Veritas-bu

Re: [Veritas-bu] One Client Per Policy

2008-02-02 23:32:09
Subject: Re: [Veritas-bu] One Client Per Policy
From: "tim burlowski" <tim.burlowski AT gmail DOT com>
To: "Curtis Preston" <cpreston AT glasshouse DOT com>, VERITAS-BU AT mailman.eng.auburn DOT edu
Date: Sun, 3 Feb 2008 09:33:22 +0530
I posted a summary of the survey results on the NetBackup blog.Thanks
to the twenty nine people sent in responses.

https://forums.symantec.com/syment/blog/article?message.uid=298198

tim

On Jan 26, 2008 6:34 AM, tim burlowski <tim.burlowski AT gmail DOT com> wrote:
> Thanks to everyone who has responded so far. If you want to weigh in
> on the topic, I'll keep the poll open for four more days.
>
> thanks,
>
> tim
>
>
> On Jan 23, 2008 11:08 PM, tim burlowski <tim.burlowski AT gmail DOT com> 
> wrote:
> > I vote this for thread of the month.
> >
> > Since there was so much talk on this topic I made a quick survey if
> > people care to vote their preference.
> >
> > http://www.surveymonkey.com/s.aspx?sm=N_2fMf4zEKDnHEU8Un_2bLf8fg_3d_3d
> >
> > I'll publish the results in a week. In the interest of full disclosure
> > I work for Symantec.
> >
> > tim
> >
> >
> > On Jan 23, 2008 1:39 PM, Curtis Preston <cpreston AT glasshouse DOT com> 
> > wrote:
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > As long as you realize that I'm just respectfully discussing and not 
> > > trying
> > > to be argumentative, I'll continue to respond.  I do think you should do
> > > what makes sense to you.  If my approach doesn't make sense to you, then 
> > > by
> > > all means don't use it.
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > I completely agree with KISS, but I think my approach is the simplest and
> > > easiest to understand.  It's just not how it's typically done.  Questions
> > > like which clients are production, or oracle, or whatever, are answered 
> > > by a
> > > proper policy naming convention (e.g. all production policies start with 
> > > P_
> > > or Prod_).
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > The two big advantages that I will remind you of is how things work when
> > > need to stop backups on a given client (much easier), and how they work 
> > > when
> > > you need to re-run a failed backup (very easy).
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > I'll admit that unless you are scripting the creation of your policies
> > > (which I do from a script that reads a spreadsheet actually), then putting
> > > one client per policy is a lot of initial work in medium to large
> > > environments.  But I think it's then easier to maintain after that.
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > This discussion is fun!
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > ---
> > >
> > > W. Curtis Preston
> > >
> > > Backup Blog @ www.backupcentral.com
> > >
> > > VP Data Protection, GlassHouse Technologies
> > >
> > >  ________________________________
> > >
> > >
> > > From: veritas-bu-bounces AT mailman.eng.auburn DOT edu
> > > [mailto:veritas-bu-bounces AT mailman.eng.auburn DOT edu] On Behalf Of 
> > > Martin,
> > > Jonathan
> > >  Sent: Wednesday, January 23, 2008 8:17 AM
> > >
> > >  To: VERITAS-BU AT mailman.eng.auburn DOT edu
> > >
> > >  Subject: Re: [Veritas-bu] One Client Per Policy
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > I think the back and forth on this issue has been quite interesting and 
> > > I'll
> > > reserve judgment on the one client per policy option until I've personally
> > > tried it, but generally speaking my I.T. policy is KISS - KEEP IT SIMPLE
> > > STUPID.  This means (to me) if there is no inherent value in doing 
> > > something
> > > then don't do it.  I tried to limit the number of policies I've created 
> > > and
> > > only created new policies when needed.  I think Curtis at one point said 
> > > its
> > > best to lump all your Netbackup resources together and let Netbackup sort 
> > > it
> > > out.  I think at the time he was referring to storage units, but I think
> > > similarly along policy lines.  I only create new policies when required, 
> > > and
> > > the only requirements in my environment are are as follows:
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > 1) Production versus Development - This is a policy requirement required 
> > > for
> > > Disaster Recovery
> > >
> > > 2) Type of Netbackup job - Windows / Std / Oracle etc...
> > >
> > > 3) Scheduling Conflicts - Some servers just have to be backed up at 
> > > special
> > > times
> > >
> > > 4) Storage Group Requirements - Some backups just have to go to special
> > > places
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > I've got some 50 active policies for 197 clients at my largest site.  That
> > > said, 99 of those machines are in 2 policies - Production Windows and
> > > Production Standard.  I break clients out into their own policies when
> > > required so I can have granular control, but I'm not quite convinced on 
> > > the
> > > value of breaking EVERY machine down into it's own policy / I don't know
> > > that I want that many variables to fret over.  When I do reporting, I 
> > > report
> > > by Policy.  Its much easier for me to identify - all Production Oracle
> > > Servers backed up 13TB this week in 48 hours because they are all in the
> > > production - oracle policy (as an example) based on policy than to find 
> > > the
> > > list of Production oracle servers, and list them individually.
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > Anyhow, I see my current solution as a hybrid.  I've got many policies 
> > > with
> > > only one client in them but I maintain simplicity by grouping servers with
> > > non-specific requirements.  I'll give the one client per policy thing a go
> > > sometime and let you know if I feel differently afterwards.
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > -Jonathan
> > >
> > >
> > >  ________________________________
> > >
> > >
> > > From: veritas-bu-bounces AT mailman.eng.auburn DOT edu
> > > [mailto:veritas-bu-bounces AT mailman.eng.auburn DOT edu] On Behalf Of 
> > > Holowinski,
> > > Scott
> > >  Sent: Wednesday, January 23, 2008 10:39 AM
> > >  To: Randy Samora
> > >  Cc: VERITAS-BU AT mailman.eng.auburn DOT edu
> > >  Subject: Re: [Veritas-bu] One Client Per Policy
> > >
> > > That is my current setup.  575 policies and about 500 clients.  Some 
> > > overlap
> > > for DB and OS backups.  I have also worked in an environment were I put 
> > > 30+
> > > clients in a policy.
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > I would say that for the initial setup the one client per policy is a 
> > > pain.
> > > But I find that reporting and management in general is easier with one
> > > client in a policy.
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > Scott
> > >
> > >  ________________________________
> > >
> > >
> > > From: Randy Samora [mailto:Randy.Samora AT stewart DOT com]
> > >  Sent: Thursday, January 17, 2008 7:43 AM
> > >  To: VERITAS-BU AT mailman.eng.auburn DOT edu
> > >  Subject: [Veritas-bu] One Client Per Policy
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > 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
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > Privileged/Confidential Information may be contained in this message or
> > > attachments hereto. Please advise immediately if you or your employer do 
> > > not
> > > consent to Internet email for messages of this kind. Opinions, conclusions
> > > and other information in this message that do not relate to the official
> > > business of this company shall be understood as neither given nor endorsed
> > > by it.
> >
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > Veritas-bu maillist  -  Veritas-bu AT mailman.eng.auburn DOT edu
> > > http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/mailman/listinfo/veritas-bu
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> > tim burlowski
> > http://timbu.org/mtblog
> >
>
>
>
> --
> tim burlowski
> http://timbu.org/mtblog
>



-- 
tim burlowski
_______________________________________________
Veritas-bu maillist  -  Veritas-bu AT mailman.eng.auburn DOT edu
http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/mailman/listinfo/veritas-bu

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>
  • Re: [Veritas-bu] One Client Per Policy, tim burlowski <=