These are indications of UNIX/Linux "man" (manual) pages. The (1M) and
the (1) are "sections" of man. Typically 1 = User commands and 1M =
administrative commands. However, it is somewhat arbitrary as to who
defines what as what. For me most NetBackup commands are
"administrative" as we don't have "users" doing things with it.
The NetBackup specific man pages are usually in your install directory
(mine is /usr/openv) so would be:
/usr/openv/netbackup/bin/goodies/man
/usr/openv/man
/usr/openv/java/man
If you do ls in each of those directories you can see which man pages
each contains.
You can add those directories to your MANPATH variable to be able to
read the man pages:
e.g.
export
MANPTH=$MANPTH:/usr/openv/man:/usr/openv/netbackup/bin/goodies/man:/usr/
openv/java/man
That allows you to type "man bp" for example and read its man page.
For more details type "man man" as the man command itself has a man
page.
-----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
Karthikeyan.Sundaram AT cognizant DOT com
Sent: Wednesday, July 01, 2009 3:21 AM
To: veritas-bu AT mailman.eng.auburn DOT edu
Subject: Re: [Veritas-bu] (1M) in Veritas Unix Commands
HI,
I could find a Attribute like (1M), (1) in the commands of VERITAS UNIX.
What does it mean?
Ex: backuptrace(1M), bp(1)
Thanks,
Karthikeyan Sundaram.
-----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
veritas-bu-request AT mailman.eng.auburn DOT edu
Sent: Wednesday, July 01, 2009 2:56 AM
To: veritas-bu AT mailman.eng.auburn DOT edu
Subject: Veritas-bu Digest, Vol 38, Issue 54
Send Veritas-bu mailing list submissions to
veritas-bu AT mailman.eng.auburn DOT edu
To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/mailman/listinfo/veritas-bu
or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
veritas-bu-request AT mailman.eng.auburn DOT edu
You can reach the person managing the list at
veritas-bu-owner AT mailman.eng.auburn DOT edu
When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
than "Re: Contents of Veritas-bu digest..."
Today's Topics:
1. Re: 2 Masters and only 1 tape library - DR Exercise (Cris Rhea)
2. Re: 2 Masters and only 1 tape library - DR Exercise
(Donaldson, Mark)
3. Re: 2 Masters and only 1 tape library - DR Exercise (Cris Rhea)
4. Regex in Java console (Khurram Tariq)
5. Re: Million file backup issue (Martin, Jonathan)
6. Re: Regex in Java console (judy_hinchcliffe AT administaff DOT com)
7. Re: Regex in Java console (Khurram Tariq)
8. SSO Option for LTO3 drives (David Turner)
9. Re: SSO Option for LTO3 drives (Donaldson, Mark)
10. Re: SSO Option for LTO3 drives (Heathe Kyle Yeakley)
11. Re: SSO Option for LTO3 drives (judy_hinchcliffe AT administaff DOT com)
12. Re: SSO Option for LTO3 drives (judy_hinchcliffe AT administaff DOT com)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Message: 1
Date: Tue, 30 Jun 2009 12:08:22 -0500
From: Cris Rhea <crhea AT mayo DOT edu>
Subject: Re: [Veritas-bu] 2 Masters and only 1 tape library - DR
Exercise
To: veritas-bu AT mailman.eng.auburn DOT edu
Message-ID: <20090630170822.GG2866 AT kaizen.mayo DOT edu>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
> You're not going to do it without partitioning the library. Hints in
> another thread suggest it might be possible by using a another
software
> package as an interface but stock Netbackup will limit you to having a
> library connected to one, and only one, master server.
>
> The Master Server holds your volume database, you can't have a tape in
> more than one volume database.
I suppose it revolves around how one defines "partitioning the library":
Hard partitions or soft (by tape label ranges).
We have a Sun/STK SL8500 with ACSLS as the front end and have several
(unrelated) Netback Master servers (and media servers) all using the
library concurrently.
We have not "hard partitioned" it, but rather have a tape range and
specific
tape drives assigned to each Netbackup system. We even have several
non-Netbackup systems also using the library.
