Networker

Re: [Networker] aborted due to inactivity

2004-01-06 14:11:44
Subject: Re: [Networker] aborted due to inactivity
From: Joel Fisher <jfisher AT WFUBMC DOT EDU>
To: NETWORKER AT LISTMAIL.TEMPLE DOT EDU
Date: Tue, 6 Jan 2004 14:11:39 -0500
Hey Robert,

When the backup is started from the server it does fail a 42GB then
restarts and fails at 42GB again.  No firewall involved.  I've kind of
ruled out a network problem, because this is the only one of about 20
large(100GB) volumes on the cluster that fails on a consistent basis.

Still searching....

Thanks,

Joel

When you say it always fails at the 42GB mark; does it always fail after
the same amount of time?  If you have serveral retries set, do you see
it
back up 42Gb, then timeout, then back up 42GB again?

If so, this would indicate an external severing of the control
connection..

First question from Legato will be "is there a firewall involved?"

Robert Maiello
Thomson Healthcare

On Mon, 5 Jan 2004 14:17:35 -0500, Joel Fisher <jfisher AT WFUBMC DOT EDU>
wrote:

>Hey All,
>
>
>
>I'm wondering if anyone might be able to shed some light on a problem
>I've be troubleshooting.
>
>
>
>Server: Sun E450/Solaris2.6/SBU 6.1.3
>
>Client: Compaq/Win 2K3 cluster/Legato 7.0 client
>
>
>
>I get the below failure on full backups(incremental backups complete
>successfully).
>
>
>
>* client1.nt.wfubmc.edu:P: 1 retry attempted
>
>* client1.nt.wfubmc.edu:P: 01/02/04 08:53:23 nsrexec: Attempting a kill
>on remote save
>
>* client1.nt.wfubmc.edu:P: 01/02/04 08:58:23 nsrexec: Attempting a kill
>on remote save
>
>* client1.nt.wfubmc.edu:P: write: Broken pipe
>
>* client1.nt.wfubmc.edu:P: aborted due to inactivity
>
>
>
>I've increase the savegroup timeout to 360 and it made no difference.
>
>
>
>I can run the backup directly from client1 successfully, but when I
>start it from the backup server it fails.  When it fails it always
seems
>to fail at 42GB.  So I thought maybe there as a bad file or something
>like that causing it to hang, but when it ran successfully directly
from
>the client that killed that theory.  I'm kind of stumped right now.
>
>
>
>Anyone ever have a similar problem?
>
>
>
>Thanks,
>
>
>
>Joel
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>--
>Note: To sign off this list, send a "signoff networker" command via
email
>to listserv AT listmail.temple DOT edu or visit the list's Web site at
>http://listmail.temple.edu/archives/networker.html where you can
>also view and post messages to the list.
>=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=

--
Note: To sign off this list, send a "signoff networker" command via
email
to listserv AT listmail.temple DOT edu or visit the list's Web site at
http://listmail.temple.edu/archives/networker.html where you can
also view and post messages to the list.
=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=

--
Note: To sign off this list, send a "signoff networker" command via email
to listserv AT listmail.temple DOT edu or visit the list's Web site at
http://listmail.temple.edu/archives/networker.html where you can
also view and post messages to the list.
=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=