tape backup?

Post #47,797 by slugbug 8/1/02 11:08:45 PM Reply	tape backup? I've got a linuxppc distro installed on a logical partition (LPAR) on an iSeries box. The way I have it configured, it has its own separate processors, memory, and disk and I have it set up in 'hosted' mode so that it can share devices (e.g. tape drives) with the iSeries. Question is: Do any of you have any favorite tape backup tools? Are there any such tools that I should avoid? I've googled and found a bit of info, but would appreciate any suggestions. Cheers, Slugbug If you think you can or you think you can't, either way you're right...
Post #47,805 by imric 8/2/02 12:03:35 AM Reply	I'm horribly jealous. Imric's Tips for Living Paranoia Is a Survival Trait Pessimists are never disappointed - but sometimes, if they are very lucky, they can be pleasantly surprised... Even though everyone is out to get you, it doesn't matter unless you let them win.
Post #47,831 by slugbug 8/2/02 10:21:41 AM Reply	And, I'm having fun! I've actually put up two of these LPARs now. Normally, I mostly write code, but I've been asked to do a bit of admin work too. Having a good time with it... The iSeries (aka AS400) has actually come a long way. It has been interesting watching it morph from S/3 to S/34, S/36, S/38 up through the present. The amount of language support/tools is very good now. Aside, from LPARs, the AS400 now has an integrated file system (IFS) and a built-in shell. Most of IBM's middle- ware (e.g. WebSphere) is implemented in Unix form on the IFS. There are a lot of integration bugs between the IFS and the rest of the system and the shell is very limited at present. Thus, the Linux LPAR is a good move because I can implement Java code there and have it talk to DB2 on the native OS (inter-LPAR connection). This is what I'm working on now.
Post #47,811 by static 8/2/02 1:23:57 AM Reply	Something wrong with tar? :-) "Ah. One of the difficult questions."
Post #47,818 by Andrew Grygus 8/2/02 2:19:33 AM Reply	Yes An unverified backup is not a backup. I have seen cases (using tar and cpio) where users changed tapes every night and did a check every morning to confirm the backup ran. When the hard disk failed, the tapes were found totally unreadable (even by a recovery house) because the tape velocity of the drive was unsteady. We have used bru quite successfully. and it's not expensive if you don't mind a little "license bending" by using the "personal" version for business use. I've been involved with sites using Lone Tar, but having to call for a new license code at 2:30 am so you can restore to a new drive is a bit of a drag, even if you can find the paperwork. In cases of extreme cheapness I have used tar -c followed by then a tar -t with any error messages written off to a text file checked by the user in the morning. At least that confirms the tape is readable. [link\|http://www.aaxnet.com\|AAx]
Post #47,830 by deSitter 8/2/02 9:47:00 AM Reply	Oh How True I've seen the same even for corporate systems with a lot of money invested in tape equipment and rigorous schedules. I always tried to insist on fire drills in addition to the standard verification. -drl
Post #47,833 by slugbug 8/2/02 10:24:31 AM Reply	Definitely... ....that's what I was looking for. Thanks, Andrew! It's not a matter of money here. These have to be verified backups. I'll check out bru and Lone Tar.
