Backup Central

I am a "newb" to the list. I have some experience with
NetBackup 5.1 MP4.

Anyways, I have an interesting problem. I have a
NetApp GX system that needs to be protected. It looks
like the best method would be to backup the unit using
NDMP. The problem we are running into, theoretically
at this moment as we design the backup system, is the
limitation of the cluster interconnect and the ability
to move up to 30TB, and in time 60TB of data across a
2GB FC link to a tape storage library. Doing the math,
we would never be able to use the netapp for what it
was designed for as the cluster-interconnects would be
continuously saturated. The reason for this (and this
is something I inherited) is that even though there
are 4 Heads, 1 Head is the owner of a metadata volume
that pretty much encompasses the entire unit, so 75%
of the data has to come across the cluster
interconnect (this is limited to 2Gb).

We could re-arch the FS to balance across all 4 Head
nodes, but we still have a 2Gb limitation per node as
that is the fastest FC card available for these guys.

My idea is to implement some kind of synthetic full
strategy. That is, move as much data as possible for
an initial full to tape (we have a two week outage
coming up in a couple months), then create a disk
stage where we can store incrementals. As long as the
daily change rate allows us to move the incrementals
in say 8hrs or so (across Gbe or FC), I think we would
be fine. The question I have for everyone is, how long
should I expect it to take for 4 LTO4 drives in
combination with incrementals on say a thumper, to
generate a weekly full to tape (lets be harsh and say
we have a 10% change rate throughout the week). I want
to start at 30TB today and scale to 60TB over the next
18-24mos.

Anyone have similar experiences?

What I am looking at is possibly using a x4500 as a
combined media server and disk storage unit.

Thanks,

Jim


_______________________________________________
Veritas-bu maillist - Veritas-bu < at > mailman.eng.auburn.edu
http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/mailman/listinfo/veritas-bu

Short answer = SnapMirror, then backup that mirror filer for days/weeks
if you need to. Once your initial mirror is done, it's only the
block-level changes from that point. Also, if you are using NDMP direct
backups, where the filer has tape connectivity, then synthetic backups
are not available.

NDMP is a horrible protocol and once your filers start to grow to these
sizes and beyond backups become difficult at best. SnapMirror works
great and once you get it to that cheaper-disk destination filer, you
can spin to tape.

-Trey

-----Original Message-----
From: veritas-bu-bounces < at > mailman.eng.auburn.edu
[mailto:veritas-bu-bounces < at > mailman.eng.auburn.edu] On Behalf Of Jim Hall
Sent: Friday, April 18, 2008 8:38 AM
To: veritas-bu < at > mailman.eng.auburn.edu
Subject: [Veritas-bu] NetBackup protecting 30TB - 60TB NetApp over NDMP.

I am a "newb" to the list. I have some experience with NetBackup 5.1
MP4.

Anyways, I have an interesting problem. I have a NetApp GX system that
needs to be protected. It looks like the best method would be to backup
the unit using NDMP. The problem we are running into, theoretically at
this moment as we design the backup system, is the limitation of the
cluster interconnect and the ability to move up to 30TB, and in time
60TB of data across a 2GB FC link to a tape storage library. Doing the
math, we would never be able to use the netapp for what it was designed
for as the cluster-interconnects would be continuously saturated. The
reason for this (and this is something I inherited) is that even though
there are 4 Heads, 1 Head is the owner of a metadata volume that pretty
much encompasses the entire unit, so 75% of the data has to come across
the cluster interconnect (this is limited to 2Gb).

We could re-arch the FS to balance across all 4 Head nodes, but we still
have a 2Gb limitation per node as that is the fastest FC card available
for these guys.

My idea is to implement some kind of synthetic full strategy. That is,
move as much data as possible for an initial full to tape (we have a two
week outage coming up in a couple months), then create a disk stage
where we can store incrementals. As long as the daily change rate allows
us to move the incrementals in say 8hrs or so (across Gbe or FC), I
think we would be fine. The question I have for everyone is, how long
should I expect it to take for 4 LTO4 drives in combination with
incrementals on say a thumper, to generate a weekly full to tape (lets
be harsh and say we have a 10% change rate throughout the week). I want
to start at 30TB today and scale to 60TB over the next 18-24mos.

Anyone have similar experiences?

What I am looking at is possibly using a x4500 as a combined media
server and disk storage unit.

Thanks,

Jim


_______________________________________________
Veritas-bu maillist - Veritas-bu < at > mailman.eng.auburn.edu
http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/mailman/listinfo/veritas-bu

_______________________________________________
Veritas-bu maillist - Veritas-bu < at > mailman.eng.auburn.edu
http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/mailman/listinfo/veritas-bu

What if I NDMP to a DSU on a NetBackup Media server?
Is that still unavailable for synths?

With SnapMirror, I believe that requires us investing
more money with NetApp.

Thanks,

Jim

--- "Tharp, Trey" <Trey.Tharp < at > allstate.com> wrote:

Short answer = SnapMirror, then backup that mirror
filer for days/weeks
if you need to. Once your initial mirror is done,
it's only the
block-level changes from that point. Also, if you
are using NDMP direct
backups, where the filer has tape connectivity, then
synthetic backups
are not available.

NDMP is a horrible protocol and once your filers
start to grow to these
sizes and beyond backups become difficult at best.
SnapMirror works
great and once you get it to that cheaper-disk
destination filer, you
can spin to tape.

-Trey

-----Original Message-----
From: veritas-bu-bounces < at > mailman.eng.auburn.edu
[mailto:veritas-bu-bounces < at > mailman.eng.auburn.edu]
On Behalf Of Jim Hall
Sent: Friday, April 18, 2008 8:38 AM
To: veritas-bu < at > mailman.eng.auburn.edu
Subject: [Veritas-bu] NetBackup protecting 30TB -
60TB NetApp over NDMP.