--- Cris
--
Cristopher J. Rhea
Mayo Clinic - Research Computing Facility
200 First St SW, Rochester, MN 55905
crhea AT Mayo DOT EDU
(507) 284-0587
------------------------------
Message: 2
Date: Tue, 30 Jun 2009 11:38:04 -0600
From: "Donaldson, Mark" <Mark.Donaldson AT Staples DOT com>
Subject: Re: [Veritas-bu] 2 Masters and only 1 tape library - DR
Exercise
To: "Cris Rhea" <crhea AT mayo DOT edu>,
<veritas-bu AT mailman.eng.auburn DOT edu>
Message-ID:
<4CC4D5AA1741AA43A1FC5084E104A26E0B17CCDA@USCOBRMFA-SE-71.northamerica.c
exp.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
ACSLS, though, would fall into the category of "using another software
package as an interface". I suspected ACSLS could do that but didn't
want volunteer that since I don't have firsthand knowledge of it.
-----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 Cris
Rhea
Sent: Tuesday, June 30, 2009 11:08 AM
To: veritas-bu AT mailman.eng.auburn DOT edu
Subject: Re: [Veritas-bu] 2 Masters and only 1 tape library - DR
Exercise
> You're not going to do it without partitioning the library. Hints in
> another thread suggest it might be possible by using a another
software
> package as an interface but stock Netbackup will limit you to having a
> library connected to one, and only one, master server.
>
> The Master Server holds your volume database, you can't have a tape in
> more than one volume database.
I suppose it revolves around how one defines "partitioning the library":
Hard partitions or soft (by tape label ranges).
We have a Sun/STK SL8500 with ACSLS as the front end and have several
(unrelated) Netback Master servers (and media servers) all using the
library concurrently.
We have not "hard partitioned" it, but rather have a tape range and
specific
tape drives assigned to each Netbackup system. We even have several
non-Netbackup systems also using the library.
--- Cris
--
Cristopher J. Rhea
Mayo Clinic - Research Computing Facility
200 First St SW, Rochester, MN 55905
crhea AT Mayo DOT EDU
(507) 284-0587
_______________________________________________
Veritas-bu maillist - Veritas-bu AT mailman.eng.auburn DOT edu
http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/mailman/listinfo/veritas-bu
------------------------------
Message: 3
Date: Tue, 30 Jun 2009 13:11:01 -0500
From: Cris Rhea <crhea AT mayo DOT edu>
Subject: Re: [Veritas-bu] 2 Masters and only 1 tape library - DR
Exercise
To: "Donaldson, Mark" <Mark.Donaldson AT Staples DOT com>
Cc: Cris Rhea <crhea AT mayo DOT edu>, veritas-bu AT mailman.eng.auburn DOT edu
Message-ID: <20090630181101.GF3097 AT kaizen.mayo DOT edu>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
On Tue, Jun 30, 2009 at 11:38:04AM -0600, Donaldson, Mark wrote:
> ACSLS, though, would fall into the category of "using another software
> package as an interface". I suspected ACSLS could do that but didn't
> want volunteer that since I don't have firsthand knowledge of it.
FYI--
If you use one of the large STK (now Sun) tape silos, you *have* to use
ACSLS-- it's not really an "extra". It's part of the silo control
system
and how any product (e.g., Netbackup, HSM, etc.) requests tape
mounts/dismounts.
These silos have a Data Path (how your system connects to the back of a
tape drive for data transfer) and a Control Path (how your system
requests
robotic tape-handling actions).
A Sun/STK SL8500 can also be hard-partitioned into 4 LSMs (ties a
physical
group of tape slots with a physical set of drives).
At our site, we probably have 10+ separate systems sharing a single
SL8500 silo (with a single ACSLS interface). Trivial in Netbackup (just
don't tell it about anybody else's tapes).
Previous posting is quite correct-- you don't want to have multiple
systems "own" any given tape.
--- Cris
--
Cristopher J. Rhea
Mayo Clinic - Research Computing Facility
200 First St SW, Rochester, MN 55905
crhea AT Mayo DOT EDU
(507) 284-0587
------------------------------
Message: 4
Date: Tue, 30 Jun 2009 13:27:24 -0500
From: Khurram Tariq <khurramtm AT gmail DOT com>
Subject: [Veritas-bu] Regex in Java console
To: veritas-bu AT mailman.eng.auburn DOT edu
Message-ID:
<e3b0304e0906301127x2980492eoa77c3c0ab6f9aa04 AT mail.gmail DOT com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
Hello,
Does anyone have experience using regular expressions in the filters of
NetBackup java console?
