[Veritas-bu] Preemptive scheduling

2000-10-17 15:34:31
Subject: [Veritas-bu] Preemptive scheduling
From: Joshua Fielden jfielden AT excitecorp DOT com
Date: Tue, 17 Oct 2000 12:34:31 -0700
In my re-write of the scheduler (a layer of perl and cron, not rewrite the 
source code - I'm still whiteboarding it), my concept is all backups which 
could take this much time are fired off from cron, and checkpoint files are 
used to manage if jobs are running. Easier than parsing /usr/ucb/ps -axwwwwww, 
I think. :)


On Tue, Oct 17, 2000 at 01:17:39PM -0600, McMurphy, Tim filled up my inbox with:
> If your full backups are taking more than 24 hours its time to get more and
> faster hardware (ie network, tape drives, slaves etc). Management loves to
> hear that :)
> As for the pre-emptive scheduling I can't think of a way to dynamicly do it
> unless you want to resort to cron jobs. Check to see if anything is running
> at a given time, if it is then assume your full is running long and run kill
> the incremental jobs. It would be quite a bit of work identifying and
> killing the processes or jobs responsible for the incrementals.
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Jonathan Meyer [mailto:jmeyer AT ptc DOT com]
> Sent: Tuesday, October 17, 2000 12:43 PM
> To: John_Wang AT enron DOT net
> Cc: veritas-bu AT mailman.eng.auburn DOT edu
> Subject: Re: [Veritas-bu] Preemptive scheduling
> Regarding your question about pre-empting incremental backups if the
> full schedule runs long.  I think "the right thing" to do is less
> clear than one might think.
> You might have data which you want protected on tape every 12 hours.
> The incrementals might not take very long, but the fulls might take
> more than 24 hours.  In this situation you would want one or more
> incrs to take place during the full backup.  Performance of both
> backups would be effected, but you would get a save to tape every 12
> hours.  It is my understanding that the netbackup scheduler was
> designed to handle the above scenario.
> I don't mean to sound like an apologist for veritas, and I have never
> wanted the functionality described, but I don't think the scheduler
> behavior is as clearly "wrong" as it might seem at first.
> --------------------------------------------------
> Jonathan Meyer
> (781)398-6594
> UNIX Systems Administrator
> Paramtric Technology Corporation
> --------------------------------------------------
>    From: John_Wang AT enron DOT net
>    Date: Fri, 13 Oct 2000 17:18:30 -0500
>    Sender: veritas-bu-admin AT Eng.Auburn DOT EDU
>    List-Id: Discussion of Veritas Inc. backup related products
> <>
>    Hello
>    Well, seeing how unsuccessful trying to see if anyone managed to do
> conditional
>    expirations was, here's another of my backup favourites.
>    Can Netbackup do preemptive scheduling?
>    i.e.: if a full backup is running long (which full backups tend to do)
> and
>    therefore into the window for a scheduled incremental for the same drive,
> there
>    is no real need for the incremental to run since the full is really in
> the same
>    time frame anyway so the incremental should be preempted by the full
> backup of
>    the same drive.
>    Can Netbackup scheduling be configured to do this and if so how?
>    Regards,
>    John I Wang
>    Sr. Systems Engineer
>    Steverson Information Professionals
>    ---
>    Enron Broadband Services
>    3 Allen Center, Room 337C
>    PH (713) 345-6238
>    _______________________________________________
>    Veritas-bu maillist  -  Veritas-bu AT mailman.eng.auburn DOT edu
> _______________________________________________
> Veritas-bu maillist  -  Veritas-bu AT mailman.eng.auburn DOT edu
> _______________________________________________
> Veritas-bu maillist  -  Veritas-bu AT mailman.eng.auburn DOT edu

"Any man page that includes the words "USE AT YOUR OWN RISK. BEWARE OF DOG. 
SLIPPERY WHEN WET" means trouble" - Michael Lucas
Joshua Fielden, Senior Systems Administrator and Backups Team Lead
[email protected], Inc. jfielden AT excitecorp DOT com 650-556-3316

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>