I am a "newb" to the list. I have some experience
with NetBackup 5.1
MP4.

Anyways, I have an interesting problem. I have a
NetApp GX system that
needs to be protected. It looks like the best method
would be to backup
the unit using NDMP. The problem we are running
into, theoretically at
this moment as we design the backup system, is the
limitation of the
cluster interconnect and the ability to move up to
30TB, and in time
60TB of data across a 2GB FC link to a tape storage
library. Doing the
math, we would never be able to use the netapp for
what it was designed
for as the cluster-interconnects would be
continuously saturated. The
reason for this (and this is something I inherited)
is that even though
there are 4 Heads, 1 Head is the owner of a metadata
volume that pretty
much encompasses the entire unit, so 75% of the data
has to come across
the cluster interconnect (this is limited to 2Gb).

We could re-arch the FS to balance across all 4 Head
nodes, but we still
have a 2Gb limitation per node as that is the
fastest FC card available
for these guys.

My idea is to implement some kind of synthetic full
strategy. That is,
move as much data as possible for an initial full to
tape (we have a two
week outage coming up in a couple months), then
create a disk stage
where we can store incrementals. As long as the
daily change rate allows
us to move the incrementals in say 8hrs or so
(across Gbe or FC), I
think we would be fine. The question I have for
everyone is, how long
should I expect it to take for 4 LTO4 drives in
combination with
incrementals on say a thumper, to generate a weekly
full to tape (lets
be harsh and say we have a 10% change rate
throughout the week). I want
to start at 30TB today and scale to 60TB over the
next 18-24mos.

Anyone have similar experiences?

What I am looking at is possibly using a x4500 as a
combined media
server and disk storage unit.

Thanks,

Jim


_______________________________________________
Veritas-bu maillist -
Veritas-bu < at > mailman.eng.auburn.edu

http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/mailman/listinfo/veritas-bu

_______________________________________________
Veritas-bu maillist - Veritas-bu < at > mailman.eng.auburn.edu
http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/mailman/listinfo/veritas-bu

You cannot NDMP to DSUs.

-Jonathan

-----Original Message-----
From: veritas-bu-bounces < at > mailman.eng.auburn.edu
[mailto:veritas-bu-bounces < at > mailman.eng.auburn.edu] On Behalf Of Jim Hall
Sent: Monday, April 21, 2008 9:55 AM
To: veritas-bu < at > mailman.eng.auburn.edu
Subject: Re: [Veritas-bu] NetBackup protecting 30TB - 60TB NetApp over
NDMP.

What if I NDMP to a DSU on a NetBackup Media server?
Is that still unavailable for synths?

With SnapMirror, I believe that requires us investing more money with
NetApp.

Thanks,

Jim

--- "Tharp, Trey" <Trey.Tharp < at > allstate.com> wrote:

Short answer = SnapMirror, then backup that mirror filer for
days/weeks if you need to. Once your initial mirror is done, it's only

the block-level changes from that point. Also, if you are using NDMP
direct backups, where the filer has tape connectivity, then synthetic
backups are not available.

NDMP is a horrible protocol and once your filers start to grow to
these sizes and beyond backups become difficult at best.
SnapMirror works
great and once you get it to that cheaper-disk destination filer, you
can spin to tape.

-Trey

-----Original Message-----
From: veritas-bu-bounces < at > mailman.eng.auburn.edu
[mailto:veritas-bu-bounces < at > mailman.eng.auburn.edu]
On Behalf Of Jim Hall
Sent: Friday, April 18, 2008 8:38 AM
To: veritas-bu < at > mailman.eng.auburn.edu
Subject: [Veritas-bu] NetBackup protecting 30TB - 60TB NetApp over
NDMP.

I am a "newb" to the list. I have some experience with NetBackup 5.1
MP4.

Anyways, I have an interesting problem. I have a NetApp GX system that

needs to be protected. It looks like the best method would be to
backup the unit using NDMP. The problem we are running into,
theoretically at this moment as we design the backup system, is the
limitation of the cluster interconnect and the ability to move up to
30TB, and in time 60TB of data across a 2GB FC link to a tape storage
library. Doing the math, we would never be able to use the netapp for
what it was designed for as the cluster-interconnects would be
continuously saturated. The reason for this (and this is something I
inherited) is that even though there are 4 Heads, 1 Head is the owner
of a metadata volume that pretty much encompasses the entire unit, so
75% of the data has to come across the cluster interconnect (this is
limited to 2Gb).

We could re-arch the FS to balance across all 4 Head nodes, but we
still have a 2Gb limitation per node as that is the fastest FC card
available for these guys.

My idea is to implement some kind of synthetic full strategy. That is,

move as much data as possible for an initial full to tape (we have a
two week outage coming up in a couple months), then create a disk
stage where we can store incrementals. As long as the daily change
rate allows us to move the incrementals in say 8hrs or so (across Gbe
or FC), I think we would be fine. The question I have for everyone is,

how long should I expect it to take for 4 LTO4 drives in combination
with incrementals on say a thumper, to generate a weekly full to tape
(lets be harsh and say we have a 10% change rate throughout the week).

I want to start at 30TB today and scale to 60TB over the next
18-24mos.

Anyone have similar experiences?

What I am looking at is possibly using a x4500 as a combined media
server and disk storage unit.

