Problems with policy/template exclusions

[David_Woodward]

I am evaluating Backup Exec 10.0 for my personal servers at home and I'm having three problems with policy/template exclusions.

1) If I add an exclusion to a policy template, close and save the template, then try to go back in and remove the exclusion, Backup Exec freezes when I try to save the template. I have been able to get around this by using the Backup Exec web interface to remove the exclusion.

2) When I remove the previously mentioned exclusion through the web interface, I end up with several blank selection list under Edit -> Edit Selection List, but they do not show up under Edit -> Delete Selection List.

3) Template exclusions seem to be applied during the first job run, but if a rule is setup to run job 2 after job 1 has completed, the exclusions for job 2 are ignored.

To give you a little more details on that last one, here's exactly what is going on.

I'm trying to determine if I want to invest the money into AOFO or if I want to use scripts to stop all the services that may have files open at the time of backup. So, I wrote a script to stop the proper services and another to start them up again. (pre/post) I ran a test job with the scripts and everything worked great.

The problem with this simple setup was that running the backup on this particular server took 3 hours and I would rather not have those services unavailable for 3 hours.

So, I wanted to split the job up and have the services required for C: drive stopped while C: is backed up, and the services for the D: drive stopped while the D: drive is being backed up. To further complicate the issue I wanted to have the C: drive backup first, and the the D: drive backup afterwards, so I setup a rule to have the D: drive backup start after the C: drive backup completed.

In order to use this policy I had to have one selection list that included both C: and D: and then make the template for C: exclude D: and the template for D: exclude C:. But when I run the jobs the first backup of C: runs properly with no D: drive data, but then the second job runs and backs up C: and D: drive data despite C: being excluded in the template for that job.

Any ideas?

Thanks,
David Woodward

[Sharvari_Deshmu]

Hello,

please check the admin guide for more information on templates and policies:

http://support.veritas.com/docs/269777

(page:377 onwards..)

Also if you arenot using 10.0 5520 we request you to upgrade to this version.Please refer to the following technote:

http://support.veritas.com/docs/277181


Thanks,


NOTE : If we do not receive your reply within two business days, this post would be marked assumed answered and would be moved to answered questions pool.

[David_Woodward]

As far as I can tell, the guide does not address these issues.

Page 348 mentions Exclusions being possible in templates but redirects you to the standard section on files selections and exclusions. It does not mention any limitations with templates.

Page 275 tells you how to delete a selection list, but does not mention anything about the lists created by the exclusions inside templates.

I am using the latest build (10.0 5520) with all updates available from Veritas.

--David Woodward

[Ajit_Kulkarni]

Hello,


Have you tried excluding the C: drive from the Text version in the Selection List ?

Regards

NOTE : If we do not receive your reply within two business days, this post would be marked "assumed answered" and would be moved to "answered questions" pool.

[David_Woodward]

I'm on my honeymoon right now, so I'll make this quick.

Yes, I have excluded it all ways possible. However; if you actually make exclusions via a template, you will notice that you end up looking at a text view in the end no matter which method you choose. Please continue to research this problem as it is most deffinitely not resolved.

(Reply submitted using a Treo 650. Please excuse any formatting issues, typos, or oversights on my part.)

Thanks,
David Woodward

[David_Woodward]

I'm back from the honeymoon now.

Has there been any progress made on this? Is anyone at Veritas looking into this issue?

Thanks again,
David Woodward