Netbackup UNIX vs Windows NT Server

[Donna_Maya]

We have the opportunity to pick either UNIX or Windows NT for the master server. Most of the clients are a mixture of UNIX & Windows based, Oracle applications. Setting hardware aside and looking at the O/S for the master server. Who can tell me which is the best O/S for the master server?? I can't seem to find any real in-depth answers, only pitches for the O/S that people are using currently. The issue becomes, does NetBackup 6.0 benefit from either O/S & which one performs better?

I am open to new ideas and concrete answers on the pros/cons of each. I know there is someone out there who can definitively say why one is better than the other. Please help!

My basic concerns are:

1) Which O/S is more stable for the Master Server
2) Which O/S allows more scripting & reporting
3) Which O/S is better performance for the Master Server

Any insights are much appreciated.

[Stumpr2]

1) Which O/S is more stable for the Master Server
UNIX - less microsoft fixes!
I prefer Solaris as VERITAS has a partnership with them

2) Which O/S allows more scripting & reporting
UNIX - has extra commands available including text menu tpconfig

3) Which O/S is better performance for the Master Server
doesn't matter as long as it is decked out.

I suggest looking over this guide for selecting a system
Veritas NetBackup (tm) Enterprise Server / Server 6.0 Backup Planning and Performance Tuning Guide for UNIX, Windows, and Linux
http://support.veritas.com/docs/281842

[Donna_Maya]

I'm still not seeing any clear cut definitive answers whether one O/S is better than the other. The answer given & the documentation really don't clearly tell you the benefits of using one O/S over the other. Am I just missing something, or is my answer that there really isn't a difference if all other factors are the same hardware configured. Thanks

[Stumpr2]

> is my answer that there really isn't a difference if all other factors are the same hardware configured

your answer is correct.

The UNIX platform allows more flexibility for scripting command lines and reporting. The windows platform only offers limited functionality. As far as OS on the platforms, it makes no difference. Use whatever is more comfortable. Just be sure to follow the guidelines for selecting a server according to the guide I supplied you.Message was edited by:
Bob Stump

[Donna_Maya]

Thanks, that is what I assumed from reading, but wanted to be sure.

[Dennis_Strom]

I have worked a bit on window and a lot on Solaris. If I had to pick I would without a doubt go with Solaris. The OS and and hardware is rock solid. I average about 6 months uptime on my Master. I can add, delete, update devices without a reboot. I do not worry about viruses, and with ipfilter 3.4 which is very easy to install can create a simple rule set to exclude whatever I want. I can run whatever shell I want, with Blastwave I can install whatever programming language I desire to use. Initial learning curve may be a bit more but in the end I think it is easier since overall UNIX is a bit more simple than Windows and once you learn one OS you can fairly easily sit down and hack away on another. I have gone from Windows to UNIX and hope to never go back. I do have a Win-Desktop, it is very helpful at times but as far as servers go, I think I have made my opinion clear. That said I work with people that would not hesitate to deploy a Windows server.
This is from a post a while back.
windows vx unix netbackup vs backupexec
BackupExec = just windows, larger user community, not an
enterprise solution but affordable

NetBackup = all platforms, enterprise solution, encryption,
vaulting, larger library/tapedrive/disk storage compatability,
shares resources with SSO. The user community is smaller than
BackupExec but very knowledgable. Licensing is expensive!

NetBackup
Windows master = cheaper, gets the job done but with some CLI limitations
UNIX master = more flexability for scripting/reporting and plays
better with configurations and drivers, less reboots

Windows and UNIX NetBackup masters both perform well if you do
the necessary tuning. And both can do poorly if you don't do tuning.

the nod goes to Netbackup for duplication.

Netbackup tends to cost a bit more but has more functionality.Message was edited by:
Dennis Strom

[Stumpr2]

Here is another GREAT write up by Mr. James Dunn:

Dennis,

UNIX versus Windows:

As far as operating systems go, to some it would seem as if UNIX has a clear advantage over Windows. UNIX offers greater flexibility than Windows operating systems; furthermore, it is more stable and it does not crash as much as much as Windows. To some, UNIX is just as easy to use as Windows, offering a GUI interface as well as command line. But there are users out there that believe UNIX is for only for computer gurus only, claiming that the fragmentation of the UNIX GUI is its greatest competitive weakness.

