| |
| |
| |
|
Page: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20
Comments:
<MeduMatte> some of these have ECG data in them
<sartan> dude you're fine..
<sartan> just don't access those directories with the gui
<MeduMatte> oh, hell no :)
<peerce> is there a index to this GUID ? how are they located ?
<sartan> if you ever try to copy those files or defrag them, it'll just take ****ing ages because they're so small
<FKnight`> I never really understood when people talk about backup with the "father, son, grandfather" analogies. It confuses me. All I know is the backup software thinks about that **** for me
<FKnight`> and I just go
<MeduMatte> peerce - SQL database
<FKnight`> "gimme salespresentation.ppt from 12-12-05"
<sartan> FKnight`: hehe
<peerce> MeduMatte; why isn't the data in teh SQL too?
<MeduMatte> hrm....it hit something in there...403k @ 19GB...
<FKnight`> I understand full, differential, incremental, and how it relates to retention, recovery, etc.
<FKnight`> but that "grandfather, father, son, mother" ****
<FKnight`> huh ?!
<sartan> yeah it doesn't make sense
<sartan> i wasn't really using the word in the manner of that way..
<FKnight`> I know
<FKnight`> it just reminded me
<MeduMatte> peerce - it *is* in the database, however for a record to be deemed authentic, it requires that the original log be transferred back to the tablet.
<FKnight`> Colour My World
<FKnight`> with hope
<FKnight`> of Loving You.
<sartan> for example.. you have a house that does not have a water meter, so the city charges you flat rate. they install a new meter, but they can't force you to change to metered water usage because you're grandfathered in!
<sartan> but new houses always come with water meters so you're forced to pay by the meter.
<sartan> cubic!
<peerce> MeduMatte; ugh. well, NTFS WILL work with very large file counts, but disk management tools like backup software, etc will probably go REALLY slow if it doesn't crash
<z0rgatr0n> when i have people wanting a backup, they usually dont know what they want, i have to pull up a BE console and run a search on filename and pull them into my office to pick which one they want
<MeduMatte> 451k files @ 26GB
<peerce> NTFS uses a balanced tree (aka B+Tree) algorithm to store directories, so opening a named file is fairly efficient even with 1/2 million or whatever
<FKnight`> z0rgatr0n yeah :D
<MeduMatte> peerce - yeah, I can understand that. My worry is that one of our apps is timing out on a file creation into this folder.
<sartan> z0rgatr0n: back at Q9 i was using netbackup.. very powerful datacenter-warehouse software. now i'm running BE, and it looks pretty pointy-clicky happy but it misses a lot of the oomph i'm used to
<sartan> er. s/Q9/old job/
<z0rgatr0n> FKnight`: even more annoying is once they pick the file they want, they wonder why i follow them out of my office.. like DUH I HAVE TO CHANGE THE TAPES!!!
<peerce> MeduMatte; then I'd strongly recommend splitting it by month or something.
<peerce> or two digits of the GUID, or something.
<MeduMatte> peerce - yeah, pretty much my only recourse
<peerce> .../0/f/fullfilename.log
<FKnight`> "I need you to restore a file. I don't remember the name of it or what directory it was in. I don't know when I deleted it."
<FKnight`> what do you say
<z0rgatr0n> sartan: I am so happy with BE10, i cant really go on.. for the most part, its just about perfect.
<FKnight`> I just look at them
<peerce> FKnight`; "that makes two of us"
<FKnight`> peerce hahaha
<sartan> i find that it misses verbosity for backup to disk failures
<z0rgatr0n> sartan: However, I have come from a CA Arcserve background... Technically, you can argue that anything is better then that :(
<sartan> i hear its crap!
<FKnight`> ntbackup is slightly better than Backup Exec 9
<peerce> I'm rather satisfied with HP Data Protector Express, formerly Omniback.
<z0rgatr0n> its not coined "Arghserve" out of joke
<FKnight`> Backup Exec 8.x was GOOD
<FKnight`> they jumped the ****ing shark with 9
<sartan> i think i'm at 9..
<peerce> but I'm only using it to backup to a LTO2 changer
<z0rgatr0n> I used to use 8.6, went straight to 10. I welcome the change. 8.6 used a proprietary database structure that frequently got jacked up. 10 uses MSDE and its rock solid.
<FKnight`> we're probably gonna go DLT-S4
<sartan> 9.11
<FKnight`> 800GB native
<FKnight`> sorry, we do GIS
<sartan> backup to disk.. netapp, direct attached storage.. ~5tb
<z0rgatr0n> BE9 uses MSDE IIRC too
<sartan> a nite
<FKnight`> BE9 uses MSDE yeah
<peerce> IBM has some new tape coming out thats multiterabyte
<FKnight`> peerce: yeah
<sartan> ooh. cool
<sartan> i wonder if they're fast too
<FKnight`> I heard about that
<z0rgatr0n> going MSDE has made a huge difference in BE's reliability
<peerce> be useless if it wasn't fast.
<peerce> LTO2 screams
<FKnight`> z0rgatr0n: All I know is half the time Backup Exec 9.x thinks I have 3 tape #127s
<sartan> it's faster than 100mbit networks!
<FKnight`> one of em is bad
<FKnight`> another is in the Web Site Data pool
<FKnight`> he other is in scratch
<z0rgatr0n> FKnight`: weird. you do an inventory between each tape load?
<FKnight`> Backup Exec 8.x never did **** like that
<peerce> LTO uses ultra160wide SCIS :D
<FKnight`> z0rgatr0n: yeah
<peerce> or fiberchannel
<peerce> but fawk, FC drives are $$$$$
<sartan> i got to set up a powervault 136T.. 76 LTO2 slots, 5 drives.
