backup solutions for netware 6

[gconnect]

i have recently installed 5 netware 6 servers at each of our bldgs

they are not in production yet but are functional


we are trying to figure out a backup solution before the servers go live.

i am currently looking at a centralize backup using:

veritas backup exec 9 for netware (installed on the central server, remote agents on the 4 branch office servers)

an external tape drive that will be connected to the central server via scsi card

i have never implemented a full scale backup solution before and need help. does anyone have any recommendations or experience with it?

p.s.
we have a 10Mbps WAN that i really only expect to get about 4Mbps tops after all the buffering and recalculation due to read writes

i also looked at PowerQuest Server Magic for Netware only to find that it is not supported by Netware 6 yet
i also looked at Norton Ghost 2.0 for Netware, but no one seems to have any real info on it. Not even when i called symantec? does anyone know if it is compatible with netware 6 and where i can buy it. (even datacommwarehouse doesn't stock it)

 

[Chewie71]

I'm not positive, but I don't think Ghost supports Netware either. If you're looking for that kind of a solution then I think Portlock Storage Manager might be what you want to look at. I've heard nothing but good things about it.

http://www.portlocksoftware.com/products/stormgr/index.htm

Matt

 

[gconnect]

thanks for the suggestions, i saw PortLock before and i am highly considering it (i downloaded the eval and will be testing it very soon)

i am really looking at 2 solutions
1 back up
1 disaster recovery

i am thinking Veritas for data backup and PortLock for Data Recovery (maybe doing that once or twice a month)

i am very interested to know if anyone has experience with centralized backup solutions

 

[marvhuffaker]

My $1.35 worth...

Centralized backups are good and bad. They are good because you can catalog everything in one spot and have all the tapes and everything in a central location and only have to mess with one tape drive and set of tapes. You also don't have to worry about changing tapes on every single server.

They are bad because generally the backup software is written to use the maximum available bandwidth to get the best throughput. This can kill your network if you have large backups to complete and limited bandwidth. But you say you have 10Mbps WAN, which is actually pretty decent for a WAN link.

Things to consider are 1) how much is being backed up from each remote server.. 2) how much other traffic will be on the WAN during the backups. 3) How long will it take and will it interfere with production operations. 4) What are the job growth probabilities for the future, and will this effect the time constraints.

Never have installed a central solution from scratch, but have managed several and those are my biggest concerns.

Marv

Marvin Huffaker MCNE, CNE
Marvin Huffaker Consulting

http://www.redjuju.com

 

[Psychoid]

Here's my $.02

1. BackupExec sucks less than ArcServe (or Brightstor, or whatever else they're calling it) does, so you made a good choice there.
2. For DR, use Portlock Storage Manager. It absolutely rocks. If Portlock would only give the ability to open an archive (ala Ghost Explorer), I'd recommend Storage Manager as a backup solution as well as a DR one.
3. Provided that the data at your remote sites really doesn't change all that much, you'll be fine bandwidth-wise by running differentials during the week. Depending on the amount of data, though, doing a full backup could kill your pipe.

------------
Bill
Consultant / Network Engineer
CNE, CCNA

 

[gconnect]

we are a 8am - 5pm mon-fri shop no one works after 5pm
differential nightly backups and weekly full backups (starting friday night - veritas), monthly disasater recovery (portlock).

right now we have 5 servers with 8GB HDDs (yes i said only 8GB), 6.5 gig on VOL1, 1.5 for SYS (yeah, we are broke). the new servers have 45 GB on VOL 1, 8 GB on SYS. i really don't see anymore than 12GB tops being used for the next year.

i am not co much worried about the time it takes to back 1 server, but when when you are talking 5 servers it may bleed over into the next monday (when you take into account the write speed (to 1 external tape drive) and buffering in the backup software that may cause the routers to buffer pkts themselves. i am VERY strongly considering suggesting the open file option with veritas.

we have a hub and spoke topology
we have 2 port ethernet routers in each building connected to wireless radios. LAN interface to LAN, WAN interface to wireless. they all point back to the hub site.

Recently we had some pretty bad storms that have changed my entire outlook on the centralized backup solution. 2 of our sites have unstable links (on public frequency, not my idea) that drop out and come back up on occasion (due to interference). the other 3 are fine (on a leased private frequency).

i am pretty much in the delima of:

centralized backup
administrative control vs. the elements that be (wireless)

localized backup
having to drive to each site, lack of admistrative control, and cost vs. no reliance on the unstable WAN


at this point unless we lease private frequencies for those unstable branch sites, i don't really see myself presenting a centralized backup solution to my supervisor.


p.s. - i have the demo of portlock and it is looking pretty promising so far but that will be a manual task.

 

[Psychoid]

First of all, you'd be very wise using an open file agent. Unfortuantely, they don't always work well; the only one that I recommend is made by St Bernard Software. However, if you're under fiscal restraints, you'll probably just want to go with the open file agent made by Veritas.

Given the instability of your links & a limited amount of time to do a full backup, it may be best for you to do backups at each site.

Perhaps you could train somebody at each site to switch tapes at needed intervals???? I've found that this usually works when I color-code the tapes and hand the person a calendar with color-coded dates. This way they can look at the calendar and know which tape to put in on any given day



------------
Bill
Consultant / Network Engineer
CNE, CCNA

 

[marvhuffaker]

Color coding is a BRILLIANT idea.. I used to number the tapes, but the overall result was that nobody liked to read numbers and the tapes didn't get changed. Colors would be much easier to identify and read. Will consider using that one myself.

Marv

Marvin Huffaker MCNE, CNE
Marvin Huffaker Consulting

http://www.redjuju.com