Thanks,

Jim


_______________________________________________
Veritas-bu maillist -
Veritas-bu < at > mailman.eng.auburn.edu

http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/mailman/listinfo/veritas-bu

_______________________________________________
Veritas-bu maillist - Veritas-bu < at > mailman.eng.auburn.edu
http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/mailman/listinfo/veritas-bu

_______________________________________________
Veritas-bu maillist - Veritas-bu < at > mailman.eng.auburn.edu
http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/mailman/listinfo/veritas-bu

NDMP is not "horrible", but I would agree that SnapMirror is the best alternative at these sizes. We have 2 GB FC connects to VTLs enabled with NDMP drives for filers and we have seen 3 TB volumes backup in hours via NDMP compared to 4-5 days via CIFS...now that is a horrible protocol...

The one caveot with NDMP is you are limited to 16 or so concurrent sessions (ONTap version specific) and can severely impact the filer (which is why Trey's suggestion of SnapMirror is a good one because you won't degrade your source filer trying to back it up.).

-Doug
-----Original Message-----
From: veritas-bu-bounces < at > mailman.eng.auburn.edu [mailto:veritas-bu-bounces < at > mailman.eng.auburn.edu] On Behalf Of Tharp, Trey
Sent: Monday, April 21, 2008 6:19 AM
To: Jim Hall; veritas-bu < at > mailman.eng.auburn.edu
Subject: Re: [Veritas-bu] NetBackup protecting 30TB - 60TB NetApp over NDMP.

Short answer = SnapMirror, then backup that mirror filer for days/weeks
if you need to. Once your initial mirror is done, it's only the
block-level changes from that point. Also, if you are using NDMP direct
backups, where the filer has tape connectivity, then synthetic backups
are not available.

NDMP is a horrible protocol and once your filers start to grow to these
sizes and beyond backups become difficult at best. SnapMirror works
great and once you get it to that cheaper-disk destination filer, you
can spin to tape.

-Trey

-----Original Message-----
From: veritas-bu-bounces < at > mailman.eng.auburn.edu
[mailto:veritas-bu-bounces < at > mailman.eng.auburn.edu] On Behalf Of Jim Hall
Sent: Friday, April 18, 2008 8:38 AM
To: veritas-bu < at > mailman.eng.auburn.edu
Subject: [Veritas-bu] NetBackup protecting 30TB - 60TB NetApp over NDMP.

I am a "newb" to the list. I have some experience with NetBackup 5.1
MP4.

Anyways, I have an interesting problem. I have a NetApp GX system that
needs to be protected. It looks like the best method would be to backup
the unit using NDMP. The problem we are running into, theoretically at
this moment as we design the backup system, is the limitation of the
cluster interconnect and the ability to move up to 30TB, and in time
60TB of data across a 2GB FC link to a tape storage library. Doing the
math, we would never be able to use the netapp for what it was designed
for as the cluster-interconnects would be continuously saturated. The
reason for this (and this is something I inherited) is that even though
there are 4 Heads, 1 Head is the owner of a metadata volume that pretty
much encompasses the entire unit, so 75% of the data has to come across
the cluster interconnect (this is limited to 2Gb).

We could re-arch the FS to balance across all 4 Head nodes, but we still
have a 2Gb limitation per node as that is the fastest FC card available
for these guys.

My idea is to implement some kind of synthetic full strategy. That is,
move as much data as possible for an initial full to tape (we have a two
week outage coming up in a couple months), then create a disk stage
where we can store incrementals. As long as the daily change rate allows
us to move the incrementals in say 8hrs or so (across Gbe or FC), I
think we would be fine. The question I have for everyone is, how long
should I expect it to take for 4 LTO4 drives in combination with
incrementals on say a thumper, to generate a weekly full to tape (lets
be harsh and say we have a 10% change rate throughout the week). I want
to start at 30TB today and scale to 60TB over the next 18-24mos.

Anyone have similar experiences?

What I am looking at is possibly using a x4500 as a combined media
server and disk storage unit.

Thanks,

Jim


_______________________________________________
Veritas-bu maillist - Veritas-bu < at > mailman.eng.auburn.edu
http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/mailman/listinfo/veritas-bu

_______________________________________________
Veritas-bu maillist - Veritas-bu < at > mailman.eng.auburn.edu
http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/mailman/listinfo/veritas-bu

_______________________________________________
Veritas-bu maillist - Veritas-bu < at > mailman.eng.auburn.edu
http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/mailman/listinfo/veritas-bu

On Mon, Apr 21, 2008 at 06:55:17AM -0700, Jim Hall wrote:
What if I NDMP to a DSU on a NetBackup Media server?
Is that still unavailable for synths?

You can't create synthetic fulls with NDMP. The protocol (currently)
doesn't specify anything about the format of the data. So it's just an
opaque object to the backup system.

Without a required format, there's no way for NBU to operate on the data
(which would be needed to create a synthetic full).

--
Darren Dunham ddunham < at > taos.com
Senior Technical Consultant TAOS http://www.taos.com/
Got some Dr Pepper? San Francisco, CA bay area
< This line left intentionally blank to confuse you. >
_______________________________________________
Veritas-bu maillist - Veritas-bu < at > mailman.eng.auburn.edu
http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/mailman/listinfo/veritas-bu

Thanks.

I had read it might become avail in 6.5, but realize
that information is now probably bogus.

I am kind of wishing there was a tighter integration
between what the NetApp has built-in for creating its
snapshots and a receptor on the NBU side.

--Jim

--- A Darren Dunham <ddunham < at > taos.com> wrote:

On Mon, Apr 21, 2008 at 06:55:17AM -0700, Jim Hall
wrote:
What if I NDMP to a DSU on a NetBackup Media
server?
Is that still unavailable for synths?

You can't create synthetic fulls with NDMP. The
protocol (currently)
doesn't specify anything about the format of the
data. So it's just an
opaque object to the backup system.

Without a required format, there's no way for NBU to
operate on the data
(which would be needed to create a synthetic full).

