<div dir="ltr">Matt,<div><br></div><div>this was true for a while, but got fixed, Netbackup has added support for GPFS metadata and acls in newer versions.</div><div>more details can be read here : </div><div><a href="https://www.veritas.com/support/en_US/article.000079433">https://www.veritas.com/support/en_US/article.000079433</a><br></div><div><br></div><div>sven</div></div><div class="gmail_extra"><br><div class="gmail_quote">On Thu, Dec 3, 2015 at 11:34 AM, Matt Weil <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:mweil@genome.wustl.edu" target="_blank">mweil@genome.wustl.edu</a>></span> wrote:<br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">
<div bgcolor="#FFFFFF" text="#000000">
Paul,<br>
<br>
We currently run netbackup to push about 1.3PB of real data to
tape. This using 1 nb master and a single media server that is also
a GPFS client. The media server uses the spare file system space as
a staging area before writing to tape. We have recently invested
into a TSM server due to limitations of netbackup. The PVU
licensing model makes TSM cost effective. We simply are not able to
speed up the netbackup catalog even with SSD. You could potentially
use the gpfs ilm engine to create file lists to feed to netbackup.<br>
<br>
netbackup (now back to veritas) does not officially support GPFS.
Netbackup is not aware of gpfs metadata.<br>
<br>
Matt<div><div class="h5"><br>
<br>
<div>On 12/2/15 4:22 PM, Sanchez, Paul
wrote:<br>
</div>
</div></div><blockquote type="cite"><div><div class="h5">
<font face="Calibri" size="2"><span style="font-size:11pt">
<div>We have a relatively mature NetBackup environment which
handles all of our tape backup requirements (e.g. databases,
NetApp via NDMP, Windows shares, and native Linux – which
provides rudimentary coverage of GPFS). Because of this
existing base, we’re
hesitant to invest in a completely separate infrastructure
just for the benefit of GPFS backups. While this works well
for many filesets, it’s not ideal for very large ones. </div>
<div> </div>
<div>We’ve been trying to get Veritas to support a more
parallel file-scan and file-copy approach to backing up GPFS
filesystems, and have repeatedly hit a brick wall there over
the past year. But I have a recent thread in which they
note that there is a fairly
large and vocal GPFS customer who drives significant feature
flow in their product. Any chance that customer is a member
of the User Group? If so, I’d love to hear from you.</div>
<div> </div>
<div>Thanks,</div>
<div>Paul</div>
<div> </div>
</span></font>
<br>
<fieldset></fieldset>
<br>
</div></div><pre>_______________________________________________
gpfsug-discuss mailing list
gpfsug-discuss at <a href="http://spectrumscale.org" target="_blank">spectrumscale.org</a>
<a href="http://gpfsug.org/mailman/listinfo/gpfsug-discuss" target="_blank">http://gpfsug.org/mailman/listinfo/gpfsug-discuss</a>
</pre>
</blockquote>
<br>
<br>
____
This email message is a private communication. The information transmitted, including attachments, is intended only for the person or entity to which it is addressed and may contain confidential, privileged, and/or proprietary material. Any review, duplication, retransmission, distribution, or other use of, or taking of any action in reliance upon, this information by persons or entities other than the intended recipient is unauthorized by the sender and is prohibited. If you have received this message in error, please contact the sender immediately by return email and delete the original message from all computer systems. Thank you.
<br>
</div>
<br>_______________________________________________<br>
gpfsug-discuss mailing list<br>
gpfsug-discuss at <a href="http://spectrumscale.org" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">spectrumscale.org</a><br>
<a href="http://gpfsug.org/mailman/listinfo/gpfsug-discuss" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">http://gpfsug.org/mailman/listinfo/gpfsug-discuss</a><br>
<br></blockquote></div><br></div>