toasters

toasters@lists.teaparty.net

13520 discussions

RE: mcafee scanning a cifs share
by Mike Sphar 01 Nov '01

01 Nov '01

You haven't run into any problems with the scan "hanging"? The few times I've run scans against very larges shares, every so often the scan would just stop and sit at one file forever, and not the same file each time, it just seemed sort of random. Made automated scans pretty useless for me. -- Mike Sphar - Sr Systems Administrator - R&D Support Peregrine Systems, Inc. -----Original Message----- From: Nail, Larry [mailto:lnail@ti.com] Sent: Thursday, November 01, 2001 12:41 PM To: 'Leonard, Roger'; 'toasters(a)mathworks.com' Subject: RE: mcafee scanning a cifs share We use Norton AntiVirus 5 to scan shares without any problems... Just turn the snapshots off ahead scan time. -----Original Message----- From: Leonard, Roger [mailto:Roger.Leonard@marconi.com] Sent: Thursday, November 01, 2001 12:42 PM To: 'toasters(a)mathworks.com' Subject: mcafee scanning a cifs share does anyone know of any problems or issues with using NT based mcafee scanner to scan a filers cifs shares from a PC? anything like data corruption or incorrect id'ing of virus infected files? just curious if this is a valid way to scan a filer for viri. thanks Roger D. Leonard

1 0

RE: mcafee scanning a cifs share
by Nail, Larry 01 Nov '01

01 Nov '01

We use Norton AntiVirus 5 to scan shares without any problems... Just turn the snapshots off ahead scan time. -----Original Message----- From: Leonard, Roger [mailto:Roger.Leonard@marconi.com] Sent: Thursday, November 01, 2001 12:42 PM To: 'toasters(a)mathworks.com' Subject: mcafee scanning a cifs share does anyone know of any problems or issues with using NT based mcafee scanner to scan a filers cifs shares from a PC? anything like data corruption or incorrect id'ing of virus infected files? just curious if this is a valid way to scan a filer for viri. thanks Roger D. Leonard

1 0

mcafee scanning a cifs share
by Leonard, Roger 01 Nov '01

01 Nov '01

does anyone know of any problems or issues with using NT based mcafee scanner to scan a filers cifs shares from a PC? anything like data corruption or incorrect id'ing of virus infected files? just curious if this is a valid way to scan a filer for viri. thanks Roger D. Leonard

1 0

Snapmirror
by Neil Stichbury 01 Nov '01

01 Nov '01

Folks, I have a requirement to Snapmirror from a Filer using BCS disks to a Filer using ZCS disks. I understand that checksum reversion will take place during the initial sync and that with around 400GB to mirror this will add around two hours to the process. Question: Will the incremental mirroring that occurs, occur as per normal ?. Ie no issues other than the initial reversion ? After a few weeks the Snapmirror will be set in the other direction (ZCS to BCS). Will the reversion process occur again ?. Ontap is 6.01.R3 in both Filers. Regards, Neil Stichbury Client Services gen-i Limited Ph: +64-9-306-4717 FaX: +64-9-306-4543 Email:nhs@gen-i.co.nz This e-mail message has been scanned and cleared by MailMarshal http://www.gen-i.co.nz