Khurram
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL:
http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/pipermail/veritas-bu/attachments/20090630/
ec55d9f6/attachment-0001.htm
------------------------------
Message: 5
Date: Tue, 30 Jun 2009 14:40:38 -0400
From: "Martin, Jonathan" <JMARTI05 AT intersil DOT com>
Subject: Re: [Veritas-bu] Million file backup issue
To: <dave.markham AT fjserv DOT net>, <veritas-bu AT mailman.eng.auburn DOT edu>
Message-ID:
<13E204E614D8E04FAF594C9AA9ED0BB70CB7B3AC AT PBCOMX02.intersil DOT corp>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"
Do you have the Veritas open file agent installed and have you rebooted?
Are you running the latest service pack for whatever version client?
I backup far more than 1.4 million files here on single Windows 2000
systems with and without Flashbackup without issue.
-Jonathan
-----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 Dave
Markham
Sent: Tuesday, June 30, 2009 11:55 AM
To: veritas-bu AT mailman.eng.auburn DOT edu
Subject: Re: [Veritas-bu] Million file backup issue
Thanks for the info Bryan.
I have just changed the file path to \\.\F: and ran a test and i'm still
getting 'WRN - can't lock raw device for read: \\.\F: (F:) (Win32 5:
Access is denied. )
I take it there's not other flash ways without advanced client license.
Cheers
Bryan Bahnmiller wrote:
>
> Dave,
>
> The Flash backup documentation is wrong, at least for 6.5. Instead
> of using /\\.\F: I had to use \\.\F:
> It will backup the entire volume. And since your "empty" space
> probably hasn't been overwritten with zeros, it will take time to back
> it up. It should still compress like the rest of the volume. If you
> had a VTL or are using de-dupe of some sort, even that "empty" space
> would probably de-dupe quite well.
>
> I just ran some tests. I had a 50 GB volume. I created about 9 GB of
> small files, about a million or so. The backup speed would start at
> about 10 MB/s and then when it hit the millions of tiny files, the
> speed drastically dropped resulting in a final average of 1.7 MB/s.
> However, the speed of the flashbackup of the raw volume ran
> consistently at 11 MB/s, start to finish. So even though there was
> only 10 GB to backup on a 50 GB volume, the 10 GB backup of files took
> 1hr 44m, and the flashbackup of 50GB took 1hr 30m.
>
> Ideally you would want to split off the "bad" files in their own
> volume, so you aren't backing up that much white space. Is it possible
> to shrink it in your environment? (With W2K it may not be possible.)
> I'm not sure you can do a "mountpoint" inside of a filesystem on W2K.
> I know it is possible in W2003 and above.
>
> Bryan
>
>
>
>
>
> *Dave Markham <dave.markham AT fjserv DOT net>* Sent by:
> veritas-bu-bounces AT mailman.eng.auburn DOT edu
>
> 06/30/2009 10:14 AM
> Please respond to
> dave.markham AT fjserv DOT net
>
>
>
> To
> "veritas-bu AT mailman.eng.auburn DOT edu"
> <veritas-bu AT mailman.eng.auburn DOT edu>
> cc
>
> Subject
> Re: [Veritas-bu] Million file backup issue
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> To add.... The F:\ volume is 521gb with 134gb used. Does this mean
> the raw backup is 134gb or 521 as i dont want it filling tape
unnecessarily.
>
> Ideally i'd like to do the mount point option and have a policy
> backing up the mount point of the problem dirs e.g F:\nic\lsnode but i
> dont know how to make a mount point from a current directory in
windows.
>
> Cheers
>
> Dave Markham wrote:
> > Running Netbackup 5.0Mp7 on Solaris 9 Master server.
> >
> > 10 odd network based clients some windows2000, 2003 and Solaris 8,9
> >
> > We are having trouble with one Windows 2000 server running Envision
> > IDS software which creates millions of files under a directory.
