Video Screencast Help
Symantec to Separate Into Two Focused, Industry-Leading Technology Companies. Learn more.
Netting Out NetBackup
Showing posts tagged with NetBackup
Showing posts in English
Daniel Hoffer | 07 Jan 2009 | 0 comments

I have a few New Year’s resolutions: 1) Eat less, 2) exercise more, and 3) share some thoughts around the term “granular recovery” when it comes to VMware and VCB backups. Hopes are high and I am confident I will be able to achieve at least one of my three resolutions.

Most folks are already familiar with the “2 for 1” idea behind NetBackup for VMware – the idea that based on a single VCB backup pass, it is possible to restore either an entire VM image or an individual file. This is advanced patent-pending technology for Symantec and no other vendor can do this. However, some of our competitors claim that they have this functionality, while in reality what they have is actually far more primitive and far less useful.

The chart below outlines the steps involved in restoring a single 1 MB file from a VCB image-level backup using NetBackup, and compares it to the same process using almost all competitive products:

TimBurlowski | 07 Jan 2009 | 0 comments

I took a long holiday break this year. Unwrapping presents and playing with a new toy is still one of my favorite parts about the holiday season. My kids and I always get something that we have to put together before we play with it. This year I got to break out some of my hardware skills and put together an LED clock from components.

So what does opening holiday presents have to do with NetBackup? Well the quarter just ended, so as usual there are plenty of you out there who got NetBackup to complete your holiday season. In addition to those of you who are new to NetBackup I understand a number of you are thinking about re-architecting your backup systems this year. In fact, the latest data from TheInfoPro — released in its Wave 11 Storage Study — reports that over 30% of IT decision makers interviewed consider backup redesign a top initiative throughout 2009.

So if you have the...

TimBurlowski | 06 Jan 2009 | 0 comments

Today I am posting an interview with John Lallier, Vice President of Technology at FalconStor. FalconStor partners with us in the context of our OpenStorage program and we also work with FalconStor to qualify their virtual tape libraries for use with NetBackup.

Q) Tell us a little more about yourself. How long have you been with FalconStor and what is your role there?

A) I’ve been with FalconStor from the beginning, having worked with ReiJane Huai and the other founders first at Cheyenne Software and later Computer Associates. As VP of Technology, I oversee the work with our OEM partners using our products (EMC, IBM, Sun, etc.) as well as the large strategic partners such as Symantec.

Q) I'm interviewing you specifically about the OpenStorage program. You are among the first few vendors to release an OpenStorage solution. From your perspective what is the problem the...

Joe Pfeiffer | 29 Dec 2008 | 0 comments

Pretty much every backup reporting product claims their product is customizable (including us).   Let’s take a closer look at this. With each backup product, there is a set of reports that comes with it. These are often referred to as “canned reports” or “out-of-the-box-reports” where, once you’ve installed, you can start generating these reports.  These reports typically are bound to a pre-defined timeframe (i.e. last 24 hours, last week etc..) and represent a pre-defined target (all backup domains, a tape library, a backup server etc…).
So, when someone asks “can I customize reports”, what do they mean?  What are they expecting?  The classic definition of customization says it’s  “modification to meet individual needs”.  Well, individual needs will most likely eclipse the canned report set – by a lot.  That is, generating reports above and beyond...

TimBurlowski | 18 Dec 2008 | 0 comments

It's the holidays and I'm feeling a little more silly than usual.


Message Edited by TimBur on 12-18-2008 06:45 PM
Joe Pfeiffer | 17 Dec 2008 | 1 comment

My post on backup reporting myths sparked some interest from a colleague (Hal Uygur) so here is his favorite myth - consecutive failures.  A common question from backup administrators is “can you tell me servers that failed x consecutive times?”.  Across the backup reporting vendors, many claim that they  can produce such a report.  Can they?  Well, it depends on what is meant by “consecutive”.  Sarcasm aside, but this topic requires looking under the covers so that the advertised functionality meets the requirement.  Consecutive failures can basically be broken down to “consecutive job” failures  and “consecutive window failures”.

Lets start with the easier one - “consecutive job failures”.  This is simply a straight line calculation of looking at jobs for a specific timeframe and determining when x many of them occurred consecutively.  For example, if we look at...

Vilobh Meshram | 17 Dec 2008 | 0 comments

Based on a recent study and suggestions I plan to come up with the post describing approximately how many tapes will we need to backup the data.

Ideal Data Transfer Rate = Amount of data to backup / Backup Window

Suppose you have 100 GB of data to backup and an 8 hour window then ideal data transfer rate would be 12.5 GB/hr . You would choose the Drive based on that requirement. After selecting the appropriate drive technology that provides the performance and selecting the cartridge capacity you need, we will focus on the how many cartridges you will need to have available.The number of cartridges depends upon the amount of data that you are backing up, the frequency of your backup, your retention period and the capacity of media used to store your backups.

A simple formula that can be used is

Number of Tapes= (total data to backup * Frequency of backup * Retention Period)/Tape Capacity

Following is an example:-

Total amount of data to...

The real Alex Davies | 16 Dec 2008 | 1 comment

The SAN client was introduced in NetBackup 6.5 to allow large amounts of data to backed up rapidly over SAN connections rather than using LANs. The SAN client has distinct advantages over both the LAN client and the SAN media server . The SAN client is much easier to administer and operate the a SAN media server as no devices are presented directly to the server being backed up. It also offers significantly faster transfer rates that Gbit LAN connections allow (testing with 4 Gbit HBAs has shown transfer speeds of the order of 500 Mbytes/sec). In the initial 6.5 GA release the SAN client was limited to 2 Gbit fibre connections and could only back up to disk on the media server.

Both of these restrictions were removed in NetBackup 6.5.2 when backup direct to tape and support for 4Gbit HBAs was introduced. The platform coverage for FT Media Servers to support the SAN client was also extended. The SAN client can be used with most standard NetBackup clients and uses either...

Joe Pfeiffer | 12 Dec 2008 | 0 comments

Back in June at Symantec Vision we had a group that busts myths perform (we're not allowed to use their official name but you can guess who these "busters" were).  We love to throw claims (myths) around in the storage industry so I thought I'd debunk a few things I've been reading about lately.  Yes, I am writing from a storage vendor as well so take it with a grain of salt but this is an attempt to at least bring these claims to light and let you make your own decisions.

Real time Reporting

There are several third party products that claim to do this.  These products typically compare the most with our own Veritas Backup Reporter (VBR for short) but really this is a feature we compare with NetBackup Operations Manager (NOM for short).  Both the 3rd party products as well as VBR simply can not do true real time reporting.  The way backup data is collected from all these applications is by executing a NetBackup...

TimBurlowski | 12 Dec 2008 | 0 comments

You can now find us on Facebook. That means you can become a fan, discuss current topics and hear the latest news.

Message Edited by TimBur on 12-12-2008 02:16 PM