If it backups up (via SAN for example) to a tape drive without going
accross a network, it's a media server. So, if I understand your
configuration correctly, your "SAN aware clients" will be media
servers. If these servers will only backup themselves and not other
clients via the network, you can get what's known as a SAN media
If a single drive may be accessed by more than one server, you need
SSO to handle drive allocation.
I'm not sure what you mean by having some drives "connected directly
to the backup network". I'm assuming you mean that these are
connected to the master/media server, which is connected to the backup
Multiple media servers may be used for a number of reasons.
Redundancy is certainly one. Load balancing might be another (put a
media server on each subnet in situations where you can't put a
network interface for each subnet on your current media server). If
you have very large clients, you may consider making them media
servers to take the load of the backup network.
David Hicks writes:
> Just want to confirm something, and open this up for input/feedback
> We are creating a seperate backup network, which will have only 1
> master/media server. Two sets of tape drives will be used. One
> group/library is fibre connected to a SAN so that SAN aware clients can
> backup to those, Another set is connected directly to the backup network so
> that SAN unaware clients can backup to those. I want to confirm that I
> won't need SSO, because as I understand it I am not sharing drives between
> media servers, because I only have one media server. Am I missing
> something crucial here ? Anyone who is doing something similiar have any
> suggestions, words of wisdom ?
> Which sort of begs the question...under what situations would I want
> another media server ? is this just a redundancy and performance issue ?
> Thanks for your input
> Veritas-bu maillist - Veritas-bu AT mailman.eng.auburn DOT edu
He who dies with the most toys is still dead