--
Darren Dunham
ddunham < at > taos.com
Senior Technical Consultant TAOS
http://www.taos.com/
Got some Dr Pepper? San
Francisco, CA bay area
< This line left intentionally blank to
confuse you. >
_______________________________________________
Veritas-bu maillist -
Veritas-bu < at > mailman.eng.auburn.edu

http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/mailman/listinfo/veritas-bu

_______________________________________________
Veritas-bu maillist - Veritas-bu < at > mailman.eng.auburn.edu
http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/mailman/listinfo/veritas-bu

On Mon, Apr 21, 2008 at 11:16:46AM -0700, Jim Hall wrote:
Thanks.

I had read it might become avail in 6.5, but realize
that information is now probably bogus.

I don't have anything to do with NDMP development, but I don't see
anything on future of the protocol that makes me think the support
necessary would be here soon. It looks like making multiplexing and
demultiplexing work are higher priorities.

I am kind of wishing there was a tighter integration
between what the NetApp has built-in for creating its
snapshots and a receptor on the NBU side.

Snapshot integration is also mentioned in the NDMP drafts.

--
Darren Dunham ddunham < at > taos.com
Senior Technical Consultant TAOS http://www.taos.com/
Got some Dr Pepper? San Francisco, CA bay area
< This line left intentionally blank to confuse you. >
_______________________________________________
Veritas-bu maillist - Veritas-bu < at > mailman.eng.auburn.edu
http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/mailman/listinfo/veritas-bu

Another problem I run into using NDMP backups is the restores.

You cannot restore a single folder without the restore job reading through the entire backup image.
For example, I backup my filers by running a backup stream for each volumes.
So if the volume is 2TB and I try to restore a single 20MB folder in this volume, the restore job needs to reads through the entire 2TB backup image before it can successfully recover that 20MB folder.
This means a 20MB restore job can take days to complete.

I think this problem is resolved in NBU 6.5 but I haven't tried it yet.
I'm currently running NBU 6.0MP6



-----Original Message-----
From: veritas-bu-bounces < at > mailman.eng.auburn.edu [mailto:veritas-bu-bounces < at > mailman.eng.auburn.edu] On Behalf Of Staub, Doug
Sent: Monday, April 21, 2008 8:18 AM
To: Tharp, Trey; Jim Hall; veritas-bu < at > mailman.eng.auburn.edu
Subject: Re: [Veritas-bu] NetBackup protecting 30TB - 60TB NetApp over NDMP.

NDMP is not "horrible", but I would agree that SnapMirror is the best alternative at these sizes. We have 2 GB FC connects to VTLs enabled with NDMP drives for filers and we have seen 3 TB volumes backup in hours via NDMP compared to 4-5 days via CIFS...now that is a horrible protocol...

The one caveot with NDMP is you are limited to 16 or so concurrent sessions (ONTap version specific) and can severely impact the filer (which is why Trey's suggestion of SnapMirror is a good one because you won't degrade your source filer trying to back it up.).

-Doug
-----Original Message-----
From: veritas-bu-bounces < at > mailman.eng.auburn.edu [mailto:veritas-bu-bounces < at > mailman.eng.auburn.edu] On Behalf Of Tharp, Trey
Sent: Monday, April 21, 2008 6:19 AM
To: Jim Hall; veritas-bu < at > mailman.eng.auburn.edu
Subject: Re: [Veritas-bu] NetBackup protecting 30TB - 60TB NetApp over NDMP.

Short answer = SnapMirror, then backup that mirror filer for days/weeks
if you need to. Once your initial mirror is done, it's only the
block-level changes from that point. Also, if you are using NDMP direct
backups, where the filer has tape connectivity, then synthetic backups
are not available.

NDMP is a horrible protocol and once your filers start to grow to these
sizes and beyond backups become difficult at best. SnapMirror works
great and once you get it to that cheaper-disk destination filer, you
can spin to tape.

-Trey

-----Original Message-----
From: veritas-bu-bounces < at > mailman.eng.auburn.edu
[mailto:veritas-bu-bounces < at > mailman.eng.auburn.edu] On Behalf Of Jim Hall
Sent: Friday, April 18, 2008 8:38 AM
To: veritas-bu < at > mailman.eng.auburn.edu
Subject: [Veritas-bu] NetBackup protecting 30TB - 60TB NetApp over NDMP.

I am a "newb" to the list. I have some experience with NetBackup 5.1
MP4.

Anyways, I have an interesting problem. I have a NetApp GX system that
needs to be protected. It looks like the best method would be to backup
the unit using NDMP. The problem we are running into, theoretically at
this moment as we design the backup system, is the limitation of the
cluster interconnect and the ability to move up to 30TB, and in time
60TB of data across a 2GB FC link to a tape storage library. Doing the
math, we would never be able to use the netapp for what it was designed
for as the cluster-interconnects would be continuously saturated. The
reason for this (and this is something I inherited) is that even though
there are 4 Heads, 1 Head is the owner of a metadata volume that pretty
much encompasses the entire unit, so 75% of the data has to come across
the cluster interconnect (this is limited to 2Gb).

We could re-arch the FS to balance across all 4 Head nodes, but we still
have a 2Gb limitation per node as that is the fastest FC card available
for these guys.

My idea is to implement some kind of synthetic full strategy. That is,
move as much data as possible for an initial full to tape (we have a two
week outage coming up in a couple months), then create a disk stage
where we can store incrementals. As long as the daily change rate allows
us to move the incrementals in say 8hrs or so (across Gbe or FC), I
think we would be fine. The question I have for everyone is, how long
should I expect it to take for 4 LTO4 drives in combination with
incrementals on say a thumper, to generate a weekly full to tape (lets
be harsh and say we have a 10% change rate throughout the week). I want
to start at 30TB today and scale to 60TB over the next 18-24mos.

