But its so much FUN Steeeeeve!

Just remember once you duplicate (with the default behaviour) it will de-mux 
the tape for you.


I remember from my OpenVision days that it was a real big "selling" point...but 
no one actually did it.

However, I do have some clients that regularly test this functionality in the 
event they "LOSE" everything.  This is their contingency plan to their DR plan, 
if for some reason they can't re-install their NBU Software.  But at that point 
I would rather have a ufsdump on me...but that's just me.


Quoting "White, Steve" <Steve.White AT pacificorp DOT com>:

> With NetBackup, you certainly can use "tar" to recover the tapes (I did it
> for fun once), as long as they're not multiplexed.  Multiplexing removes
> the
> ability to restore with tar.  That being said, I agree with Andrew, even
> though you can do it, restoring without NBU would be such a hassle, it's
> probably not worth it.  Just install the application, restore your NBU
> database, and you're on your way.
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Fabbro, Andrew P [mailto:Fabbro.Andrew AT cnf DOT com]
> Sent: Friday, January 24, 2003 1:17 PM
> To: 'Deb'; veritas-bu AT mailman.eng.auburn DOT edu
> Subject: RE: [Veritas-bu] Considering moving to NetBackup
> 
> 
> I'm not sure about some of the things you mention:
> 
> >1. With over 200 clients, updating them from one release to the next
> requires
> >   going to each client (via login of some kind) and doing an interactive
> >   pkgadd.  I'm told that NBU allows client updates to be "pushed out."
> This
> >   would save a lot of time, and be version reliable.
> 
> True for the Unix side.  I don't know that you can do that on the Windows
> side (in our environment, the Windows admins always install their own
> clients).
> 
> > 8. LGTO writes in proprietary format to tapes, NBU is modified gnu-tar.
> 
> I don't see this is a benefit.  If you have a set of tapes, you need NBU to
> restore from them.  I suppose if there was a nuclear war and you were the
> last man standing and all you had was gnu tar, NBU, and a tape drive, then
> perhaps you'd be further along, but otherwise...how likely are you to try
> any kind of restore without the backup software?  Also, I'm not sure those
> tar files are really readable in the sense that you can use GNU tar to
> recover a file.  You're typically multiplexing blocks from different
> clients...my understanding was always more that the tar files on tape are
> "containers" (via max fragment size) for data, not "tar archives" in the
> recovery sense.
> 
> --
>  Drew Fabbro [fabbro.andrew AT cnf DOT com]
>  Unix Systems Group
>  Desk: 503-450-3374
>  Cell: 503-701-0369
> _______________________________________________
> Veritas-bu maillist  -  Veritas-bu AT mailman.eng.auburn DOT edu
> http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/mailman/listinfo/veritas-bu
> 
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> 
> This email is confidential and may be legally privileged.
> 
> It is intended solely for the addressee. Access to this email by anyone else,
> unless expressly approved by the sender or an authorized addressee, is
> unauthorized.
> 
> If you are not the intended recipient, any disclosure, copying, distribution
> or any action omitted or taken in reliance on it, is prohibited and may be
> unlawful. If you believe that you have received this email in error, please
> contact the sender, delete this e-mail and destroy all copies.
> 
> 
> ==============================================================================
>