Netbackup 7.5.0.4 Exchange 2007 GRT backup failed status 20
Created: 11 Oct 2012 | Updated: 13 Oct 2012 | 10 comments
This issue has been solved. See solution.
after upgrade to 7.5.0.4 from 0.3 Exch. GRT backup (app cluster) failed
storage unit is on MSDP
11:55:01 PM - Info nbjm(pid=7448) starting backup job (jobid=30633) for client ########, policy Exch_07_GRT, schedule Full
11:55:01 PM - Info nbjm(pid=7448) requesting STANDARD_RESOURCE resources from RB for backup job (jobid=30633, request id:{7FB589A4-201F-4039-A383-442169CCD880})
11:55:01 PM - requesting resource Dedupe_SU
11:55:01 PM - requesting resource ########.NBU_CLIENT.MAXJOBS.########
11:55:01 PM - requesting resource ########.NBU_POLICY.MAXJOBS.Exch_07_GRT
11:55:01 PM - granted resource ########.NBU_CLIENT.MAXJOBS.########
11:55:01 PM - granted resource ########.NBU_POLICY.MAXJOBS.Exch_07_GRT
11:55:01 PM - granted resource MediaID=@aaaa2;DiskVolume=PureDiskVolume;DiskPool=Dedupe;Path=PureDiskVolume;StorageServer=########;MediaServer=########
11:55:01 PM - granted resource Dedupe_SU
11:55:07 PM - estimated 0 Kbytes needed
11:55:07 PM - Info nbjm(pid=7448) started backup (backupid=########_1349992507) job for client ########, policy Exch_07_GRT, schedule Full on storage unit Dedupe_SU
11:55:09 PM - started process bpbrm (7228)
11:55:18 PM - Error bpbrm(pid=7228) NetBackup storage unit NOT compatible for Granular enabled backup, Please refer NetBackup software compatibility list for supported configurations
11:55:20 PM - end writing
invalid command parameter(20)
Discussion Filed Under:
Comments 10 Comments • Jump to latest comment
This sounds like a defect. I would recommend opening a support case and having a bpbrm log ready to send to your TSE.
What's the version of Exchange?
Exchange GRT poerformance to Puredisk (or OST media device) has much better performance when using VSS (snapshot backup) versus the older legacy or streaming style backup. To save performance complains or support cases, we added a check in 7.5.0.4 to error if trying to backup using this style. Please change yoru backup type to snapshot and try again. If this is not the issue, let me know.
Thanks.
I'm speechless. Are you saying that we deliberately coded something that caused backups which succeeded in 7.5.0.3 to fail in 7.5.0.4? Tell me I'm reading that incorrectly. (Then, please email me.)
I am seeing the same issue since upgrading, if it in fact turns out that a perfectly functional configuration has been made to throw an error for no reason in the new version I will be extremely unimpressed.
When I turn on VSS for Exchange backups I no longer see the error however by backup speeds are unusable, this is why I didn't use VSS in the first place, now I have no option. Nice upgrade.
d_bergen
Please let me know more about the issue you are having with VSS versus the non VSS backups. You should not be seeing such big speed/performance issues by using VSS. Maybe we can take a look at the issues.
We were seeing too many escalations regarding GRT performance without using VSS backup sets. The decision was made to only support VSS backup using GRT to a dedup storage.
Also wanted to make a note that VSS backups are the "preferred" backup from Microsoft for Exchange databases. For Exchange 2007, a lot of vendors don't even support streaming based backups anymore. Microsoft removed the capability all together for Exchange 2010, so VSS is the only option.
Thanks rawilde and Chris, it worked after enabling snapshot however i lost the ability to perform a db level grt backup !,
btw, i reviewed the release notes of 0.4 and found something that may need more explanation
"Etrack Incident: 2820643
storage unit on NetBackup clients that are higher than version 7.5.0.4."
Are you trying to do a DB level backup of Exchange 2007 and not storage group? Can I ask why?
I will see if we can clear up the description in future release notes.
nothing important, we already have an SG:DB 1:1 rate , however I agree that there is no notable performance advantage, or in other words it was fine before the VSS
Would you like to reply?
Login or Register to post your comment.