Anyone have similar experiences?

What I am looking at is possibly using a x4500 as a combined media
server and disk storage unit.

Thanks,

Jim


_______________________________________________
Veritas-bu maillist - Veritas-bu < at > mailman.eng.auburn.edu
http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/mailman/listinfo/veritas-bu

_______________________________________________
Veritas-bu maillist - Veritas-bu < at > mailman.eng.auburn.edu
http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/mailman/listinfo/veritas-bu

_______________________________________________
Veritas-bu maillist - Veritas-bu < at > mailman.eng.auburn.edu
http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/mailman/listinfo/veritas-bu

_______________________________________________
Veritas-bu maillist - Veritas-bu < at > mailman.eng.auburn.edu
http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/mailman/listinfo/veritas-bu

Yes, the restore process of NDMP is definitely slower, but for us the choice was simple. Many of our larger 2-3 TB NetApp volumes were being backed up via CIFS through a Windows media server, which 1) took days to backup and 2) placed a heavy CPU load on the media server. IF those volumes were successful, then the restores would take minutes. With NDMP, the restores ARE successful, they just happen to take 2-3 hours....never experienced an NDMP restore to take days...

Our users are much happier to get back data and wait a few hours (some would be willing to wait days), rather than the alternative of nothing to restore.

Again, my experience is limited to version 5.1 MP6, so I have not seen this play in 6.5 (yet).

-Doug

-----Original Message-----
From: Raymond Wong [mailto:Raymond.Wong < at > efi.com]
Sent: Wednesday, April 23, 2008 10:22 AM
To: Staub, Doug; Tharp, Trey; Jim Hall; veritas-bu < at > mailman.eng.auburn.edu
Subject: RE: [Veritas-bu] NetBackup protecting 30TB - 60TB NetApp over NDMP.

Another problem I run into using NDMP backups is the restores.

You cannot restore a single folder without the restore job reading through the entire backup image.
For example, I backup my filers by running a backup stream for each volumes.
So if the volume is 2TB and I try to restore a single 20MB folder in this volume, the restore job needs to reads through the entire 2TB backup image before it can successfully recover that 20MB folder.
This means a 20MB restore job can take days to complete.

I think this problem is resolved in NBU 6.5 but I haven't tried it yet.
I'm currently running NBU 6.0MP6



-----Original Message-----
From: veritas-bu-bounces < at > mailman.eng.auburn.edu [mailto:veritas-bu-bounces < at > mailman.eng.auburn.edu] On Behalf Of Staub, Doug
Sent: Monday, April 21, 2008 8:18 AM
To: Tharp, Trey; Jim Hall; veritas-bu < at > mailman.eng.auburn.edu
Subject: Re: [Veritas-bu] NetBackup protecting 30TB - 60TB NetApp over NDMP.

NDMP is not "horrible", but I would agree that SnapMirror is the best alternative at these sizes. We have 2 GB FC connects to VTLs enabled with NDMP drives for filers and we have seen 3 TB volumes backup in hours via NDMP compared to 4-5 days via CIFS...now that is a horrible protocol...

The one caveot with NDMP is you are limited to 16 or so concurrent sessions (ONTap version specific) and can severely impact the filer (which is why Trey's suggestion of SnapMirror is a good one because you won't degrade your source filer trying to back it up.).

-Doug
-----Original Message-----
From: veritas-bu-bounces < at > mailman.eng.auburn.edu [mailto:veritas-bu-bounces < at > mailman.eng.auburn.edu] On Behalf Of Tharp, Trey
Sent: Monday, April 21, 2008 6:19 AM
To: Jim Hall; veritas-bu < at > mailman.eng.auburn.edu
Subject: Re: [Veritas-bu] NetBackup protecting 30TB - 60TB NetApp over NDMP.

Short answer = SnapMirror, then backup that mirror filer for days/weeks
if you need to. Once your initial mirror is done, it's only the
block-level changes from that point. Also, if you are using NDMP direct
backups, where the filer has tape connectivity, then synthetic backups
are not available.

NDMP is a horrible protocol and once your filers start to grow to these
sizes and beyond backups become difficult at best. SnapMirror works
great and once you get it to that cheaper-disk destination filer, you
can spin to tape.

-Trey

-----Original Message-----
From: veritas-bu-bounces < at > mailman.eng.auburn.edu
[mailto:veritas-bu-bounces < at > mailman.eng.auburn.edu] On Behalf Of Jim Hall
Sent: Friday, April 18, 2008 8:38 AM
To: veritas-bu < at > mailman.eng.auburn.edu
Subject: [Veritas-bu] NetBackup protecting 30TB - 60TB NetApp over NDMP.

I am a "newb" to the list. I have some experience with NetBackup 5.1
MP4.

Anyways, I have an interesting problem. I have a NetApp GX system that
needs to be protected. It looks like the best method would be to backup
the unit using NDMP. The problem we are running into, theoretically at
this moment as we design the backup system, is the limitation of the
cluster interconnect and the ability to move up to 30TB, and in time
60TB of data across a 2GB FC link to a tape storage library. Doing the
math, we would never be able to use the netapp for what it was designed
for as the cluster-interconnects would be continuously saturated. The
reason for this (and this is something I inherited) is that even though
there are 4 Heads, 1 Head is the owner of a metadata volume that pretty
much encompasses the entire unit, so 75% of the data has to come across
the cluster interconnect (this is limited to 2Gb).

We could re-arch the FS to balance across all 4 Head nodes, but we still
have a 2Gb limitation per node as that is the fastest FC card available
for these guys.

