Veritas-bu

[Veritas-bu] Clarification - Policies

2006-08-30 04:41:57
Subject: [Veritas-bu] Clarification - Policies
From: smpt at peppas.gr (smpt)
Date: Wed, 30 Aug 2006 11:41:57 +0300
Hi,
If you are using archive bit to take incrementals be aware that any program
that reset the achieve bit may cause problems to your backups. Such as xcopy
or robocopy. The real problem is that you may not know the use of such
programs. I have a customer he had lost data because of this. 

I always use ctime for incrementals.
stefanos


-----Original Message-----
From: veritas-bu-bounces at mailman.eng.auburn.edu
[mailto:veritas-bu-bounces at mailman.eng.auburn.edu] On Behalf Of WEAVER,
Simon
Sent: Wednesday, August 30, 2006 9:09 AM
To: 'Darren Dunham'; Veritas-bu at mailman.eng.auburn.edu
Subject: Re: [Veritas-bu] Clarification - Policies


Ok, so short answer - if a backup fails for 1 policy, rather than using a
MANUAL POLICY, simply restart the original policy again, and where
applicable, cancel the stream or streams that do not need backing up (in
other words, do a full on the streams that have failed)

Regards

Simon Weaver
3rd Line Technical Support
Windows Domain Administrator 

EADS Astrium Limited, B23AA IM (DCS)
Anchorage Road, Portsmouth, PO3 5PU

Email: Simon.Weaver at Astrium-eads.net



-----Original Message-----
From: Darren Dunham [mailto:ddunham at taos.com] 
Sent: 29 August 2006 23:00
To: Veritas-bu at mailman.eng.auburn.edu
Subject: Re: [Veritas-bu] Clarification - Policies


> I setup two identical policies on my master server TEST1 and TEST2 and 
> pointed them at one of my Linux servers, at a specific test directory 
> /test.  I then touched two files, test1 and test2 in that directory 
> and fired off TEST1 w/ a FULL.  It backed up both files.  The, without 
> modifying these files I fired off the TEST2 policy with the same 
> selection list but an incremental.  Theoretically if it was using the 
> same date/time stamp for the last "full" it shouldn't backup these two 
> files again.  Unfortunately it did, so it would appear that the 
> date/time stamp method used by NBU is policy specific?

Yes, they're policy specific.

>From your "Unfortunately", I take it that you don't want that behavior
(or at least don't expect it).  Can I ask if that's true?

As an aside, Networker doesn't do this and it can certainly cause problems
in some situations.

-- 
Darren Dunham                                           ddunham at taos.com
Senior Technical Consultant         TAOS            http://www.taos.com/
Got some Dr Pepper?                           San Francisco, CA bay area
         < This line left intentionally blank to confuse you. >
_______________________________________________
Veritas-bu maillist  -  Veritas-bu at mailman.eng.auburn.edu
http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/mailman/listinfo/veritas-bu

This email is for the intended addressee only.
If you have received it in error then you must not use, retain, disseminate
or otherwise deal with it.
Please notify the sender by return email.
The views of the author may not necessarily constitute the views of Astrium
Limited.
Nothing in this email shall bind Astrium Limited in any contract or
obligation.

Astrium Limited, Registered in England and Wales No. 2449259
Registered Office: Gunnels Wood Road, Stevenage, Hertfordshire, SG1 2AS,
England
_______________________________________________
Veritas-bu maillist  -  Veritas-bu at mailman.eng.auburn.edu
http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/mailman/listinfo/veritas-bu




<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>