Netbackup 7.1 and Exchange 2010 DAGs backup

[posie80]

Hi all,

I'm facing a strange issue on Netbackup Windows 2008 Master/media servers environment (with SSO). We are currently testing with Microsoft exchange 2010 DAG backups and we have been seeing the following error whenever a DAG backup policy (using 3PAR VSS snapshot backup) is run :

99/30/2011 11:41:08 AM - Info bpbrm(pid=2452) DAGCLIENT is the host to restore data      

9/30/2011 11:41:08 AM - Info bpbrm(pid=2452) reading file list from client        

9/30/2011 11:41:13 AM - Info bpbrm(pid=2452) client_pid=3940            

9/30/2011 11:41:14 AM - Info bpbrm(pid=2452) from client DAGCLIENT: TRV - BPRESOLVER has executed on server (FRAEBL-S-T322)  

9/30/2011 11:42:31 AM - Warning bpbrm(pid=2452) from client DAGCLIENT: WRN - Exchange 2010 item <Microsoft Exchange Database Availability Groups:\DAGCLIENT-DBSTD001> not backed up.  See bpresolver log.

9/30/2011 11:42:31 AM - Warning bpbrm(pid=2452) from client DAGCLIENT: WRN - Exchange 2010 item <Microsoft Exchange Database Availability Groups:\DAGCLIENT-DBSTD002> not backed up.  See bpresolver log.

9/30/2011 11:42:31 AM - Warning bpbrm(pid=2452) from client DAGCLIENT: WRN - Exchange 2010 item <Microsoft Exchange Database Availability Groups:\DAGCLIENT-DBSTD003> not backed up.  See bpresolver log.

9/30/2011 11:42:31 AM - Info bpresolver(pid=3940) done.  status: 2         

9/30/2011 11:42:31 AM - Error bpbrm(pid=2452) no worklist items returned from bpresolver on client  DAGCLIENT   

9/30/2011 11:42:36 AM - Info bpresolver(pid=3940) done. status: 2: none of the requested files were backed up  

Status 2

I came across this link and it sounded exactly like the issue I'm having :

http://www.symantec.com/business/support/index?page=content&id=TECH153708

Making the netbackup service logon account as domain administrator seems to be fixed the issue..

My question :

1) Since I am using Exchange 2010 and not using granular recovery, why do I need to set the netbackup service logon account to domain administrator? I thought you only need to do this IF you use granular recovery and if you have exchange 2007 earlier.

2) The strange thing, is that the DAG backups were working for me before they suddenly started throwing the 'no worklist items' errors. No changes were made but suddenly, local account no longer work and I needed to set the service logon account before it could work again. So why was I able to perform the backups a few times without aid of the service logon account?

3) Does service logon account need to have domain admin priveleges? This seem a bit much and if we do need this account, would be nice to know what exactly are the priveleges needed rather than just giving it the full priveleges of domain admin.

I really appreciate your feedbacks! I'm using Netbackup 7.1, one master server and 2 medias (SAN clients), with SSO and 3PAR snapshot backup option turned on. 

Thanks!

[bartman10]

I'm doing the same kind of backup also without granular recovery and I don't believe the Exchange admin changed the NBU service to run with any special accounts. The client was installed with local admin account and I'm not getting this error.

What I am seeing is really bad preformance!! Backups of the 2010 DAG are taking over 2x as long compaired to 2007. The throughput is really bad, like 6-20mb/s. This is with client side dedupe disabled but still get about the same speed with client side dedupe enabled. I'm running NBU 7.1.0.2 but the Exchange servers are still at 7.0.1 fyi..

[SlobodanS]

Hi,

I had the same issue couple of weeks ago.

We created a policy with Microsoft Exchange Attributes to "Passive copy only".

When i change it to "Passive copy and if not available the active copy", the backups ran well.

Slobodan

[bbahnmiller]

We had a similar issue. According to the case we had opened, we had to set the VSS provider to "system" in order for the backups to work. We did not have to change the ownership of the NetBackup process. Our backend storage is NetApp and it was trying to use hardware snapshots. By setting it "system" we cleared up the issue.

See:

http://www.symantec.com/docs/TECH72663

Bryan