Post #47,870 by pwhysall 8/2/02 2:50:02 PM Reply	Preach it. I've actually had to explain to people why we verify backups. Go figure. Peter [link\|http://www.debian.org\|Shill For Hire] [link\|http://www.kuro5hin.org\|There is no K5 Cabal] [link\|http://guildenstern.dyndns.org\|Blog]
Post #47,872 by kmself 8/2/02 3:27:05 PM 8/2/02 7:05:57 PM Reply	tar, but verify My backups script runs a tar, then verifies each backup. Adds time to the job, but certainly seems worth it in measure. See my [link\|http://kmself.home.netcom.com/Linux/FAQs/backups.html\|backup FAQ] for more rationale and the script itself. Other tools -- amanda gets positive press. Edit: who could turn down an opportunity to misquote like that? (Subject) -- Karsten M. Self [link\|mailto:kmself@ix.netcom.com\|kmself@ix.netcom.com] [link\|http://kmself.home.netcom.com/\|[link\|http://kmself.home.netcom.com/\|http://kmself.home.netcom.com/]] What part of "gestalt" don't you understand? [link\|http://twiki.iwethey.org/twiki/bin/view/Main/\|TWikIWETHEY] -- an experiment in collective intelligence. Stupidity. Whatever. Keep software free. Oppose the CBDTPA. Kill S.2048 dead. [link\|http://www.eff.org/alerts/20020322_eff_cbdtpa_alert.html\|[link\|http://www.eff.org/alerts/20020322_eff_cbdtpa_alert.html\|http://www.eff.org/...a_alert.html]] Edited by kmself Aug. 2, 2002, 03:30:45 PM EDT Edited by kmself Aug. 2, 2002, 07:05:57 PM EDT Expand All History
Post #47,877 by slugbug 8/2/02 4:24:31 PM Reply	Hey, thanks....that helps! Bookmarked the FAQs
Post #48,019 by static 8/4/02 8:03:17 AM Reply	Ah... yes, of course. I thought you had a thing against tar itself, but no, it was the "backup without verify" nature of the beast. I mean, ArcServe, IIRC, doesn't verify by default. Not that I would wish ArcServer on anyone, BTW. I fully agree that all tape backups should be verified according to the level of risk of associated backup failure. Wade. "Ah. One of the difficult questions."
Post #48,388 by boxley 8/6/02 12:29:32 PM Reply	what he said bru ."Once, in the wilds of Afghanistan, I had to subsist on food and water for several weeks." W.C. Fields
Post #47,825 by folkert 8/2/02 9:08:02 AM Reply	Well... here I go again.... Seeing as though you have an iSeries... Get Tivoli Storage Manager... Just plain works... Pain in the A$$ to install a central server... but once done, upgrades or changes are a dream. Is better to install with 5.x now... but when it was ADSM icky. It is a dream to use, command line or GUI. Plus you can make it so each machine does it's own thing if you want OR you can have a central scheduler and managed tapes drives and changers, etc... I use it everyday, I cannot imagine my job(err maybe life eh?) without it. It...it... well nothing in my book beats it, NOTHING. Legato, NETback, TAR, Arkeia, Amanada (is good but hard to get working correctly period), Vertias, CA, BRU (still in Business?), SBACK, BKUP and such... NONE work as slick or better than TSM. NONE. That's all folks... move along nothing to see here... just move right into IBM's arms please... Yeah... Yeah... talk to the hand... Face don't wanna know. `greg, curley95@attbi.com -- REMEMBER ED CURRY!!!`
Post #47,835 by slugbug 8/2/02 10:38:33 AM Reply	The tricky part is.... This is not purely an IBM shop. They are running nearly every OS known to mankind, but mainly OS/2, Linux (Intel and PPC), Solaris, NetWare, and AS/400. I know it's awesome, but TSM may not go over well with this crowd. Not only are they distributed globally, each group is partial to different technologies. The group I'm doing the LPARs for doesn't know anything about Linux or the iSeries. They mainly want a stable box and some Java apps that can talk to DB2. And, they want to be able to back up their stuff reliably. I can pitch the idea of TSM to them, but I'm not so sure they want to take the budget hit. Thanks!
