Networker

Re: [Networker] Question about storage node/server distributed se tup

2004-12-28 13:48:59
Subject: Re: [Networker] Question about storage node/server distributed se tup
From: Terry Lemons <lemons_terry AT EMC DOT COM>
To: NETWORKER AT LISTMAIL.TEMPLE DOT EDU
Date: Tue, 28 Dec 2004 13:48:09 -0500
Hi Mary

>Is this a good idea?
I think so!

>How much bandwidth does the index info, etc, need between the storage node
and the server?
Not much.  In fact, the amount of metadata (client file index, media
database, logging, etc.) is tiny when compared to the actual backup data.
In earlier (and, maybe, current) version of NetWorker, each client file
index entry consumed ~220 bytes.  So, even if you're backing up lots of
little files, this shouldn't pose a burden even for your narrow, sub-T1
network circuit.

>And is it possible to replicate a networker server to a hot spare?
I don't know of Legato describes a method to do this, but it sure sounds
possible.  You could either replicate in real time, or you could shutdown
NetWorker, transfer the files, then restart NetWorker.  I did a quick search
through the Legato Tech Bulletins, and I didn't see one covering NetWorker
and RepliStor, so I don't know if this is formally supported.

If you are planning to set up a hot DR site, consider using VMware.  At your
DR site, you may want to have multiple systems or applications in a hot
state.  You could dedicate a physical server to each one of these
applications, but that can quickly become expensive.  An alternative would
be to run VMware on a single server, and create a virtual machine in VMware
for each server that you want to replicate.  These VMs would be active all
of the time, receiving updates from the real production systems.  Each VM is
a separate world, and can be running many different operating systems (see
the VMware web site for details).  When you need to failover, you can make
the appropriate changes to hot standby system, and put it into production
mode.  There are certainly issues to be resolved (ex., if you completely
replicate one system to another, how do you avoid having two systems active
at the same time with the same IP address, name, etc.), but this might be a
fruitful line of thought.

Hope this helps!
tl

Terry Lemons
CLARiiON Applications Integration Engineering
EMC²                 
where information lives
 
4400 Computer Drive, MS D239
Westboro MA 01580
Phone: 508 898 7312
Email:  Lemons_Terry AT emc DOT com




-----Original Message-----
From: Legato NetWorker discussion [mailto:NETWORKER AT LISTMAIL.TEMPLE DOT EDU] 
On
Behalf Of Dell, Mary
Sent: Wednesday, December 22, 2004 11:45 AM
To: NETWORKER AT LISTMAIL.TEMPLE DOT EDU
Subject: [Networker] Question about storage node/server distributed setup

Hi all,

I have 4 sites on my wan, with anywhere from 1 gb bandwidth down to less
than a T1 connection back to my home base.  Currently I have one server in
each location with a locally attached tape library on each server.

I'm considering switching to an arrangement with a single server at my home
site, with storage nodes at the remote sites that talk to the home server
for index and scheduling, etc, but back up to their own local tape
libraries.  That way I could restore something at my home site that was
written at a remote site.

The other advantage to this arrangement would be that *in theory* I could
have a duplicate of my single server up and running at a hot site, and do a
daily replication to it, so that I could cut over to it if I lost my main
site, rather than having to restore from a bootstrap.

So my question:  Is this a good idea?  How much bandwidth does the index
info, etc, need between the storage node and the server?  And is it possible
to replicate a networker server to a hot spare?  I'm willing to buy add-on
products to make it happen, if it's a sound concept.

Thanks in advance for any input!

Mary Dell
Server Administrator
Mesirow Financial


     This communication may contain privileged and/or confidential
information. It is intended solely for the use of the addressee. If you are
not the intended recipient, you are strictly prohibited from disclosing,
copying, distributing or using any of this information. If you received this
communication in error, please contact the sender immediately and destroy
the material in its entirety, whether electronic or hard copy. Confidential,
proprietary or time-sensitive communications should not be transmitted via
the Internet, as there can be no assurance of actual or timely delivery,
receipt and/or confidentiality. This is not an offer, or solicitation of any
offer to buy or sell any security, investment or other product.

--
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. Questions regarding this list
should be sent to stan AT temple DOT edu
=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=

--
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. Questions regarding this list
should be sent to stan AT temple DOT edu
=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>
  • Re: [Networker] Question about storage node/server distributed se tup, Terry Lemons <=