> > f:\nic\lsnode has 87gb data with 1.4million files. Luckily the
> directory
> > is on a separate drive than the OS so there are options (hopefully).
> >
> > We currently can't get a backup as it fails with Status 14 or other
> issues.
> >
> > I'm asking for advise from windows side as i'm a Unix/Solaris
engineer.
> >
> > I'm guessing i need to do some image type backup with flash or snap
> > but i dont have the advanced client license and as i'm on v5 i dont
> > see how i can get one.
> >
> > I've currently tried following this :-
> > http://seer.entsupport.symantec.com/docs/275912.htm
> > and putting /\\.\F: in the file list for a new policy with the
> > problem client to do raw backup.
> >
> > However i get a Status1 and get the following error :-
> >
> > WRN - can't lock raw device for read: \\.\F: (F:) (Win32 5: Access
> > is denied. )
> >
> > I'm not sure why that is.
> >
> > Also i have not got any settings on the Client properties under VSP.
> > I dont have a cache file volume list or Cache File Size parameters
> > other than default. Should i be changing anything here?
> >
> > Any help appreciated.
> >
> > Cheers
> > _______________________________________________
> > Veritas-bu maillist - Veritas-bu AT mailman.eng.auburn DOT edu
> > http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/mailman/listinfo/veritas-bu
> >
> >
> >
>
> _______________________________________________
> Veritas-bu maillist - Veritas-bu AT mailman.eng.auburn DOT edu
> http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/mailman/listinfo/veritas-bu
>
>
> ________________________________________________________
> DTCC DISCLAIMER: This email and any files transmitted with it are
> confidential and intended solely for the use of the individual or
> entity to whom they are addressed. If you have received this email in
> error, please notify us immediately and delete the email and any
> attachments from your system. The recipient should check this email
> and any attachments for the presence of viruses. The company accepts
> no liability for any damage caused by any virus transmitted by this
> email.
_______________________________________________
Veritas-bu maillist - Veritas-bu AT mailman.eng.auburn DOT edu
http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/mailman/listinfo/veritas-bu
------------------------------
Message: 6
Date: Tue, 30 Jun 2009 13:48:46 -0500
From: <judy_hinchcliffe AT administaff DOT com>
Subject: Re: [Veritas-bu] Regex in Java console
To: <khurramtm AT gmail DOT com>, <veritas-bu AT mailman.eng.auburn DOT edu>
Message-ID:
<FE972C3F59A505478D7DBBF3613AB9D708146434@KWIVSEXP01.corporate.administa
ff.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Where and what are you trying to do?
________________________________
From: veritas-bu-bounces AT mailman.eng.auburn DOT edu
[mailto:veritas-bu-bounces AT mailman.eng.auburn DOT edu] On Behalf Of Khurram
Tariq
Sent: Tuesday, June 30, 2009 1:27 PM
To: veritas-bu AT mailman.eng.auburn DOT edu
Subject: [Veritas-bu] Regex in Java console
Hello,
Does anyone have experience using regular expressions in the filters of
NetBackup java console?
Khurram
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL:
http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/pipermail/veritas-bu/attachments/20090630/
d86687aa/attachment-0001.htm
------------------------------
Message: 7
Date: Tue, 30 Jun 2009 14:53:58 -0500
From: Khurram Tariq <khurramtm AT gmail DOT com>
Subject: Re: [Veritas-bu] Regex in Java console
To: veritas-bu AT mailman.eng.auburn DOT edu
Message-ID:
<e3b0304e0906301253k5129119drab0d7dafb52356e0 AT mail.gmail DOT com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
Lets say I'm in activity monitor of NetBackup Admin Console (Java) & I
create a filter to filter out certain jobs. In the comparion list I have
the
option of choosing regular expression. I'm looking at creating a
slightly
more complex condition than the ones that are already available.
On Tue, Jun 30, 2009 at 1:48 PM, <judy_hinchcliffe AT administaff DOT com>
wrote:
> Where and what are you trying to do?