Post #47,829 by deSitter 8/2/02 9:44:28 AM Reply	Tapes? Isn't it late in the day for tapes as a primary backup? What about recording to a DVD disk? Or using something like mirrored IDE local disks for backup (also incrementals) and periodically off-loading to tape for archives? -drl
Post #47,904 by folkert 8/2/02 7:45:17 PM Reply	Re: Tapes? ... Yes Tapes... Double Sided DVDs only hold ~9GB worth of DATA. Each one of my tapes I use, hold ~120GB. They write at 40 MegaBytePerSecond, read as fast too. I'd like to see a writeable DVD do that. Plus I have automagic DRM (no not Digital Rights Management), or Disaster Recovery Management. Tape Copies and such all roundy round... 12 DVDs to each tape... plus the Tape is "reclaimable" DVD's are just ummm.... used. Costly in the long run. Tapes are more manageable... for the time being. `greg, curley95@attbi.com -- REMEMBER ED CURRY!!!`
Post #47,914 by deSitter 8/2/02 8:52:04 PM Reply	Re: Tapes? ... Yes Tapes... Well, do you just try to image the machine (impossible, also with Linux, because of /proc), or do you really have 12Gb of data that needs to be regularly backed up? Moving an image, unless to the same hardware, is a waste of time. One needs a reliable scheme for reconstructing systems step by step. -drl
Post #47,925 by folkert 8/2/02 9:46:49 PM Reply	And yes.... 120GB of data on a night per machine is not out of the question. And Imaging a machine is a waste of time. Repeatable installations are the key to diaster recovery. /proc is not only on Linux either... On average I backup about 700GB of data every 24hr period. Some backups are done at night... some during the day, some every 8 hours. So, there you go. Now you understand my reluctance to use DVDs. `greg, curley95@attbi.com -- REMEMBER ED CURRY!!!`
Post #47,942 by deSitter 8/3/02 9:39:04 AM Reply	Well I'm Stunned What on Earth requires 260Gb of data? The entire text of the Encyclopedia Britannica, which is a summary of all human knowledge, can fit on one CD. On my machine I have almost 100 downloaded books (so far) and it barely makes a dent in my 40Gb drive - not to mention 100s of downloaded physics papers as PDFs, etc. etc. Have we lost track of what numbers mean? -drl
Post #48,010 by folkert 8/4/02 1:22:24 AM Reply	Re: Well I'm Stunned What on Earth requires 260Gb of data? The entire text of the Encyclopedia Britannica, which is a summary of all human knowledge, can fit on one CD. On my machine I have almost 100 downloaded books (so far) and it barely makes a dent in my 40Gb drive - not to mention 100s of downloaded physics papers as PDFs, etc. etc. Have we lost track of what numbers mean? Well, have you seen some of the ERP solutions these days??? All of the make-work people do... all of the DUPLICATION of data people do... How about the attitude... Use all you want we'll buy more! How about DB's that have 60GB Partitions... then the COPIES of the Prodution data in various stages of "patching"... oh BTW, did I mention PeopleSoft gives use 400MB of compressed patches a month per "system"... those systems being "Learning Solutions", "Human Management"(I htink that is it's real name) and "Business Services". Plus... we can't let the "Testing System" loose an data... think of all the "Hours" of testing and ad-hoc changes not yet captured... Just the COBOL Source for all 3 systems in 1200MB(uncompressed). More or less... everything is in a constant state of flux... all the time... changes have to get captured every day. 700GB a day is a bit overstated... I went through our logs and we actually do about 600GB a day. Now I checked for the last month and somedays we did 1TB, others we did 300GB. Now as far as the student's data... we gotta keep it all as long as 4 major terms past thier last enrollment. This hurts. It's just one big mass of uncoordintated stuff. You make your backups... and I make mine... you live by yours... I live and die by mine. That is why I use TSM... you use DVDs. `greg - Grand-Master Artist in IT, curley95@attbi.com -- REMEMBER ED CURRY!!!`
Post #48,045 by deSitter 8/4/02 2:21:12 PM Reply	Re: Well I'm Stunned No, I still use tapes, but I manage what needs to be backed up every day. -drl
Post #48,064 by folkert 8/4/02 6:52:21 PM Reply	Management of backups.... TSM does all that for me... has save my butt NUMEROUS times... unfortunately (L)users tend to screw things up alot more than I'd like. I am talking about functional users too. So, I have to have automated backups managed and reclaimed automagically. `greg - Grand-Master Artist in IT, curley95@attbi.com -- REMEMBER ED CURRY!!!`
Post #48,020 by static 8/4/02 8:10:06 AM Reply	A small bank's data warehouse can easily exceed 4Tb. That is the entire customer account database and transaction information for 12 months. Wade. "Ah. One of the difficult questions."
