Unfortunately my test showed you do.(or do they?).
I'm to understand why expiring the full backup triggered another full
backup (not synthetic). There maybe an obsure reason that my
test failed or it may be a bug.
Maybe the Full backup running has nothing to do
with the synthetics but is actually a scheduling or retension issue. Since
all my Fulls are "manual" this is a bit perplexing as to why a Full ran
automatically.
Something to do with running a manual backup and
the system thinks it hasn't run since the image was expired?
From what I've read, and from what Curtis says below, you DON'T
need to keep the original full backup around, once you've created at least one
more synethtic full backup. You can do just one full backup, then keep creating
synthetic fulls by merging the previous synthetic full with incrementals,
forever. The original full backup does not need to be retained as long is there
is always at least one unexpired synthetic full
available.
Though keeping the orginal full around(to
create other synthetics) does seem a bit strange. Hopefully Netbackup will
mature to elimnate the constraint.
> I've been testing it
myself. I think you do need to keep that full > backup around. The
"synthetic" part of a synthetic backup is the > consolidation of the
full backup and the incrementals into a single > image. This is done via
duplication.
What makes it synthetic is that it is created tape to
tape instead of transferring a bunch of non-changed data from the client
again. Once that new (synthetic) full is created, there is no need
for previous fulls (other than for retention). The new full DOES NOT
rely on the old full once
it's created.
+---------------------------------------------------------------------- |This
was sent by wcplists1 AT gmail DOT com via
Backup Central. Forward SPAM |to abuse AT backupcentral DOT com. +----------------------------------------------------------------------