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> *From:* veritas-bu-bounces AT mailman.eng.auburn DOT edu [mailto:
> veritas-bu-bounces AT mailman.eng.auburn DOT edu] *On Behalf Of *Khurram
Tariq
> *Sent:* Tuesday, June 30, 2009 1:27 PM
> *To:* veritas-bu AT mailman.eng.auburn DOT edu
> *Subject:* [Veritas-bu] Regex in Java console
>
>
>
> Hello,
>
> Does anyone have experience using regular expressions in the filters
of
> NetBackup java console?
>
> Khurram
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL:
http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/pipermail/veritas-bu/attachments/20090630/
515c5bda/attachment-0001.htm
------------------------------
Message: 8
Date: Tue, 30 Jun 2009 16:54:38 -0400
From: "David Turner" <Dturner AT manh DOT com>
Subject: [Veritas-bu] SSO Option for LTO3 drives
To: <veritas-bu AT mailman.eng.auburn DOT edu>
Cc: Will Tucker <WTucker AT manh DOT com>
Message-ID:
<36CE59B80D3D7249BC9E3D8198B0B68807903A73 AT ma-atl56.us.manh DOT com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
I have 1 windows master running Netbackup 6.5 with 3 media servers. I
have Storagetek/Sun SL8500 with 8 LTO3 tape drives (2 drives are
dedicated via NDMP to a Netapp 3050). All drives are connected via FC to
brocade etc. we have the Shared storage option but I don't think it's
working properly. How can I verify that its working?
I believe the engineers that configured the zoning on the switch
dedicated 2 drives per server and dedicate 2 to the Netapp. Did it makes
sense to purchase SSO?
I was told you should only have 2 LTO3 drives per servers because of
"shoe shining" and the servers ability to handle more than 2 drives
(Dell 2950's quad cores with 8gig of ram). I am wondering if the switch
should be rezoned to make use of SSO or can the zoning have an impact on
how SSO should be configured? How can these 2 play together?
As you can see I am all confused and would love for someone to explain
this in simple terms.
thanks
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL:
http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/pipermail/veritas-bu/attachments/20090630/
3961af14/attachment-0001.htm
------------------------------
Message: 9
Date: Tue, 30 Jun 2009 15:05:08 -0600
From: "Donaldson, Mark" <Mark.Donaldson AT Staples DOT com>
Subject: Re: [Veritas-bu] SSO Option for LTO3 drives
To: "David Turner" <Dturner AT manh DOT com>,
<veritas-bu AT mailman.eng.auburn DOT edu>
Cc: Will Tucker <WTucker AT manh DOT com>
Message-ID:
<4CC4D5AA1741AA43A1FC5084E104A26E0B1D8A41@USCOBRMFA-SE-71.northamerica.c
exp.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
If a drive is visible to one and only one server because of zoning ,
then SSO isn't necessary. SSO is used to share a single drive among
multiple media servers. Each server uses it in turn but then releases
it after use to be used by a different server. While you may be
licensed for SSO, what you're describing won't need it.
You could still limit the use of drives by each media server through
multiple techniques - storage units "max drive" setting comes to mind -
so that only X number of drives are used simultaneously per media
server. You could still have it choose that X drives from a shared pool
of all your drives. I suspect your servers are more than capable of
keeping two drives busy (subject to throttling introduced by your
back-end SAN & HBA speeds).
Your storage guys are, IMO, being too conservative.
From: veritas-bu-bounces AT mailman.eng.auburn DOT edu
[mailto:veritas-bu-bounces AT mailman.eng.auburn DOT edu] On Behalf Of David
Turner
Sent: Tuesday, June 30, 2009 2:55 PM
To: veritas-bu AT mailman.eng.auburn DOT edu
Cc: Will Tucker
Subject: [Veritas-bu] SSO Option for LTO3 drives
I have 1 windows master running Netbackup 6.5 with 3 media servers. I
have Storagetek/Sun SL8500 with 8 LTO3 tape drives (2 drives are
dedicated via NDMP to a Netapp 3050). All drives are connected via FC to
brocade etc. we have the Shared storage option but I don't think it's
working properly. How can I verify that its working?
I believe the engineers that configured the zoning on the switch
dedicated 2 drives per server and dedicate 2 to the Netapp. Did it makes
sense to purchase SSO?