Post #47,926 by kmself 8/2/02 9:56:55 PM Reply	Tape advantages Tapes offer a number of advantages over other backup systems and media: Size: Tape backup up to 40 GB is available for < US$500 for the drive, and ~ US$15 for media. Compare to DVD as others recommend -- you're limited to 4GB. CDR is 650-700 MB -- at today's disk sizes, that's the equivalent of backing your hard drive onto 184 floppies (650 MB CDR and 120 GB drive). Systems of 200GB (single media unit) and more are available, tape 'bots extend this range further (all at a price). Cost: Incremental media cost is lower than any other format. Expandability: My current employer uses online disk backups, with no tape archive. While this makes for convenience, it means that extraordinary measures are required when space gets tight. You can't just "toss in another drive". The backup system's case is packed, so rather than drive install, it's a wipe the archive and build a new array. This makes for week or more's downtime as issues are worked through. I've seen this. Using tape, you add another cartridge to your rotation. Depth of archive. Disk inherently limits the ability to archive older copies of content. With tape, you simply rotate an archive out of active circulation, and it becomes permanent. The cost is your media cost per unit -- $15. Reliability: SCSI DDS technology has many years of high-reliability operation under itself. Problems with either tapes or drives are rare. Media themselves are largely impervious to shock damage, and can tolerate wide environmental extremes. The hardware is ubiquitous and standard -- if you lose your drive along with other hardware or data, you can still recover your tapes on COTS hardware elsewhere. Reusable media: individual tapes are rated for hundreds of duty cycles, and can be used far beyond this. Differential backups: to address the issue that tape tends to be just slightly smaller than the data you want to archive, a strategy of differential backups is highly recommended. Under this strategy, a periodic full backup is made (say, weekly). A differential backup is made of all changes since the nth most recent full backup, where n is greater than 1. That is, you're doing a differential from three or four weeks back, if you're doing regular weekly full backups. Why, you ask? Because this means you can now pair a differential with any of the past four weeks' full backups. You'd have to lose four weeks' worth of full backups before your incremental became useless. Note that the "tower of Hanoi" scheme is particularly fragile, as loss of any one backup in the "tower" results in loss of data. This was pointed out to me by Rick Moen. It was pointed out to him by that most useful of all System Administrator training methods, bitter experience. Tried, true, tested, and cheap, hard to beat. Note that backups to disk may make sense for a single, nearline, copy of data, and as a staging system for tape backups. However, I wouldn't (and don't) trust this as my long-term archival system. -- Karsten M. Self [link\|mailto:kmself@ix.netcom.com\|kmself@ix.netcom.com] [link\|http://kmself.home.netcom.com/\|[link\|http://kmself.home.netcom.com/\|http://kmself.home.netcom.com/]] What part of "gestalt" don't you understand? [link\|http://twiki.iwethey.org/twiki/bin/view/Main/\|TWikIWETHEY] -- an experiment in collective intelligence. Stupidity. Whatever. Keep software free. Oppose the CBDTPA. Kill S.2048 dead. [link\|http://www.eff.org/alerts/20020322_eff_cbdtpa_alert.html\|[link\|http://www.eff.org/alerts/20020322_eff_cbdtpa_alert.html\|http://www.eff.org/...a_alert.html]]
Post #47,935 by pwhysall 8/3/02 3:20:49 AM Reply	DVD? Pshaw. We fit up to 260GB of data onto an AIT3 tape, and we're using a Sony StorStation 16-slot loader with two drives for an overall nightly throughput in excess of 600MB/min. When you do the sums, it turns out that large-capacity tape is way cheaper than things like CDR or DVD-R(AM\|W), once you've swallowed the upfront cost of the drive. Factors like reliability and archive life also make me unwilling to bet my job on CD or DVD for backups. Peter [link\|http://www.debian.org\|Shill For Hire] [link\|http://www.kuro5hin.org\|There is no K5 Cabal] [link\|http://guildenstern.dyndns.org\|Blog]

Welcome to IWETHEY!