I'll keep that in mind. Someone else told me the best options to use are:
- gwava reload
- gwdown,snapshot,gwup (should take only a few minutes according)
You're opinion?
Back to the speed issue.
We had a better backup result last night. We disabled the OFO and also netshield.
On the SYS volume the speed was 470 Mb/min with 45 files in use and 8 skipped.
On the VOL1 volume 177 Mb/min (I hoped more, but could have been worse) with 26 files in use and 17 skipped. This one took about 2 hours and 45 min. to complete. Before this was somewhere between 5 and 6 hours. So ... improvement.
However, every remote server (all windows) show in the job result as not being backed up.
Example:
##NML##Backup set started: 03/28/08 at 04:25:34a
##NML##
##NML##Media ID: 387c0813 Media 1
##NML##Media description: "Maandag - donderdag op 03/28/08 01"
##NML##Set 6 created 03/28/08
##NML##BarCode: LTO_000024
##NML##Set name: "Daily"
##NML##Set description: "Backup van netwerk van maandag t/m donderdag"
##NML##Backup of MFP01/D:
##NML##Drive: "HA:1 ID:3 LUN:0 HP ULTRIUM448 DRV"
##NML##
##NML## Total directories: 2801
##NML## Total files: 34362
##NML## Total bytes: 0
##NML## Total time: 00:08:57
##NML## Throughput: 0 bytes/second
##NML##
##NML##Backup set ended: 03/28/08 at 04:35:01a
I looked at the restore area and it shows files (???).
I tried to do a restore of the data and files are actually restored.
So, files were backed up, but it doesn't show in the job result.
Besides disabling the OFO in the policy I also disabled netshield using the policy. Like this:
Pre/Post Options
Pre/Post Commands
Execute before backup: unload netshld
Delay after command (seconds): 30
Execute after backup: netshld
Delay after command (seconds): 30
( ) Execute for every backup set
(X ) Execute commands once for each data server
Pre/Post Options
[ ] Pre-scan backup sets to estimate size
[X] Eject media after job completes
[ ] Verify after each backup
[X] Quick Check
Like this, the commands are executed for each data server. Meaning, also for the windows servers, right (?)
Could this have anything to do with the inaccurate job results?