I was told you should only have 2 LTO3 drives per servers because of
"shoe shining" and the servers ability to handle more than 2 drives
(Dell 2950's quad cores with 8gig of ram). I am wondering if the switch
should be rezoned to make use of SSO or can the zoning have an impact on
how SSO should be configured? How can these 2 play together?
As you can see I am all confused and would love for someone to explain
this in simple terms.
thanks
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL:
http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/pipermail/veritas-bu/attachments/20090630/
3de7289b/attachment-0001.htm
------------------------------
Message: 10
Date: Tue, 30 Jun 2009 16:15:33 -0500
From: Heathe Kyle Yeakley <hkyeakley AT gmail DOT com>
Subject: Re: [Veritas-bu] SSO Option for LTO3 drives
To: David Turner <Dturner AT manh DOT com>
Cc: veritas-bu AT mailman.eng.auburn DOT edu, Will Tucker <WTucker AT manh DOT
com>
Message-ID: <4A4A8075.5060109 AT gmail DOT com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252; format=flowed
The "shoe-shining" issue is resolved by enabling multiplexing on your
backups. By having multiple jobs writing to the same tape, the tape
doesn't have any idle time to shoe shine your drive.
I have 2 tape libraries, both with 12 drives a piece. All 24 drives and
2 robots are presented to my 1 Linux Master, 2 Linux Media, and 3 Tru64
SAN Media servers. All 6 systems see all 24 tapes drives and the robot
for each library. The factor that allows me to do this is that my 6
servers all have multipathing support built into the OS. If your Windows
server is connected to a SAN, I'm 99% certain you have multipathing in
your OS somewhere, either built into the kernel, added via a software
pack, or managed by the HBAs on the server.
The way I understand SSO, is if you're using anything more complicated
than a stand alone tape drive, then you need SSO (I could be totally
incorrect here, this is me trying to summarize SSO in 20 words or less).
Given the little I know of your SSO configuration, I'd start with going
over the way your SAN is zoned with a fine tooth comb. 90% of all the
SSO issues I've had with my 2 libraries existed in the SAN itself, not
in NetBackup or the libraries.
Hope this helps.
- Heathe Kyle Yeakley
David Turner wrote:
>
> I have 1 windows master running Netbackup 6.5 with 3 media servers. I
> have Storagetek/Sun SL8500 with 8 LTO3 tape drives (2 drives are
> dedicated via NDMP to a Netapp 3050). All drives are connected via FC
> to brocade etc. we have the Shared storage option but I don?t think
> it?s working properly. How can I verify that its working?
>
> I believe the engineers that configured the zoning on the switch
> dedicated 2 drives per server and dedicate 2 to the Netapp. Did it
> makes sense to purchase SSO?
>
> I was told you should only have 2 LTO3 drives per servers because of
> ?shoe shining? and the servers ability to handle more than 2 drives
> (Dell 2950?s quad cores with 8gig of ram). I am wondering if the
> switch should be rezoned to make use of SSO or can the zoning have an
> impact on how SSO should be configured? How can these 2 play together?
>
> As you can see I am all confused and would love for someone to explain
> this in simple terms.
>
> thanks
>
>
------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> _______________________________________________
> Veritas-bu maillist - Veritas-bu AT mailman.eng.auburn DOT edu
> http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/mailman/listinfo/veritas-bu
>
------------------------------
Message: 11
Date: Tue, 30 Jun 2009 16:22:58 -0500
From: <judy_hinchcliffe AT administaff DOT com>
Subject: Re: [Veritas-bu] SSO Option for LTO3 drives
To: <Mark.Donaldson AT Staples DOT com>, <Dturner AT manh DOT com>,
<veritas-bu AT mailman.eng.auburn DOT edu>
Cc: WTucker AT manh DOT com
Message-ID:
<FE972C3F59A505478D7DBBF3613AB9D708146629@KWIVSEXP01.corporate.administa
ff.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
I agree if you are only zoning each drive to one media server the SSO is
not needed.
However! If those two drives fail - bad tape - bad whatever and are
down then that media server has NO tape drives avail.
I have 18 tape drives and have zoned all 18 to all of them to all 4 of
my media servers.
So they use tape drives based on NB's algorithm of which drive to use
next kind of evening out the usage some what, and if two drives go down
the there are still 16 drives available for the media server to try and
find one not busy.