My idea is to implement some kind of synthetic full strategy. That is,
move as much data as possible for an initial full to tape (we have a two
week outage coming up in a couple months), then create a disk stage
where we can store incrementals. As long as the daily change rate allows
us to move the incrementals in say 8hrs or so (across Gbe or FC), I
think we would be fine. The question I have for everyone is, how long
should I expect it to take for 4 LTO4 drives in combination with
incrementals on say a thumper, to generate a weekly full to tape (lets
be harsh and say we have a 10% change rate throughout the week). I want
to start at 30TB today and scale to 60TB over the next 18-24mos.

Anyone have similar experiences?

What I am looking at is possibly using a x4500 as a combined media
server and disk storage unit.

Thanks,

Jim


_______________________________________________
Veritas-bu maillist - Veritas-bu < at > mailman.eng.auburn.edu
http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/mailman/listinfo/veritas-bu

_______________________________________________
Veritas-bu maillist - Veritas-bu < at > mailman.eng.auburn.edu
http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/mailman/listinfo/veritas-bu

_______________________________________________
Veritas-bu maillist - Veritas-bu < at > mailman.eng.auburn.edu
http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/mailman/listinfo/veritas-bu

_______________________________________________
Veritas-bu maillist - Veritas-bu < at > mailman.eng.auburn.edu
http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/mailman/listinfo/veritas-bu

I think what I will end up doing is splitting the
NetApp into 4 (effectively) and allocate 7.5T per head
for homes and move to a flexvol strategy. The
remainder will be rearch to an HPO volume and served
up as scratch / workspace.

This gives me 4 2Gb FC out, each 2Gb FC card will have
2 LTO4 drives allocated. I can then setup several
qtrees and NDMP to tape. I think we could get 15T done
to 4 drives in about 20hrs. When we move scratch /
workspace to another filesystem in the future we would
have to upgrade the heads to something that can push
out 4Gb or 8Gb and throw a couple more drives onto
them.


--- Raymond Wong <Raymond.Wong < at > efi.com> wrote:

Another problem I run into using NDMP backups is the
restores.

You cannot restore a single folder without the
restore job reading through the entire backup image.
For example, I backup my filers by running a backup
stream for each volumes.
So if the volume is 2TB and I try to restore a
single 20MB folder in this volume, the restore job
needs to reads through the entire 2TB backup image
before it can successfully recover that 20MB folder.
This means a 20MB restore job can take days to
complete.

I think this problem is resolved in NBU 6.5 but I
haven't tried it yet.
I'm currently running NBU 6.0MP6



-----Original Message-----
From: veritas-bu-bounces < at > mailman.eng.auburn.edu
[mailto:veritas-bu-bounces < at > mailman.eng.auburn.edu]
On Behalf Of Staub, Doug
Sent: Monday, April 21, 2008 8:18 AM
To: Tharp, Trey; Jim Hall;
veritas-bu < at > mailman.eng.auburn.edu
Subject: Re: [Veritas-bu] NetBackup protecting 30TB
- 60TB NetApp over NDMP.

NDMP is not "horrible", but I would agree that
SnapMirror is the best alternative at these sizes.
We have 2 GB FC connects to VTLs enabled with NDMP
drives for filers and we have seen 3 TB volumes
backup in hours via NDMP compared to 4-5 days via
CIFS...now that is a horrible protocol...

The one caveot with NDMP is you are limited to 16 or
so concurrent sessions (ONTap version specific) and
can severely impact the filer (which is why Trey's
suggestion of SnapMirror is a good one because you
won't degrade your source filer trying to back it
up.).

-Doug
-----Original Message-----
From: veritas-bu-bounces < at > mailman.eng.auburn.edu
[mailto:veritas-bu-bounces < at > mailman.eng.auburn.edu]
On Behalf Of Tharp, Trey
Sent: Monday, April 21, 2008 6:19 AM
To: Jim Hall; veritas-bu < at > mailman.eng.auburn.edu
Subject: Re: [Veritas-bu] NetBackup protecting 30TB
- 60TB NetApp over NDMP.

Short answer = SnapMirror, then backup that mirror
filer for days/weeks
if you need to. Once your initial mirror is done,
it's only the
block-level changes from that point. Also, if you
are using NDMP direct
backups, where the filer has tape connectivity, then
synthetic backups
are not available.

NDMP is a horrible protocol and once your filers
start to grow to these
sizes and beyond backups become difficult at best.
SnapMirror works
great and once you get it to that cheaper-disk
destination filer, you
can spin to tape.

-Trey

-----Original Message-----
From: veritas-bu-bounces < at > mailman.eng.auburn.edu
[mailto:veritas-bu-bounces < at > mailman.eng.auburn.edu]
On Behalf Of Jim Hall
Sent: Friday, April 18, 2008 8:38 AM
To: veritas-bu < at > mailman.eng.auburn.edu
Subject: [Veritas-bu] NetBackup protecting 30TB -
60TB NetApp over NDMP.

I am a "newb" to the list. I have some experience
with NetBackup 5.1
MP4.

Anyways, I have an interesting problem. I have a
NetApp GX system that
needs to be protected. It looks like the best method
would be to backup
the unit using NDMP. The problem we are running
into, theoretically at
this moment as we design the backup system, is the
limitation of the
cluster interconnect and the ability to move up to
30TB, and in time
60TB of data across a 2GB FC link to a tape storage
library. Doing the
math, we would never be able to use the netapp for
what it was designed
for as the cluster-interconnects would be
continuously saturated. The
reason for this (and this is something I inherited)
is that even though
there are 4 Heads, 1 Head is the owner of a metadata
volume that pretty
much encompasses the entire unit, so 75% of the data
has to come across
the cluster interconnect (this is limited to 2Gb).

