[quote="Fazil Saiyed"]Hello,
Please review storage node or snapimage ( if still available) option for
this client.
How I can enable local logging on the EMC networker client.
If you run the client by script, then -v ( each extra v will
increase the logging level) with the save cmd will do it ( logs will
go to savegrp log)or you can do verbose logging for the group. ( I would
be very careful with either option, as the log file fills up, it
could adversely impact your backup & server performance, you
will get failure messages without extra logging ( i.e open files etc)
aka004db: So in the end the logs will allways completely remain on the backup
server, and not a copy on the client as well? In my eventlog no entries are
written as well..
- Is it possible not to dump the full filesystem for each drive prior to
backing up data?
You will need to look into Native OS capabilities, i.e VSS, also
look into change journal to make use of it's capabilities
aka004db: As far as I can tell from the documentation it is even impossible not
to use VSS. The change journal is a part of VSS, so that is used and enabled. I
simply cannot figure out the reason why every save.exe process needs to build a
complete directory listing...
- Is it necessary to put a hughe amount of physical memory in the server
for backup purposes only?
I don't think so, however, expect backups to run very long time,
unless you breakup the data in various saveset and configure Legato
backups to be spread out. ( How much data and files are you referring too
?)
aka004db: I actually tried splitting up into different savesets, but that only
made things worse as more save.exe processes start to build up a directory
listing in memory. Note this is not only for the designated logical disk to be
backed up, but also on volumes not a member of the save set :-(
The data is about 2,5 TB written data full of homedirectories,
profiledirectories etc. etc. so, flat file data is millions and millions of
folders...
If you cannot get SN capabilities , try and serrate file system if
possible to different logical disk & spread out your backups, this way you
may gain slight advantage on read access & add a robust raid controller ,
optimized for read. ( This are optional steps and will only go so far)
Does your backup go to tape or VTL ? You may gain slightly better
performance if you use disk or VTL backups vs Tape ( again few other may
disagree)
HTH
aka004db: backup is to VTL, but the data transfer does not even occur so the
bottleneck is not on the server. I did another test today and one actually
finished: save.exe pushed 10 GB of data for a VSS:SYSTEM into the server, but
it took the process more than 5 GB in memory... :-( and several hours. The
actual data transfer was finished in a blink of an eye!
+----------------------------------------------------------------------
|This was sent by arjan.kauffman AT tele2 DOT com via Backup Central.
|Forward SPAM to abuse AT backupcentral DOT com.
+----------------------------------------------------------------------
To sign off this list, send email to listserv AT listserv.temple DOT edu and
type "signoff networker" in the body of the email. Please write to
networker-request AT listserv.temple DOT edu if you have any problems with this
list. You can access the archives at
http://listserv.temple.edu/archives/networker.html or
via RSS at http://listserv.temple.edu/cgi-bin/wa?RSS&L=NETWORKER
|