________________________________
From: veritas-bu-bounces AT mailman.eng.auburn DOT edu
[mailto:veritas-bu-bounces AT mailman.eng.auburn DOT edu] On Behalf Of
Donaldson, Mark
Sent: Tuesday, June 30, 2009 4:05 PM
To: David Turner; veritas-bu AT mailman.eng.auburn DOT edu
Cc: Will Tucker
Subject: Re: [Veritas-bu] SSO Option for LTO3 drives
If a drive is visible to one and only one server because of zoning ,
then SSO isn't necessary. SSO is used to share a single drive among
multiple media servers. Each server uses it in turn but then releases
it after use to be used by a different server. While you may be
licensed for SSO, what you're describing won't need it.
You could still limit the use of drives by each media server through
multiple techniques - storage units "max drive" setting comes to mind -
so that only X number of drives are used simultaneously per media
server. You could still have it choose that X drives from a shared pool
of all your drives. I suspect your servers are more than capable of
keeping two drives busy (subject to throttling introduced by your
back-end SAN & HBA speeds).
Your storage guys are, IMO, being too conservative.
From: veritas-bu-bounces AT mailman.eng.auburn DOT edu
[mailto:veritas-bu-bounces AT mailman.eng.auburn DOT edu] On Behalf Of David
Turner
Sent: Tuesday, June 30, 2009 2:55 PM
To: veritas-bu AT mailman.eng.auburn DOT edu
Cc: Will Tucker
Subject: [Veritas-bu] SSO Option for LTO3 drives
I have 1 windows master running Netbackup 6.5 with 3 media servers. I
have Storagetek/Sun SL8500 with 8 LTO3 tape drives (2 drives are
dedicated via NDMP to a Netapp 3050). All drives are connected via FC to
brocade etc. we have the Shared storage option but I don't think it's
working properly. How can I verify that its working?
I believe the engineers that configured the zoning on the switch
dedicated 2 drives per server and dedicate 2 to the Netapp. Did it makes
sense to purchase SSO?
I was told you should only have 2 LTO3 drives per servers because of
"shoe shining" and the servers ability to handle more than 2 drives
(Dell 2950's quad cores with 8gig of ram). I am wondering if the switch
should be rezoned to make use of SSO or can the zoning have an impact on
how SSO should be configured? How can these 2 play together?
As you can see I am all confused and would love for someone to explain
this in simple terms.
thanks
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL:
http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/pipermail/veritas-bu/attachments/20090630/
2b444233/attachment-0001.htm
------------------------------
Message: 12
Date: Tue, 30 Jun 2009 16:25:47 -0500
From: <judy_hinchcliffe AT administaff DOT com>
Subject: Re: [Veritas-bu] SSO Option for LTO3 drives
To: <judy_hinchcliffe AT administaff DOT com>, <Mark.Donaldson AT Staples DOT
com>,
<Dturner AT manh DOT com>, <veritas-bu AT mailman.eng.auburn DOT edu>
Cc: WTucker AT manh DOT com
Message-ID:
<FE972C3F59A505478D7DBBF3613AB9D708146636@KWIVSEXP01.corporate.administa
ff.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
I should also add, that even though I have 18 drives avail to each
server, the number of drives used at one time is still based on policy
and which storage unit it uses ( as you set how many tape drives are in
a storage unit.)
So serverA zoned to all 18 drives.
Storage unit is 2 drives at a time.
Then serverA still only uses 2 drives at a time out of the 18 that might
be available.
________________________________
From: veritas-bu-bounces AT mailman.eng.auburn DOT edu
[mailto:veritas-bu-bounces AT mailman.eng.auburn DOT edu] On Behalf Of
judy_hinchcliffe AT administaff DOT com
Sent: Tuesday, June 30, 2009 4:23 PM
To: Mark.Donaldson AT Staples DOT com; Dturner AT manh DOT com;
veritas-bu AT mailman.eng.auburn DOT edu
Cc: WTucker AT manh DOT com
Subject: Re: [Veritas-bu] SSO Option for LTO3 drives
I agree if you are only zoning each drive to one media server the SSO is
not needed.