We could re-arch the FS to balance across all 4 Head
nodes, but we still
have a 2Gb limitation per node as that is the
fastest FC card available
for these guys.

My idea is to implement some kind of synthetic full
strategy. That is,
move as much data as possible for an initial full to
tape (we have a two
week outage coming up in a couple months), then
create a disk stage
where we can store incrementals. As long as the
daily change rate allows
us to move the incrementals in say 8hrs or so
(across Gbe or FC), I
think we would be fine. The question I have for
everyone is, how long
should I expect it to take for 4 LTO4 drives in
combination with
incrementals on say a thumper, to generate a weekly
full to tape (lets
be harsh and say we have a 10% change rate
throughout the week). I want
to start at 30TB today and scale to 60TB over the
next 18-24mos.

Anyone have similar experiences?

What I am looking at is possibly using a x4500 as a
combined media
server and disk storage unit.

Thanks,

Jim


_______________________________________________
Veritas-bu maillist -
Veritas-bu < at > mailman.eng.auburn.edu

http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/mailman/listinfo/veritas-bu

_______________________________________________
Veritas-bu maillist -
Veritas-bu < at > mailman.eng.auburn.edu

http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/mailman/listinfo/veritas-bu

_______________________________________________
Veritas-bu maillist -
Veritas-bu < at > mailman.eng.auburn.edu

http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/mailman/listinfo/veritas-bu

_______________________________________________
Veritas-bu maillist - Veritas-bu < at > mailman.eng.auburn.edu
http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/mailman/listinfo/veritas-bu

if you choose your restore files correctly, backups can be very fast.
DAR (direct access restore (i think)) has been available since netbackup
4.5 (maybe fp3). read the rules for using it, and restores "can" speed
up significantly. you can't choose directories, only files, and are
limited to 1024 or so. we had an admin click on a directory to restore
and it took 6 hours to complete as it had to go through several entire
tapes (sdlt at the time). then in the restore gui i went down into the
directory and manually selected the 25 files that were there and the
restore took 15 minutes. 99% of our ndmp restores are for files. for
us if someone screws up a directory, the ~snapshot is there. your
mileage may vary.

jerald

-----Original Message-----
From: veritas-bu-bounces < at > mailman.eng.auburn.edu
[mailto:veritas-bu-bounces < at > mailman.eng.auburn.edu] On Behalf Of Staub,
Doug
Sent: Wednesday, April 23, 2008 2:37 PM
To: Raymond Wong; Tharp, Trey; Jim Hall;
veritas-bu < at > mailman.eng.auburn.edu
Subject: Re: [Veritas-bu] NetBackup protecting 30TB - 60TB NetApp over
NDMP.

Yes, the restore process of NDMP is definitely slower, but for us the
choice was simple. Many of our larger 2-3 TB NetApp volumes were being
backed up via CIFS through a Windows media server, which 1) took days to
backup and 2) placed a heavy CPU load on the media server. IF those
volumes were successful, then the restores would take minutes. With
NDMP, the restores ARE successful, they just happen to take 2-3
hours....never experienced an NDMP restore to take days...

Our users are much happier to get back data and wait a few hours (some
would be willing to wait days), rather than the alternative of nothing
to restore.

Again, my experience is limited to version 5.1 MP6, so I have not seen
this play in 6.5 (yet).

-Doug

-----Original Message-----
From: Raymond Wong [mailto:Raymond.Wong < at > efi.com]
Sent: Wednesday, April 23, 2008 10:22 AM
To: Staub, Doug; Tharp, Trey; Jim Hall;
veritas-bu < at > mailman.eng.auburn.edu
Subject: RE: [Veritas-bu] NetBackup protecting 30TB - 60TB NetApp over
NDMP.

Another problem I run into using NDMP backups is the restores.

You cannot restore a single folder without the restore job reading
through the entire backup image.
For example, I backup my filers by running a backup stream for each
volumes.
So if the volume is 2TB and I try to restore a single 20MB folder in
this volume, the restore job needs to reads through the entire 2TB
backup image before it can successfully recover that 20MB folder.
This means a 20MB restore job can take days to complete.

I think this problem is resolved in NBU 6.5 but I haven't tried it yet.
I'm currently running NBU 6.0MP6

-----Original Message-----
From: veritas-bu-bounces < at > mailman.eng.auburn.edu
[mailto:veritas-bu-bounces < at > mailman.eng.auburn.edu] On Behalf Of Staub,
Doug
Sent: Monday, April 21, 2008 8:18 AM
To: Tharp, Trey; Jim Hall; veritas-bu < at > mailman.eng.auburn.edu
Subject: Re: [Veritas-bu] NetBackup protecting 30TB - 60TB NetApp over
NDMP.

NDMP is not "horrible", but I would agree that SnapMirror is the best
alternative at these sizes. We have 2 GB FC connects to VTLs enabled
with NDMP drives for filers and we have seen 3 TB volumes backup in
hours via NDMP compared to 4-5 days via CIFS...now that is a horrible
protocol...

The one caveot with NDMP is you are limited to 16 or so concurrent
sessions (ONTap version specific) and can severely impact the filer
(which is why Trey's suggestion of SnapMirror is a good one because you
won't degrade your source filer trying to back it up.).

-Doug
****************************************************************
Confidentiality Note: The information contained in this
message, and any attachments, may contain confidential
and/or privileged material. It is intended solely for the
person(s) or entity to which it is addressed. Any review,
retransmission, dissemination, or taking of any action in
reliance upon this information by persons or entities other
than the intended recipient(s) is prohibited. If you received
this in error, please contact the sender and delete the
material from any computer.
****************************************************************


_______________________________________________
Veritas-bu maillist - Veritas-bu < at > mailman.eng.auburn.edu
http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/mailman/listinfo/veritas-bu

Jerald,

Thank you, I had been puzzled by that behaviour in our environment, just
never knew it was a "feature". Guess I should read MORE manuals.

