NetBackup 7.5 trial install

[Mugurel]

Hi,

I am trying to see if NetBackup can solve my company backup needs and I requested a trial license for it. I am looking for a few things out there, but looks like I got stuck from start.

I did the installation on a Linux CentOS 5 server running in a ESXi 5 virtual server. It is a new installation. I did follow the steps in the installation manual and mostly kept the default settings. The master server, media manager and client are all on the same machine. I am starting the Java console, it is asking me for the host name, username and password. I login as root as it says in the manual, but the console I see is not the same I see in the manual. It looks like I am connecting only to the client side, not to the server. There is no wizard link to set the server and storage.The panel on the left side contains only one line: "Backup, Archive and Restore".

Any idea on where to look for would be highly appreciated.

Thanks,

Mugurel

[mph999]

Hi Mugurel,

As per the compatability guide

http://www.symantec.com/docs/TECH76648

Page 63.  Consoles, CentOS is not listed, as it is not supported to run the Java console.

Martin

[mph999]

.

[Mugurel]

CentOS5 and Red Hat Enterprise 5 should be pretty much the same stuff, I have never had a problem running software compiled for RedHat on a CentOS machine. The console is runing, it is just not showing what I was expecting.

[mph999]

Yes, but unfortunately, although they are similar, they are not identicle.

Look at this post (similar issue) ...

https://www-secure.symantec.com/connect/forums/unable-run-netbackup-java-console-jnbsa-javalangnocla...

Look at the comment from Chris Zimmerman, one up from the bottom.

The compat. guide is not clear, I agree.  Even tech support struggle to get the right conclusion sometimes.  Perhaps someone wlse will come along that knows different, but Chris knows more than me in this area.

Regards,

Martin

[CRZ]

Please refer again to page 14 of the most recent (dated today!) version of the NetBackup 7.x Compatibility List:

NetBackup 7.x Operating System
 http://symantec.com/docs/TECH76648

OS: CentOS 6

NetBackup Media Server: YES

NetBackup Master Server: NO

And actually, your original post mentions CentOS *5*, which is not listed AT ALL on the server grid.  (It is only certified as a client - see page 13).  Only CentOS 6 is certified, and ONLY as a media server.

There appears to be a rash of people trying to run unsupported configurations.  PLEASE STOP DOING THIS!  I don't care if you THINK it's working right now!  If you experience ANY issues at ANY time, you WILL be denied support as soon as we figure out you're describing an unsupported configuration to us!  I can't be more clear!  Look at all the exclamation points I'm using!

[Mugurel]

What can I say... I thought Symantec is trying to provide software for customers to backup what they have, not that the customers have to change the environment in order to use that software.

I am pretty sure that CentOS should work with whatever is design for RHEL5, but with an answer as the one above, with tech support that "don't care what you think" I will follow the advice and "stop doing it"

Sorry for wasting your time with a potential customer. I will stay away of NetBackup, I am pretty sure there are other solutions out there with friendlier tech support.

Mugurel

[liushuililuo]

Hi,guy.

I'm lookinf for one or some trial license for NetBackuo because my commpany want to test whether NetBackup can match our requirement.

But I can't find the trail license on the internet .Mybe you can help me .

Thx.

[CRZ]

Please don't forget to mark my post as a solution if you found it completely unhelpful. 

(Rhetorical question: If someone can afford NetBackup, can't they also afford an operating system that isn't freeware?)

[CRZ]

You will want to contact Symantec and talk things over with a sales engineer who can help you out with evaluation keys (amongst other things).

[mph999]

If you decide to try NBU, and I hope you do, hey it's awesome, please please please read this bit below.

Check on this forum, as to what operating system you can use for the master server.

I really really don't want a 3rd thread like this one ...

And now, Martin's top tip of the day.

Do not build your master server on CentOS, it won't work properly, you will then get very angry and we will get very sad.

Martin

[Mugurel]

Yes, I am a cheap guy... what can I say

[mph999 · Accepted solution]

All backup software has a compatability list.

"I am pretty sure that CentOS should work with whatever is design for RHEL5" - OK, if this is what you think, try it - but you may find you have issues, which is why it is listed as unsupported.

Chris is not trying to be unhelpful, he is making a very clear statement.

EDIT

I have just re-read the post,  This was not aimed at you personally.

"There appears to be a rash of people trying to run unsupported configurations.  PLEASE STOP DOING THIS!  I don't care if you THINK it's working right now!  If you experience ANY issues at ANY time, you WILL be denied support as soon as we figure out you're describing an unsupported configuration to us!  I can't be more clear!  Look at all the exclamation points I'm using!"

It was a general statement aimied at everybody.

Chris is right - there are a lot of issues popping up on the forum with prople doing 'unsupported' things.  We try to stop this, but unfortunately have to type in big letters, beause people don't listen.

Let me tell you a story.

