directories logged as "skipped" but actually backed up - proof needed for SOX
NetBackup Enterprise Server 7.1.0.3 on Windows 2k8 x64 backing up an AIX 5.3 using client 6.5.4 (yes, I know it should be 6.5.6 or greater but change controls are in place)
Single threaded backup set to "All_Local_Drives". Cross Mount Points and Follow NFS are checked.
The backup reports status 1, not all files were backed up.
When I go into the Activity Monitor, Job Details, Detailed Status there are a lot of messages like this one:
1/23/2012 07:20:31 - Info bpbrm(pid=7212) from client xxxxxxxxx: TRV - /home/db2 is in a different file system from /home. Skipping.
but if I go into the restore tool, there are files listed so they apparently did get backed up.
My SOX Auditor isn't happy with this...so...is there anything on the NetBackup KB or online docs that says "this is how it reports things...."?
Comments
bpcoverage
look for the bpcoverage command that is in the admincmd dir
you can run this for your server and it will tell you if a fs is covered and by what policy.
I don't have to know how to spell....I work on Unix.
NetBackup 7.0.1 - AIX & Windows
Clear "Cross Mount Points" and "Follow NFS"
> Single threaded backup set to "All_Local_Drives". Cross Mount Points and Follow NFS are checked.
Why do you enable Cross Mount Points and Follow NFS with ALL_LOCAL_DRIVES directive?
No need to enable both because ALL_LOCAL_DRIVES covers all local-mounted file systems by itself.
Clear both and try again.
Authorized Symantec Consultant(ASC) Data Protection in Tokyo, Japan
I've cleared both checkmarks
I've cleared both checkmarks and am running a test backup right now. And the same "skipping" messages are being logged (but I can see files from those same dirs being backed up via the current file at the bottom of the details screen.
So it's true I don't need them checked but it doesn't eliminate the scary (to use the word the Auditor used) messages.
skipped while backup for filesystem where mount point resides,
but mounted filesystem is covered in other part of backup. ALL_LOCAL_DRIVES indicate that this backup will take all local filesystem.
/home/db2 is skipped while the job taking data in /home, but later, /home/db2 will be backed up.
Authorized Symantec Consultant(ASC) Data Protection in Tokyo, Japan
"1/23/2012 07:20:31 - Info
"1/23/2012 07:20:31 - Info bpbrm(pid=7212) from client xxxxxxxxx: TRV - /home/db2 is in a different file system from /home. Skipping."
The message is perfectly normal when a backup for /home is done. Note the Info status.
/home/db2 is a separate filesystem and will be backed up when it gets to that filesystem.
Supporting Storage Foundation and VCS on Unix and Windows as well as NetBackup on Unix and Windows.
Handy NBU links
As stated above this is perfectly normal
On one of our Solaris servers:
# ./bpmount -i
MNT - ufs 14 1 /dev/md/dsk/d0 /
MNT - local 8 8 /devices /devices
MNT - ctfs 4 16 ctfs /system/contract
MNT - PROC 4 5 proc /proc
MNT - mntfs 6 11 mnttab /etc/mnttab
MNT - tmp 4 17 swap /etc/svc/volatile
MNT - objfs 5 14 objfs /system/object
MNT - local 7 17 sharefs /etc/dfs/sharetab
MNT - fd 2 7 fd /dev/fd
MNT - tmp 4 4 swap /tmp
MNT - tmp 4 8 swap /var/run
MNT - ufs 15 9 /dev/md/dsk/d20 /one
MNT - ufs 15 4 /dev/md/dsk/d11 /two
MNT - ufs 15 12 /dev/md/dsk/d31 /three
UNAME - 5 7 4 17 5 SunOS dpurple 5.10 Generic_137137-09 sun4u
VERSION - 22 NetBackup-Solaris9 6.5
EXIT STATUS 0: the requested operation was successfully completed
The directive ALL_LOCAL_DRIVES in this instance would be like having a backup selection of:
/
/one
/two
/three
So, if I were to back up ALL_LOCAL_DRIVES on this particular server then, when NetBackup backs up the root filesystem whose 'content' obviously also includes the other ufs filesystems /one, /two and /three, I would also expect to see this 'skipping' message for all three of these different filesystems. But they would also be backed up as we are using the ALL_LOCAL_DRIVES directive.
Also as stated above, do not use cross mount points when using ALL_LOCAL_DRIVES on a *NIX client - you'll probably end up backing up more than you bargained for!
http://www.symantec.com/business/support/index?pag...
Regards Andy
"It's not too late to panic ..."
If you really need that warm and fuzzy feeling
turn on multi streams
when / backs up it will say skipping anything that is a seperate file system - and / will run an its own job
then all the other filesystems will also run as their own jobs
so you will get a job for /home/db2 and for each of the others
this allows you to show it is getting the backup.
I don't have to know how to spell....I work on Unix.
NetBackup 7.0.1 - AIX & Windows
I may have to do just that.
I may have to do just that. I don't want to because this backup is at a remote site and is to a stand alone drive. So the Operators are using the "complete" email to know when to change the tapes. And multi-thread produces multi "complete" emails...I may have to do something with one of the end-of-backup scripts for notification...
GUI removed filtering of these messages...
As mentioned above by couple of folks, those messages "is in a different file system from... Skipping" have been there since day-one of NBU. They have always been send from NBU Agent to NBU Server(s).
However, earlier releases of NBU had their GUI's filter out these "TRV / Trivial" messages from being actually displayed in the Activity Monitor's Job Details. The only place we would have seen such messages would have been in backup bpbkar verbose log, which is turned off by default. Later versions of NBU GUI's decided to remove the filtering, and now everything may be making its way to the GUI's Activity Monitor's Job Details.
If you really believe that you do not want those TRV/Trivial messages in the Activity Monitor's Job Details, escalate it to NBU GUI engineering for a corrective fix.
I had a same situation. I
I had a same situation. I left the follow NFS and croos mount points checked and changed backup selection. instead of ALL_LOCAL_DRIVES i put all backup selection separatly. After that i got everything backed up.
I've provided the auditor
I've provided the auditor with the online KB page about bpcoverage as well as the output for the specified machine. We'll see if that is accepted or if I have to start doing strange things to keep them happy.
Would you like to reply?
Login or Register to post your comment.