We currenly back up 70-80TB between two heads, for the moment we are
happy with NDMP, however we have limited aggregates to 5TB, so backup's
take no longer that 12 hours each. (well close, we get 5TB in about 14
hours, we aimed for 12.)

Our business is pushing for 16TB filesystems, and with this we are
investigating snapmirror to a box at the DR site.

I'm hoping to squeeze some more out of the NDMP solution, however not
yet able to get more than 100MB/s to tape.

Adam.

-----Original Message-----
From: veritas-bu-bounces < at > mailman.eng.auburn.edu
[mailto:veritas-bu-bounces < at > mailman.eng.auburn.edu] On Behalf Of Iverson,
Jerald
Sent: Thursday, 24 April 2008 4:11 AM
To: veritas-bu < at > mailman.eng.auburn.edu
Subject: Re: [Veritas-bu] NetBackup protecting 30TB - 60TB NetApp over
NDMP.

if you choose your restore files correctly, backups can be very fast.
DAR (direct access restore (i think)) has been available since netbackup
4.5 (maybe fp3). read the rules for using it, and restores "can" speed
up significantly. you can't choose directories, only files, and are
limited to 1024 or so. we had an admin click on a directory to restore
and it took 6 hours to complete as it had to go through several entire
tapes (sdlt at the time). then in the restore gui i went down into the
directory and manually selected the 25 files that were there and the
restore took 15 minutes. 99% of our ndmp restores are for files. for
us if someone screws up a directory, the ~snapshot is there. your
mileage may vary.

jerald

-----Original Message-----
From: veritas-bu-bounces < at > mailman.eng.auburn.edu
[mailto:veritas-bu-bounces < at > mailman.eng.auburn.edu] On Behalf Of Staub,
Doug
Sent: Wednesday, April 23, 2008 2:37 PM
To: Raymond Wong; Tharp, Trey; Jim Hall;
veritas-bu < at > mailman.eng.auburn.edu
Subject: Re: [Veritas-bu] NetBackup protecting 30TB - 60TB NetApp over
NDMP.

Yes, the restore process of NDMP is definitely slower, but for us the
choice was simple. Many of our larger 2-3 TB NetApp volumes were being
backed up via CIFS through a Windows media server, which 1) took days to
backup and 2) placed a heavy CPU load on the media server. IF those
volumes were successful, then the restores would take minutes. With
NDMP, the restores ARE successful, they just happen to take 2-3
hours....never experienced an NDMP restore to take days...

Our users are much happier to get back data and wait a few hours (some
would be willing to wait days), rather than the alternative of nothing
to restore.

Again, my experience is limited to version 5.1 MP6, so I have not seen
this play in 6.5 (yet).

-Doug

-----Original Message-----
From: Raymond Wong [mailto:Raymond.Wong < at > efi.com]
Sent: Wednesday, April 23, 2008 10:22 AM
To: Staub, Doug; Tharp, Trey; Jim Hall;
veritas-bu < at > mailman.eng.auburn.edu
Subject: RE: [Veritas-bu] NetBackup protecting 30TB - 60TB NetApp over
NDMP.

Another problem I run into using NDMP backups is the restores.

You cannot restore a single folder without the restore job reading
through the entire backup image.
For example, I backup my filers by running a backup stream for each
volumes.
So if the volume is 2TB and I try to restore a single 20MB folder in
this volume, the restore job needs to reads through the entire 2TB
backup image before it can successfully recover that 20MB folder.
This means a 20MB restore job can take days to complete.

I think this problem is resolved in NBU 6.5 but I haven't tried it yet.
I'm currently running NBU 6.0MP6

-----Original Message-----
From: veritas-bu-bounces < at > mailman.eng.auburn.edu
[mailto:veritas-bu-bounces < at > mailman.eng.auburn.edu] On Behalf Of Staub,
Doug
Sent: Monday, April 21, 2008 8:18 AM
To: Tharp, Trey; Jim Hall; veritas-bu < at > mailman.eng.auburn.edu
Subject: Re: [Veritas-bu] NetBackup protecting 30TB - 60TB NetApp over
NDMP.

NDMP is not "horrible", but I would agree that SnapMirror is the best
alternative at these sizes. We have 2 GB FC connects to VTLs enabled
with NDMP drives for filers and we have seen 3 TB volumes backup in
hours via NDMP compared to 4-5 days via CIFS...now that is a horrible
protocol...

The one caveot with NDMP is you are limited to 16 or so concurrent
sessions (ONTap version specific) and can severely impact the filer
(which is why Trey's suggestion of SnapMirror is a good one because you
won't degrade your source filer trying to back it up.).

-Doug
****************************************************************
Confidentiality Note: The information contained in this
message, and any attachments, may contain confidential
and/or privileged material. It is intended solely for the
person(s) or entity to which it is addressed. Any review,
retransmission, dissemination, or taking of any action in
reliance upon this information by persons or entities other
than the intended recipient(s) is prohibited. If you received
this in error, please contact the sender and delete the
material from any computer.
****************************************************************


_______________________________________________
Veritas-bu maillist - Veritas-bu < at > mailman.eng.auburn.edu
http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/mailman/listinfo/veritas-bu

NOTICE: This email and any attachments are confidential.
They may contain legally privileged information or
copyright material. You must not read, copy, use or
disclose them without authorisation. If you are not an
intended recipient, please contact us at once by return
email and then delete both messages and all attachments.


_______________________________________________
Veritas-bu maillist - Veritas-bu < at > mailman.eng.auburn.edu
http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/mailman/listinfo/veritas-bu