> We're trying to set up multiple streams from a single large volume on one
> of our clients, using the trick with having two client instances -- one
> using Saveset "All" but with a server-side directive that skips certain
> directories, and the other client instance that just backs up those
> particular directories that are skipped via the All. This method has
> been discussed on the list before, for example see my post and Itzik
> Meirson's follow-up from April 6th of 2004.
> We have one instance of the client defined, with Saveset All and those
> directives being used.
> We're trying to create a second instance of the client, with Saveset set
> to just
> As soon as I try put this second client in the same group as the first
> one, I get an error from NetWorker:
> save set of All for client foo.bar in group GroupName excludes
> any clients with the same name from the group.
> I can see why NetWorker would want to at least warn about this -- if
> you're using "All" with a client, in theory you're backing up everything
> so having a second instance of the client in the same group seems like
> a waste. In practice, though, the directive controls whether anything
> is really getting backed up by that client instance. In our case, there
> would be no significant overlap between the two clients, but NetWorker
> isn't smart enough to realize this.
> Is this just a limitation at version 6, or does this still happen at v7
No, it remains a limitation in NetWorker v7 as well. In fact,
NetWorker is so "smart" at detecting this that it will circumvent you
even if you force a creation of a second client in the same group
where the first client has a saveset of all:
~$ savegrp -pv -c mac Default
12/30/04 13:12:13 savegrp: Client mac has invalid save sets: 'All' and others
12/30/04 13:12:13 savegrp: Ignoring other save sets for mac
12/30/04 13:12:13 savegrp: Run up to 4 clients in parallel
12/30/04 13:12:13 savegrp: mac:probe started
savefs -s sol -c mac -g Default -p -l full -R -v
While I can appreciate the rationale behind the "no other client in a
savegroup when there's one with 'All' in it" rationale, I agree that
it's somewhat limiting and ends up creating situations whereby a lot
of people end up creating "inclusive" backup policies where they
explicitly include all the savesets to backup, which is often seen as
easier than maintaining two separate savegroups.
> For those of you that are using this trick to get multiple savestreams off
> a big volume, have you found any way to have both instances of a client
> in the same group, or are you forced to use a second group and run it at
> the same time?
See above - unless someone knows of a way of munging savegrp NetWorker
does it's best to force you to not do this, even if you circumvent it
-Preston de Guise.
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