cancel
Showing results for 
Search instead for 
Did you mean: 

Duplicate TLD entries on Vault Management tab

thesanman
Level 6
I have been trying to debug this minor issue wuth Symantec with so far, no luck.  Thought I would try this forum.

I use the Windows Java NetBackup Administrator Console to manage my NetBackup environment from my windows XP desktop.  My master server is a Solaris server and we run v6.5.3.1 throughout although I first noticed this with v6.5.3 as well.  This my Windows Java console is communicating with my Solaris master server.

When I start the Java console from my desktop, once loaded the last tab reads "Vault Management".  It has a little radio button to its left.  When I single click on the words "Vault Management" all works fine; my TLD(2) robot vault entry is displayed.  However, if, on the first time, I click on the radio tab (to expand the Vault Management entry), the radio tab dissappears.  If I then click on the Vault Management wording, an hour glass is displayed as the config is loaded, the tab is expanded but two TLD(2) entries are shown and it appears that the robot entries are duplicated.  I can then manage these entries, both are expandable but show the same vault profiles.  The same thing happens if I double click on the Vault Management wording.

If, instead of using the Windows Java console I start the Solaris version (jnbSA) from my master server and push the display back to my desktop, the problem does not exist.  The radio button expands the tab  and only one robot entry is seen.

This problem seems to happen from multiple Windxows XP desktops and a pretty basic Windows 2003 server; communicating to both my Production and test/QA NetBackup master servers.

Vault Management is not something we do on a day to day basis but it's anoying and confusing when it happens.  This issue did not exist in v6.0 MP6 which we upgraded from recently.

Wondering if the comunity out there sees the same issue?  Anyone have any ideas what is going on here?  So far, Symantec have no idea.

Thanks,
Malcolm
0 REPLIES 0