|
All my filesystem policies have more than one client per
policy. I have, bascially 10 filesystem policies: 5 for Unix, 5 for
Windows boxes. Each set of 5 has a different night for full backups so,
for example, I have a Unix_Monday with full backups on Mondays and incrementals
other nights, Unix_Tuesday has fulls on Tuesdays, etc. Similar for
Windows. Of course there's some on-off stuff but in general this is the
setup. I "balance" the policies so that each has about the same amount of
weekly data volume.
In general, it's worked very nicely.
My only problem has been if somebody asks for a boxes
backups to be skipped for a couple nights, this is very rare but happened about
six months ago when they were doing performance tests and wanted a pristine
process environment. In this case, I pulled the client from the policy and
set up an "at" job to add it back via command-line a couple days later (I'm
forgetful and didn't want to try to remember).
Our oracle policies have per-client, per
database policies.
I
guess, to me, it's about trusting the scheduler to get them all done. If
you have separate policies per client then you're managing 600 backup windows.
It's a false sense of control since, at that level of complexity, they're all
queueing up anyway and the scheduler is managing the
stream/storage-unit/priority levels anyway.
$.02
-M
NetBackup 6.0 MP5; Windows 2003 Server and
clients.
I heard this suggested again in conversation and wanted to
find out if anyone else is creating a separate policy for each client? I
was up to almost 800 clients, slowing getting down to about 600 clients, but
will grow again in 2008.
The original setup would take quite a while but I can see
some pros and some cons. Is anyone actually running that way with hundreds
of clients?
Thank
you,
Randy
Samora
Team
Lead - Enterprise Backup & Recovery
Enterprise
Server and Storage Systems
randy.samora AT stewart DOT com
Mobile:
713.256.8224
Office:
713.625-8369
| 