Hi Chris,

We're fairly lucky in that we typically aren't actively writing to our cache
volumes during the backup operation.  Our normal operation for many of the
big clients is such that we write to the disk until it's full, then it's
mostly write-locked so that the cache volume doesn't need to be too big.
We're using (I think) 30GB cache volumes just in case for most of our
Windows clients.

The 156s I've seen have been caused by a misconfiguration - e.g. not adding
the cache volume to the same cluster volume group as the disk you're trying
to back up or by a disk being totally full.  We haven't yet filled a cache
volume while a backup was actively going (but see my next post).

We're using a Solaris 9 master with Solaris 10 and Windows 2003 media
servers and clients that are a mix of Windows 2003 and Solaris 9.

        .../Ed

--
Ed Wilts, Mounds View, MN, USA
mailto:ewilts AT ewilts DOT org

I GoodSearch for Bundles Of Love
http://www.goodsearch.com/?charityid=821118 


> -----Original Message-----
> From: Hall, Christian N. [mailto:HallC AT SEC DOT GOV]
> Sent: Tuesday, May 22, 2007 11:13 AM
> To: Ed Wilts
> Cc: veritas-bu AT mailman.eng.auburn DOT edu
> Subject: RE: [Veritas-bu] Tuning Windows backups
> 
> Ed,
> 
> What cache sizings are you sing for your flashbackups? I have tried
> letting backups determine the size as well as modifying the cache size
> based on VERITAS's recommendations but was getting 156s' repeatedly.
> With these concerns and many other problems we didn't deploy the
> product as a solution.  The storage is a mix between symmetrix, and
> clariion. We are running 5.1MP6, the hosts are windows 2003 R2, the
> master is a UNIX Solaris 8 running SSO. We have many millions of small
> files and terabytes of data.  Any feedbackup would be great...
> 
> Thanks,
> Chris Hall
> 
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: veritas-bu-bounces AT mailman.eng.auburn DOT edu [mailto:veritas-bu-
> bounces AT mailman.eng.auburn DOT edu] On Behalf Of Paul Keating
> Sent: Tuesday, May 22, 2007 11:52 AM
> To: Ed Wilts; veritas-bu AT mailman.eng.auburn DOT edu
> Subject: Re: [Veritas-bu] Tuning Windows backups
> 
> Just out of curiousity, what is the filesystem sizes, and amount of
> "free space" on the filesystems?
> 
> Ie, are youbacking up 2TB volumes with 1TB of data?
> Or more like 900GB of data on a 1TB volume?
> 
> We're getting killed with some boxes that have about 1TB on a 2TB
> volume, but millions of files.
> It's gotten worse over time despite little data growth.
> Assuming defragging is sucking...
> However, backing up 1TB of empty space using FlashBackup would suck.
> 
> Also, maybe I'm out of the loop...been a while since I looked into
> this,
> but is single file restore available with Flashbackup for Windows now?
> 
> Paul
> 
> 
> --
> 
> 
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: veritas-bu-bounces AT mailman.eng.auburn DOT edu
> > [mailto:veritas-bu-bounces AT mailman.eng.auburn DOT edu] On Behalf
> > Of Ed Wilts
> > Sent: May 18, 2007 9:57 AM
> > To: Bluejay AT fujigreenwood DOT com; veritas-bu AT mailman.eng.auburn DOT 
> > edu
> > Subject: Re: [Veritas-bu] Tuning Windows backups
> >
> >
> > Flashbackup.  That's the best answer on any client with
> > millions of little
> > files.  We're using it on file systems much larger than yours
> > and with 10x
> > the number of files.
> >

_______________________________________________
Veritas-bu maillist  -  Veritas-bu AT mailman.eng.auburn DOT edu
http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/mailman/listinfo/veritas-bu