1 0

RE: Veritas NetBackup 3.4 NDMP backup failure
by Collie, Michael 31 Oct '01

31 Oct '01

Attached is a note from STK regarding tape cleaning options on the L700. >>>>>>><<<<<<<<< To let the backup app determine when to clean a drive Auto Clean is turned off in the library. STK libraries, with Auto Clean enabled, will present status to the backup application that a drive is being cleaned. The drives all present to the library that they need to be cleaned and the drive vendors like this because drives should only be cleaned when necessary - prevents excessive head wear. With Auto Clean enabled in a library a clean will occur when the drive tells the library that it needs to be cleaned. This means that a clean operation could occur in the middle of a multi-volume backup causing problems for the backup application. None of the backup applications make use of the status the library presents to say that a clean operation is occurring, they all have different methods of cleaning drives. Some base cleaning on number of mounts and some on hours of use - drive vendors don't like either method as they only want a drive to be cleaned when they determine that it is necessary. Because the backup apps don't make use of the library status notification we usually suggest that customer's let the backup app determine when to clean a device. This means that a clean will occur when the backup app wants to do one, this way you don't encounter cleanings during multi-volume backups. Veritas NetBackup put out a big patch recently that addressed this cleaning issue (and other issues), I think in patch 3.4.1 - you will have to check the Veritas site. NetBackup will now detect that a drive is being cleaned and 'wait' for this to end. In the case of a DLT drive this could take 20-30 minutes because the DLT drives never use the same area of a cleaning tape, they always space forward to a new area on the cleaning tape. -----Original Message----- From: ilya.birman(a)abnamro.com [mailto:ilya.birman@abnamro.com] Sent: Wednesday, October 31, 2001 10:55 AM To: toasters(a)mathworks.com Subject: Veritas NetBackup 3.4 NDMP backup failure ----- Forwarded by Ilya Birman/US/ABNAMRO/NL on 10/31/2001 01:00 PM ----- Ilya Birman To: 'toasters <'toasters(a)mathworks.com'" 10/31/2001 <toasters(a)mathworks.com> 10:31 AM cc: support(a)veritas.com, support(a)storagtek.com Subject: Veritas NetBackup 3.4 NDMP backup failure We have a 760 NetApp Filer that we backup using NetBackup 3.4 via NDMP ( StorageTek L700) The volume of the backup job is large and spans across numerous tapes. Often StorageTek L700 detects that tape drive needs to be cleaned and in the middle of the backup job, while backup job switches tapes. This causes Veritas to DOWN the tape drive. Have anyone run into this problem. Is there a setting you can set ( turning off Auto Clean is not an option) TIA Ilya --------------------------------------------------------------------------- This message (including any attachments) is confidential and may be privileged. If you have received it by mistake please notify the sender by return e-mail and delete this message from your system. Any unauthorized use or dissemination of this message in whole or in part is strictly prohibited. Please note that e-mails are susceptible to change. ABN AMRO Bank N.V. (including its group companies) shall not be liable for the improper or incomplete transmission of the information contained in this communication nor for any delay in its receipt or damage to your system. ABN AMRO Bank N.V. (or its group companies) does not guarantee that the integrity of this communication has been maintained nor that this communication is free of viruses, interceptions or interference. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------

1 0

Veritas NetBackup 3.4 NDMP backup failure
by ilya.birman＠abnamro.com 31 Oct '01

31 Oct '01

----- Forwarded by Ilya Birman/US/ABNAMRO/NL on 10/31/2001 01:00 PM ----- Ilya Birman To: 'toasters <'toasters(a)mathworks.com'" 10/31/2001 <toasters(a)mathworks.com> 10:31 AM cc: support(a)veritas.com, support(a)storagtek.com Subject: Veritas NetBackup 3.4 NDMP backup failure We have a 760 NetApp Filer that we backup using NetBackup 3.4 via NDMP ( StorageTek L700) The volume of the backup job is large and spans across numerous tapes. Often StorageTek L700 detects that tape drive needs to be cleaned and in the middle of the backup job, while backup job switches tapes. This causes Veritas to DOWN the tape drive. Have anyone run into this problem. Is there a setting you can set ( turning off Auto Clean is not an option) TIA Ilya --------------------------------------------------------------------------- This message (including any attachments) is confidential and may be privileged. If you have received it by mistake please notify the sender by return e-mail and delete this message from your system. Any unauthorized use or dissemination of this message in whole or in part is strictly prohibited. Please note that e-mails are susceptible to change. ABN AMRO Bank N.V. (including its group companies) shall not be liable for the improper or incomplete transmission of the information contained in this communication nor for any delay in its receipt or damage to your system. ABN AMRO Bank N.V. (or its group companies) does not guarantee that the integrity of this communication has been maintained nor that this communication is free of viruses, interceptions or interference. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------

1 0

RE: CarrierScan (Resolved)
by Tim Longo 31 Oct '01

31 Oct '01

I forgot to create a unix account to match my Windows service account. Once created, things started working as expected. Thanks. > >I'm having trouble getting my carrier scan server to register with my filer when >using a service account. When I change the service account to a domain admin >account, things work fine. > >I therefore conclude that my install/config is correct, with the exception of my >service account permissions. > >Have done the following: > >- created a service account in the domain >- added the service account to the local "Backup Operators" group on the netapp >- added the service account to local admin group on win2k machine (so it can run >as a service?) > >Any suggestions? > >Thanks. >

1 0

RE: CarrierScan
by Tim Longo 31 Oct '01

31 Oct '01

I'm having trouble getting my carrier scan server to register with my filer when using a service account. When I change the service account to a domain admin account, things work fine. I therefore conclude that my install/config is correct, with the exception of my service account permissions. Have done the following: - created a service account in the domain - added the service account to the local "Backup Operators" group on the netapp - added the service account to local admin group on win2k machine (so it can run as a service?) Any suggestions? Thanks.

