Veritas-bu

Re: [Veritas-bu] Backup Policy - Responsibility for adding client into NBU

2009-02-17 13:11:13
Subject: Re: [Veritas-bu] Backup Policy - Responsibility for adding client into NBU
From: Ed Wilts <ewilts AT ewilts DOT org>
To: James Osbourn <jo4 AT sanger.ac DOT uk>
Date: Tue, 17 Feb 2009 11:54:39 -0600
On Tue, Feb 17, 2009 at 10:14 AM, James Osbourn <jo4 AT sanger.ac DOT uk> wrote:
In my previous job we had a coverage report script that ran.  If I
remember correctly it used DNS config files to get a list of machines on
the network ( we were not using dynamic addressing ) and it used
netbackup check_coverage script in the bin/goodies directory to list
client and compared the two lists.  We had a seperate config file which
we could set up exception.  The config was basically a list of regular
expressions.  For example we did not want to backup ethernet switches or
routers or printers etc and these could all be added to the list of
machines to ignore.

The script ran once a week and reported and differences.

This doesn't really work very well.  bpcoverage is braindead when you have clustered clients.  It fails to detect that there are virtual servers running on the host and says they're uncovered.  Unless you piece together all of the virtual servers and the physical servers manually, you can't tell what's covered and what isn't.  If you're in the backup group and don't manage the clusters, you may not even know which virtual servers belong to what. 

Additionally, for Windows clients, the drive letter case in the policy has to be upper case.  If you specify a lowercase c:, the backups work fine but bpcoverage fails.

Coverage is a really, really hard problem and Symantec hasn't given us adequate tools yet to help.
    .../Ed

Ed Wilts, RHCE, BCFP, BCSD, SCSP, SCSE
ewilts AT ewilts DOT org
_______________________________________________
Veritas-bu maillist  -  Veritas-bu AT mailman.eng.auburn DOT edu
http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/mailman/listinfo/veritas-bu