However! If those two drives fail - bad tape - bad whatever and are
down then that media server has NO tape drives avail.
I have 18 tape drives and have zoned all 18 to all of them to all 4 of
my media servers.
So they use tape drives based on NB's algorithm of which drive to use
next kind of evening out the usage some what, and if two drives go down
the there are still 16 drives available for the media server to try and
find one not busy.
________________________________
From: veritas-bu-bounces AT mailman.eng.auburn DOT edu
[mailto:veritas-bu-bounces AT mailman.eng.auburn DOT edu] On Behalf Of
Donaldson, Mark
Sent: Tuesday, June 30, 2009 4:05 PM
To: David Turner; veritas-bu AT mailman.eng.auburn DOT edu
Cc: Will Tucker
Subject: Re: [Veritas-bu] SSO Option for LTO3 drives
If a drive is visible to one and only one server because of zoning ,
then SSO isn't necessary. SSO is used to share a single drive among
multiple media servers. Each server uses it in turn but then releases
it after use to be used by a different server. While you may be
licensed for SSO, what you're describing won't need it.
You could still limit the use of drives by each media server through
multiple techniques - storage units "max drive" setting comes to mind -
so that only X number of drives are used simultaneously per media
server. You could still have it choose that X drives from a shared pool
of all your drives. I suspect your servers are more than capable of
keeping two drives busy (subject to throttling introduced by your
back-end SAN & HBA speeds).
Your storage guys are, IMO, being too conservative.
From: veritas-bu-bounces AT mailman.eng.auburn DOT edu
[mailto:veritas-bu-bounces AT mailman.eng.auburn DOT edu] On Behalf Of David
Turner
Sent: Tuesday, June 30, 2009 2:55 PM
To: veritas-bu AT mailman.eng.auburn DOT edu
Cc: Will Tucker
Subject: [Veritas-bu] SSO Option for LTO3 drives
I have 1 windows master running Netbackup 6.5 with 3 media servers. I
have Storagetek/Sun SL8500 with 8 LTO3 tape drives (2 drives are
dedicated via NDMP to a Netapp 3050). All drives are connected via FC to
brocade etc. we have the Shared storage option but I don't think it's
working properly. How can I verify that its working?
I believe the engineers that configured the zoning on the switch
dedicated 2 drives per server and dedicate 2 to the Netapp. Did it makes
sense to purchase SSO?
I was told you should only have 2 LTO3 drives per servers because of
"shoe shining" and the servers ability to handle more than 2 drives
(Dell 2950's quad cores with 8gig of ram). I am wondering if the switch
should be rezoned to make use of SSO or can the zoning have an impact on
how SSO should be configured? How can these 2 play together?
As you can see I am all confused and would love for someone to explain
this in simple terms.
thanks
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL:
http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/pipermail/veritas-bu/attachments/20090630/
5b46906f/attachment.htm
------------------------------
_______________________________________________
Veritas-bu maillist - Veritas-bu AT mailman.eng.auburn DOT edu
http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/mailman/listinfo/veritas-bu
End of Veritas-bu Digest, Vol 38, Issue 54
******************************************
This e-mail and any files transmitted with it are for the sole use of
the intended recipient(s) and may contain confidential and privileged
information.
If you are not the intended recipient, please contact the sender by
reply e-mail and destroy all copies of the original message.
Any unauthorized review, use, disclosure, dissemination, forwarding,
printing or copying of this email or any action taken in reliance on
this e-mail is strictly prohibited and may be unlawful.
_______________________________________________
Veritas-bu maillist - Veritas-bu AT mailman.eng.auburn DOT edu
http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/mailman/listinfo/veritas-bu
Please consider our environment before printing this e-mail or attachments.
----------------------------------
CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: This e-mail may contain privileged or confidential
information and is for the sole use of the intended recipient(s). If you are
not the intended recipient, any disclosure, copying, distribution, or use of
the contents of this information is prohibited and may be unlawful. If you have
received this electronic transmission in error, please reply immediately to the
sender that you have received the message in error, and delete it. Thank you.
----------------------------------
_______________________________________________
Veritas-bu maillist - Veritas-bu AT mailman.eng.auburn DOT edu
http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/mailman/listinfo/veritas-bu
|
