Backup Infrastructure Upgrade/Restructure - Netbackup

[Jack89]

Greetings:

We have a project to upgrade our backup infrastructure which currently consists of a single Master/Media Server running NetBackup v.5.1.  Currently it backs up our LAN and SAN connected servers to a StorageTek Tape Library.

We are going to be upgrading to v.65, adding a dedicated Media Server (Master will be separate)  and backing up to SAN instead.  Then to tape.

My questions are:

1.  What is the order in which this restructure/upgrade should occur?  Should the backups be repointed to the SAN prior to the upgrade to 6.5?  When should the second Media Server be introduced?

2.  What is the procedure in separating the Media and Master server roles?  Currently the Master is also a Media Server.  By adding a new server we would like to separate these roles.  Do we introduce another Media Server and move the policies over to it?

3.  SAN Media Server.  This seems to be the very least understood topic even amongst support.  I need to understand how this works in terms of data flow.  I understand that it backs itself up however is it in fact a true SAN to SAN backup?  Does the data still go over the HBA then back to the backup SAN?

4.  More of a SAN question.  Using the SAN Media Server which is already connected to the production SAN e.g. Exchange Server.  Does the Exchange server need to be able to see the LUN's on the backup SAN?  And if so how does this get accomplished using a single HBA which is already used.


Thanks in advance.
J

[marekkedzierski]

1. Upgrade Master Server, Admin Consoles and then clients. If your SAN environment works now with 5.1 you don't have to make any changes to SAN. You can add second Media Server after upgrade to 6.5.
If your environment has only one backup Server you probably have NetBackup Standard license. If you want to connect additional Media Servers you have to upgrade to NetBackup Enterprise Server license.

2. Simply change storage unit in all policies to new media server, remove Master Server devices from configuration, disconnect Master from SAN tape drives and that's all.. You don't have to uninstall any NB components etc.

3. SAN Media Server (now Enterprise Client) backups only its own data, you can't backup remote clients by this media server, you cannot install SAN Media Server Active/Pasive Cluster. You don't need to have SAN devices connected to this server. SAN Media Server can backup for example its own data to SCSI Autoloader, disk or streamer.

4. If you want to install SAN Media Server on Exchange machine and backup to SAN tape drives - you have to create zones and install tape drives in Windows system.. If you want to share tape drives between Media Server you have to buy Shared Storage Option license (1 per drive)

[Scott_Lundberg]

1.  I don't think it matters when you introduce the server. Though I would wait until after you upgrade so you don't have to upgrade two media servers.
2.  In the Media server properties remove the current media server and add the second.  Redo your policies to point to the new media if required (.i.e.  policies aren't set to Any Available.
3.  Without built in code running on the SAN, I don't believe any software can start a Fibre stream from one SAN to another.  We use IBM DS products here and they require a separate license/firmware to do SAN snapshots (as they are called in the IBM world).  In other words, yes, your data is traveling up and down the same HBA.  Shouldn't really matter much though as Fibre is full duplex and your limiting factor will be the write on the destination SAN, not the HBA.
4.  Not if it the backup SAN is purely used for backups.  The only that would need access is the new media server.  If you do decide later that you need the Exchange server to see both SANs, you will need to introduce a Fibre switch and implement zoning.  This is assuming you are using Loops only at the moment.  If you already have a SAN fabric with Fibre switches, then all you need to do is configure the Fibre Fabric with a zone between the backup SAN and the Exchange server, then on the backup SAN allow the Exchange server as a valid host.  Restart the Exchange server, or use Diskpart to search for and add the new LUN(s).

One word of caution:  Our experience during the 5.x to 6.x upgrade was not very smooth.  We ended having to recreate all of our policies, so make some good notes about your policies before you start...

HTH

[Jack89]

Thanks guys for the responses.

Based on your response on question 4 regarding the SAN Media Server and its ability to see the Backup LUNs.  Seems as though you do not need the SAN Media Server (e.g Exchange Server) to have access to the Backup SAN LUN's.  The Media Server will have the LUN's exposed to it and direct the data from the production SAN LUN (Exchange Server) to the Backup SAN's LUN.    Correct?

We do have the Shared Storage Option so the other question is with regard to how the Backup SAN should be configured.  My understanding (based on the above paragraph) is that the LUN's on the Backup SAN should be configured on the Media Server (Not SAN Media Server).  How should this storage be allocated?  My understanding is that you can only write to one LUN at a time. 

Currently the SAN has 5 Arrays with 1TB disks in each array.  Each array has 10 disks in RAID 5 config. 

E.g. Should the storage be broken down into multiple LUN's of equal size etc?

[Scott_Lundberg]

Yes, you are correct.  The Media server is the only thing that needs access to the backup SAN.

Concerning the configuration of the SAN:  It will depend on the SAN vendor which way will give you the best performance.  Check with their best practices, everyone is different.  General rule of thumb is to put as many spindles (disks) as you can on each LUN, regardless of total size.  This will allow multiple disks to write at the same time and therefore increase the throughput. 

I have not heard of the limitation of writing to one LUN at the same time.  Is that a Netbackup limitation?  It shouldn't be any different than writing to 2 tape drives at the same time...???

I would not break down your LUN into multiples unless you are exceeding maximum LUN size for your OS or the block size gets too big and you have many small files.  Since Netbackup image files are to be stored on the backup SAN, I would say that you can use large block size and therefore a larger LUN as well.  Breaking down into multiple LUNs will increase disk management overhead and slow the throughput...

[Jack89]

From reading the NetBackup Architecture document it seems pretty clear that the SAN Media Server does back itself up directly.  Its basically a full blown Media Server without the ablity to back itself up.  Meaning that the backup storage LUN's will need to be exposed to it directly. 

Now for another question:

Which Shared Storage Option should SAN Media Servers use?  Keep in mind these servers are attached to a production SAN and will backup their data to the backup SAN.

Shared Disk, Open Storage or Shared Storage?

[Scott_Lundberg]

Maybe I am not clear on what you are trying to do, but what's the point of having another Media server if you are just going to use the original (SAN Media Server in your terms) to access the Backup LUNS?  I don't see why you would need two Media servers if your SAN Media server has access to both the production and backup SANs...  Am I missing something?

We have ours setup as Shared Disk...

[Jack89]

The other media server is for LAN based clients.  SAN Media Servers are themselves "Media Servers" and there are about 20 of them.  The SAN Media Servers cannot backup remote clients.

[marekkedzierski]

"Which Shared Storage Option should SAN Media Servers use? "

When you have for example 10 FC tape drives and you want connect them to 5 media servers, you have to buy 10x tape drive license and 10x SSO license. The same situation for 10,20,50 media servers. SSO is licensed per shared drive.