******

Back in my old lilfe (previuos job) I joined the SAN team.  I became responsible for disk stuff, backup suff , SAN stuff - includiing an archiving product (NOT Symantecs) .

I was on-call one evening , got called middle of the night, you know how it is.  Some issue with the archiving product, ok ,no problem - ran the commands I need - ahh, damm, that's not good, as the system came falling down around me, big time ..

OK, got things limping on till the morning ..

Now people wanted answers (I had it appeared just bought down a failrly major system) - checked the commands I had run, nope, they are fine, should NOT cause an issue.

Turns out the install of the software was hacked - it was running in an unsupported config, meaning the commands I had run were invalid, and dangerous.

Unfortunately, no one told me ...

The fault therefore lay, with the person who insisted that the product was installed and used in a manner it was not designed to.

This sort of thing is what we are trying to avoid.

*****************************************

Please understand that this is a public forum, and as such, sometimes we, rightly or wrongy make 'strong' statements.

As Chris explained previously, CentOS is NOT the same as Redhat, as he pointed out, if it was the same, it would be called RedHat ....

We don't say it is unsupported because we don't want you to use it NetBackup, we say it is unsupported because if you use it, you will have problems that may be unfixable.  We want you to use NetBackup, just on an operating system that is supported.

There is a wide range of OS out there that will work, why not give it a chance on another, and if you have issues, you will find out how friendly we actually are.

Too many times we see a serious issue that we cannot resolve, because people did not follow the documentation, or went against the advice of support and then hit serious problems later on.  I have seen serious data loss because of people running commands and doing things they are not meant to do - and no matter how much they scream and shout, it is 100% their fault.  (Was it in the manula, no, why did you do it then ...).   We want to avoid such things happening, as as you will see from Chris' statement, we have to say things directly sometimes, else we are ignored and people do it anyway.

Martin

[Mugurel]

Martin,

Thanks a lot for your answer. I realy appreciate you spending time to clean up after your coleague. My big problem here is that I am never going to take for granted a statement without understanding why. Just stating that CentOS is not the same as RH because it has a different name... does not make much sens to me. I was feeling like in a forum ran by teenagers with big ego that are talking to the stupid outsiders and trying to show them how stupid they are.

Maybe I am wrong, but, basically, all linux is... freeware. What you buy from RH is not the operating system, like you do from Microsoft, but the tech support. True, you cannot get their distribution unless you will buy the tech support, but you can find all the packages they are using because, legally, they have to do it. I am not an expert in CentOS, even though I am using it for a log time, but I know they are taking those packages and making a distribution out of them. I do agree there are some differences, thay may or not be important for your product, but again, I am pretty sure there should be a workarround for that. Never mind, I am anyway out of that, I understand Symantec is looking only for wealthy customers that do not care how much they spend.

Have a great weekend,

Mugurel

[mph999]

Hi Mugurel,

I'm not an expert on the diff versions of Linux (you might have noticed ...) but there must be enough of a difference between RH and CentOS to be a problem for NBU.

I have no idea why we don't support CentOS - well I do, there are only so many people, and so many hours in the day  - so fixing bits, developing new features that customers want and so on means that not all OS are going to be supported, perhaps CentOS is on the cards to be added in - I don't know.

At the moment, CentOS ain't going to work, and the worst thing that could happen is that someone installs it as a production master and then hits major issues with live data - that would be real bad.  I know for a fact that some people have got it working on CentOS, and then hit issues.  I know you were only talking about a  test, but there are people who would just buy it, get it working, put it into production and then complain when they find out it's not supported.  If we stop that, even if it means someone gets a bit upset, then that is better than data loss, even if they don't think so.

You woundn't believe how many issues I deal with that are caused by badly designed systems and unsupported configs, we don't want anymore.   I could give you many horror stories of serious issues that are 100% the fault of people doing things they shouldn't do - sometimes these are unfixable (and yes we will try if a production environment).

There are two golden rules:

1.  If it is unsupported don't do it

2.  If it isn't in the manuals, don't do it (or at least check with us first).

If these two rules were obeyed, our lives would be a lot easier.

 A lot of people come here for advice, and then ignore it and do it anyway - hence the 'strong words', don't take it personally.  As I said, having re-read the post, it's wasn't directed at you, it was a general comment.  Chris is very very knowledgeable, and comes up with answers that no one else can.  I am sorry if he upset you a bit, but at least you got the correct answer, which has to be the most important thing.

I don't think we are looking for wealthy customers - I am not aware it costs any more to run NBU on Solaris than on RH for example, but we do expect it to be run on an OS that we support, I don't think that is unreasonable.

Perhaps you may choose to try NBU in the future, if you do, I am sure you will find it fits your needs, it has many features, the VM capabilities are pretty impressive for a start (new feaures added in 7.5).

Hope your weekend is good also.

Regards,

Martin