1 0

Re: Used gear?
by ScottUCE＠aol.com 31 Oct '01

31 Oct '01

In a message dated 10/29/01 11:05:15 AM Central Standard Time, FZiller(a)IKON.com writes: > They have to "re-certify" the equipment before they support it...can be > costly. > Network Appliance has been very reasonable with respect to accepting used NetApp add-ons and systems onto service contract. This is not to say, however, that users are required to buy NetApp service coverage on their purchases of used gear. Regards, Scott Fischmann Union Computer Exchange, Inc. 6233 Idylwood Lane Minneapolis, MN 55436 Phone: 952 935 7282 FAX: 952 935 5056 scott(a)unioncomputer.com

1 0

RE: Veritas Netbackup Database
by Jon Walton 29 Oct '01

29 Oct '01

I guess what I am getting at is make sure you get it in writing. I agree with your take on NFS file locking, but I have been in situations where support engineer A promised something that support engineer B would not support. If you can point to a Veritas document that states they support the database over NFS, your are in favorable situation. Regards, Jon -----Original Message----- From: Manny Kaiser [mailto:mkaiser@mmcnet.com] Sent: Thursday, October 25, 2001 12:28 AM To: Jon Walton Cc: toasters@mathworks. com Subject: RE: Veritas Netbackup Database I was under the distinct impression that file locking in NFS in today's operating systems is considerably more reliable then it was years ago. I have never encountered a problem with any application running on an NFS mounted file system. I am under the impression that the quote below is something that was copied out of earlier versions of the manual and never reviewed again. When using NFS you might suffer a performance penalty if your systems are not correctly configured. -----Original Message----- From: owner-toasters(a)mathworks.com [mailto:owner-toasters@mathworks.com]On Behalf Of Jon Walton Sent: Wednesday, October 24, 2001 11:31 PM To: Jeff Kennedy Cc: toasters@mathworks. com Subject: RE: Veritas Netbackup Database Now that I look, the 3.4 DataCenter install guide states: "Because the product uses file locking, VERITAS recommends that you not install NetBackup in an NFS mounted directory. File locking in NFS mounted files systems can be unreliable" I mentally took this to mean "not supported". Sorry if my previous email was misleading. Regards, Jon -----Original Message----- From: Jeff Kennedy [mailto:jlkennedy@amcc.com] Sent: Wednesday, October 24, 2001 6:18 AM To: Jon Walton Cc: toasters@mathworks. com Subject: Re: Veritas Netbackup Database OK, I did some checking again. Veritas does officially support putting /usr/openv onto an NFS file system. However, they say that performance does suffer due to the large write streams. So, if performance is not an issue then it is a very nice solution. Also, db backups do not yet support disk storage unit backups. Supposedly in 4.5 they will for just this reason. ~JK Jon Walton wrote: > > I believe they do not support this due the fact that operations on the > database files involve file locking. That is what is remember reading > in the Unix Admin Guide. > > Regards, > > Jon > > -----Original Message----- > From: Jeff Kennedy [mailto:jlkennedy@amcc.com] > Sent: Friday, October 19, 2001 10:39 AM > To: Manny Kaiser > Cc: toasters@mathworks. com > Subject: Re: Veritas Netbackup Database > > Got word from Vertias that putting the /usr/openv filesystem itself on > NFS was NOT supported. However, you could backup the database to a NFS > disk without issue.... > > ~JK > > > Manny Kaiser wrote: > > > > Has anyone placed the Veritas Netbackup database on an NFS mounted > > file system? > > More specifically on a netapp? > > I was just told by Veritas that they do not recommend doing this > > because NFS is unreliable. > > Any feedback would be helpful. > > > > > > -- > ===================== > Jeff Kennedy > Unix Administrator > AMCC > jlkennedy(a)amcc.com -- ===================== Jeff Kennedy Unix Administrator AMCC jlkennedy(a)amcc.com

1 0

Jump to page:

2025

2024

2023

2022

2021

2020

2019

2018

2017

2016

2015

2014

2013

2012

2011

2010

2009

2008

2007

2006

2005

2004

2003

2002

2001

2000

1999

1998

1997

toasters