<z0rgatr0n> FKnight`: The only real bitch I have about BE10 over 8.6, is that BE10 treats an Inventory operation as a Job. So if our autoloader (4-tape AIT2) fills up during the full weekend backup, I cannot change tapes and re-inventory to resume the job, because the backup is still queued. This is a known and unresolved issue, as I've discovered reading Veritas' forums
<peerce> nice. I just have a lto2 1/8 autoloader. 1 drive, 8 slots
<FKnight`> sartan: how much you pay for that
<sartan> lots
<FKnight`> over 20K ?
<sartan> well
<sartan> that was my old job =(
<FKnight`> LTO2 is way too small for us
<FKnight`> LTO3 is ok but our data growth is vertical
<z0rgatr0n> we really need a larger autoloader. we get barely 350gb on a 4-tape AIT2
<sartan> considered hard drive trays?
<peerce> ok, this new IBM tape thing is 5 years away, its a research thing now. 8 terabytes expected on a LTO/DLT sized cart.
<FKnight`> hard drives aren't as cheap for backup as you think over the long haul
<z0rgatr0n> we considered hard disk based storage. dont want it. what if the motor doesnt spin up one day. tapes are tried, proven.
<FKnight`> at least for tons of data
<z0rgatr0n> tapes still rule the roost for m*** backup
<peerce> z0rgatr0n; check out the LTO2 1/8 autoloaders, relatively cheap, you get 8 * 400GB online, and they are FAST.
<FKnight`> for small data sets, hdd is the way to go maybe
<z0rgatr0n> peerce: Have any opinion on Cybernetics brand autoloaders?
<peerce> there's only a couple companies that actually make them.
<sartan> nite!
<peerce> IBM, HP, Dell all sell the same 1/8 transport :D
<z0rgatr0n> we've seen some sweet cybernetics autoloaders offered
<peerce> I dunno who actually sources it, I think its quantums
<FKnight`> tape is fast enough now to have a manageable backup window. Most restores are "I ****ed up", so you use Windows Volume Shadow copy to do differential snapshots
<z0rgatr0n> I'd honestly just be happy with a unit that could hold maybe 10tb in total, which can run all week, with a friday ejection for offsite storage.
<FKnight`> and let the end users restore their own ****
<FKnight`> just allocate like 30% of the total
<FKnight`> depending on your retention needs
<sartan> z0rgatr0n: just scrolled up. if you can see it in advance, try suspending the job
<z0rgatr0n> sartan: unfortunately we run the full backup so close to capacity, were usually within a few gigabytes of capacity :(
<FKnight`> you use disk for the volume shadow snapshots
<FKnight`> tape for your real backup
<z0rgatr0n> fortunately the important data is backed up by the time the job fills, by that time its just user home directories
<peerce> this iss the one I have... http://h18006.www1.hp.com/products/storageworks/18autoloader/index.html
<z0rgatr0n> and **** that
<sartan> =(
<FKnight`> now
<FKnight`> at one of our field offices
<FKnight`> they store about 20 GB of data
<FKnight`> so we back up to a Maxtor Onetouch
<FKnight`> **** it
<z0rgatr0n> omg, some poeple complain about hard disk backup, but youre doing hard disk backup to a MAXTOR?
<peerce> 80Mbyte/sec native backup, up to 160MByte/sec compressed, and 3.2TB online.
<FKnight`> z0rgatr0n: IT's a field office for construction inspectors that do a lot of citix with the DOT, and local storage of office docs.
<sartan> http://www.sun.com/storagetek/tape_storage/tape_libraries/l700e/features.xml <-- one of the customers of my old employer had one of these. 3 modules. over a half million dollars
<z0rgatr0n> peerce: Thats ****ing fast. is that real world performance, or just specs?
<peerce> oh, thats 3.2TB native with LTO3. 6.4TB compressed with LTO3.
<FKnight`> The only reason we're not doing a backup over the net is because we're in the process of changing out our HQ backup
<FKnight`> with a new library, software, etc
<FKnight`> so the Maxtor is fine for now
<peerce> z0rgatr0n; thats LTO3 with HP's drive. it really is that fast. mine is LTO2, 24MB/sec native
<z0rgatr0n> peerce: Because our AIT2 library specs are about 10x more then we really get
<z0rgatr0n> that drive ****ing blows
<z0rgatr0n> its old as the hills anyway
<peerce> you need the right software to keep this thing humming. HP dataprotector backs up 4 seperate volumes of disks at once onto the same tape :D interleaves the data.
<z0rgatr0n> man ive tweaked BE10 several times
<peerce> I hit rated speed backing up 2 SCSI raids at once.
<z0rgatr0n> about 200 mbyte/min is about the max i can get
<peerce> the LTO3 1/8 autoloader is $5800. the LTO2 1/8 is $4300 from HP. about $50/tape, LTO2 is 200/400GB and LTO3 is 400/800GB
<z0rgatr0n> is there a trial of hp dataprotector? im willing to try anything, even as much as weve invested in BE
<peerce> it comes with the HP LTO drives
<peerce> dunno, there's probably a tiral, yeah. there's two completely different versions, full blown enterprise ("Data Protector") and a smaller/mid business Data Protector Express.
<peerce> Express won't do Solaris or AIX
<peerce> just Windows and Linux
<peerce> extra licenses for some of the 'agents' are fairly cheap
Return to
#windows
or
Go to some related
logs:
#computers
#cisco
asus 590SLI
iljazira
eurocup 2008 wikipedia
#windows
management studio sql script drop then create
u tube portugal vs italy
#hardware
|
|
