This message is in MIME format. Since your mail reader does not understand
this format, some or all of this message may not be legible.
------_=_NextPart_001_01C2319B.CBF729A0
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset="iso-8859-1"
I backup the majority of my systems to the same pool; Linux & Solaris alike
so there's no technical issues with it.
Here's a (slightly edited) snippet from an earlier post with my opinion on
tape pools:
I pool my databases separate from my filesystem backups just for
administrative tracking. I like to know how many tapes are being taken up
by this different class of data. I also have a pair of pools for a specific
project-related set of servers because this client is paranoid about sharing
tapes with other client's data.
I use a specific pool for offsite tapes. This is because I duplicate the
pools above to other tapes for offsite storage, the offsite pool easily
identifies which tapes get ejected from the library after the duplication is
done. I have a script called "eject_pool" that I call that pushes all tapes
from the library that are part of the supplied poolname.
I think a scratchpool is a necessity - I return all deassigned tapes to the
scratchpool with a daily script.
One reason for using pools to separate full and incremental backups would be
to protect against media damage. If you smash a tape full of incremental
images, then you can be sure your full backups weren't damaged in the fall.
Be aware, that using lots of pools will cost slightly more tapes. For each
pool, there's a portion of tape "on the end" that wasn't filled fully by the
previous jobs - from an efficiency point of view, this is wasted space. I
have roughly a dozen pools, each one has at least one tape that isn't full.
This free space adds up - although not significantly. It's a balancing act
- although a pretty easy one.
-Mark
-----Original Message-----
From: Emmanuel ULRICH [mailto:eulrich AT jetmultimedia DOT fr]
Sent: Monday, July 22, 2002 1:32 AM
To: veritas-bu AT mailman.eng.auburn DOT edu
Subject: [Veritas-bu] Backup different OS in a same pool ?
Hello everybody,
i've many Linux machines that are backup with Netbackup and a few SCO
and solaris too. But i was told to create a pool per OS ... so i loose
many media space for two/three machines in a pool on media that are
40/70 Gb large .
My question is : can i backup solaris and sco machines within the linux
pool without data losses or problems with netbackup?
Thanks for any answer.
Emmanuel.
_______________________________________________
Veritas-bu maillist - Veritas-bu AT mailman.eng.auburn DOT edu
http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/mailman/listinfo/veritas-bu
------_=_NextPart_001_01C2319B.CBF729A0
Content-Type: text/html;
charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 3.2//EN">
<HTML>
<HEAD>
<META HTTP-EQUIV=3D"Content-Type" CONTENT=3D"text/html; =
charset=3Diso-8859-1">
<META NAME=3D"Generator" CONTENT=3D"MS Exchange Server version =
5.5.2653.12">
<TITLE>RE: [Veritas-bu] Backup different OS in a same pool ?</TITLE>
</HEAD>
<BODY>
<P><FONT SIZE=3D2>I backup the majority of my systems to the same pool; =
Linux & Solaris alike so there's no technical issues with =
it.</FONT>
</P>
<P><FONT SIZE=3D2>Here's a (slightly edited) snippet from an earlier =
post with my opinion on tape pools:</FONT>
</P>
<P><FONT SIZE=3D2>I pool my databases separate from my filesystem =
backups just for administrative tracking. I like to know how many =
tapes are being taken up by this different class of data. I also =
have a pair of pools for a specific project-related set of servers =
because this client is paranoid about sharing tapes with other client's =
data.</FONT></P>
<P><FONT SIZE=3D2> </FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>I use a specific pool for offsite tapes. This =
is because I duplicate the pools above to other tapes for offsite =
storage, the offsite pool easily identifies which tapes get ejected =
from the library after the duplication is done. I have a script =
called "eject_pool" that I call that pushes all tapes from =
the library that are part of the supplied poolname.</FONT></P>
<P><FONT SIZE=3D2> </FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>I think a scratchpool is a necessity - I return all =
deassigned tapes to the scratchpool with a daily script.</FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=3D2> </FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>One reason for using pools to separate full and =
incremental backups would be to protect against media damage. If =
you smash a tape full of incremental images, then you can be sure your =
full backups weren't damaged in the fall. </FONT></P>
<P><FONT SIZE=3D2> </FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>Be aware, that using lots of pools will cost =
slightly more tapes. For each pool, there's a portion of tape =
"on the end" that wasn't filled fully by the previous jobs - =
from an efficiency point of view, this is wasted space. I have =
roughly a dozen pools, each one has at least one tape that isn't =
full. This free space adds up - although not significantly. =
It's a balancing act - although a pretty easy one.</FONT></P>
<P><FONT SIZE=3D2>-Mark</FONT>
</P>
<P><FONT SIZE=3D2>-----Original Message-----</FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>From: Emmanuel ULRICH [<A =
HREF=3D"mailto:eulrich AT jetmultimedia DOT fr">mailto:eulrich AT jetmultimedia
DOT fr=
</A>]</FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>Sent: Monday, July 22, 2002 1:32 AM</FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>To: veritas-bu AT mailman.eng.auburn DOT edu</FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>Subject: [Veritas-bu] Backup different OS in a same =
pool ?</FONT>
</P>
<BR>
<P><FONT SIZE=3D2>Hello everybody,</FONT>
</P>
<P><FONT SIZE=3D2>i've many Linux machines that are backup with =
Netbackup and a few SCO</FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>and solaris too. But i was told to create a pool per =
OS ... so i loose</FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>many media space for two/three machines in a pool on =
media that are</FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>40/70 Gb large .</FONT>
</P>
<P><FONT SIZE=3D2>My question is : can i backup solaris and sco =
machines within the linux</FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>pool without data losses or problems with =
netbackup?</FONT>
</P>
<P><FONT SIZE=3D2>Thanks for any answer.</FONT>
</P>
<P><FONT SIZE=3D2>Emmanuel.</FONT>
<BR><FONT =
SIZE=3D2>_______________________________________________</FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>Veritas-bu maillist - =
Veritas-bu AT mailman.eng.auburn DOT edu</FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=3D2><A =
HREF=3D"http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/mailman/listinfo/veritas-bu"; =
TARGET=3D"_blank">http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/mailman/listinfo/veritas=
-bu</A></FONT>
</P>
</BODY>
</HTML>
------_=_NextPart_001_01C2319B.CBF729A0--
|