One thing that has been established though, UNIX is quite a bit more reliable than Windows, and less administration and maintenance is needed in maintaining a UNIX system. This is a huge cost saver for any organization. Rather than employing many individuals to maintain a Windows based system, one part-time employee would be needed for the upkeep of a typical size UNIX system. One key difference between UNIX and Windows is the implementation of multiple users on one computer. When a user logs onto a UNIX system, a shell process is started to service their commands. Keeping track of users and their processes, a UNIX operating system is able to keep track of processes and prevent them from interfering with each other. This is extremely beneficial when all the processes run on the server, which demands a greater use of resources - especially with numerous users and sizeable applications.

Another main difference between UNIX and Windows is the process hierarchy which UNIX possesses. When a new process is created by a UNIX application, it becomes a child of the process that created it. This hierarchy is very important, so there are system calls for influencing child processes. Windows processes on the other hand do not share a hierarchical relationship. Receiving the process handle and ID of the process it created, the creating process of a Windows system can maintain or simulate a hierarchical relationship if it is needed. The Windows operating system ordinarily treats all processes as belonging to the same generation.

UNIX uses daemons, Windows has service processes. Daemons are processes that are started when UNIX boots up that provide services to other applications. Daemons typically do not interact with users. A Windows service is the equivalent to a UNIX daemon. When a Windows system is booted, a service may be started. This is a long running application that does not interact with users, so they do not have a user interface. Services continue running during a logon session and they are controlled by the Windows Service Control Manager.

UNIX has a novel approach to designing software. Since UNIX is open-sourced, it attracts some very intelligent programmers who develop many applications free of charge. With this in mind, many designers choose to resolve software problems by creating simpler tools that interconnect rather than creating large application programs. In contrast, Windows applications are all proprietary and costly. With UNIX, each generation extends, rather than replaces the previous like Windows it is rarely necessary to upgrade - old and new Unix are all compatible. The main reason for this is the way UNIX is built, which is on a solid theoretical foundation. There are many advantages to this, for instance, a book written 20 years ago that discusses programming UNIX can still be used today. Imagine trying to figure out how to run Windows XP with a Window 3.1 manual - it can't be done.

One argument to be made about UNIX is its lack of standardization. Some feel there are too many choices to be made regarding which GUI to use, or which combination of UNIX hardware and software to support. UNIX operating systems make great high-performance servers, but for end-users, every application on each arrangement of UNIX platform requires a different set, and each application has a different user interface. Microsoft has "the" Windows operating system; there simply isn't one standardized UNIX operating system, or for that matter, a single standardized UNIX GUI. One could argue and say this is a downfall for UNIX, but on the other hand, these variations add flavor and versatility to a solid, reliable operating system.

In other words, UNIX rules.

JD

[Rakesh_Khandelw]

UNIX is the way to go specially Solaris. Because of various limitations like frequent reboot to enable changes, buffer size limitation etc on Windows you will not be able to meet forget about beating the performance you will see on UNIX given you are taking care of basic tuning parameters. Reporting is easy in UNIX because of flexiblity you get for scripting in variety of languages and shells.

Most of the NetBackup code is being developed for UNIX specially Solaris and then they migrate/convert it for another OS.

Bottom line, UNIX beats Windows in terms of reliability, availability, scalability and performance. Only down side is you may have to pay little extra for a UNIX admin and Hardware.

[Dennis_Strom]

UNIX does rule. Before we were bought out and our new upper management took over, and demanded that mail go on an Xchange server, our enterprise level mail server was up for almost 3 years. We had an enterprise web server that served people all over the world and was also used for development that was up for close to 5 years. They both got fairly slow on a couple occasions as they weathered various DNS attacks but they continued to serve. Oh, and almost all Windows mail servers have a UNIX box in front of them, just cuz.

[Dennis_Strom]

We have done side by side comparisons with hardware and Sun hardware does not end up being more expensive. Enterprise level support is about the same all things considered. The UNIX admin will most likely cost a bit more but then you only have to hire one and the person can usually work on something else too.

[Donna_Maya]

Well, to sum it up - I am a UNIX administrator here; there was an issue with NetBackup on UNIX and it was moved to NT Server about 12 months ago. Just getting settled in here (just started), I was trying to explain besides the basic advantages of moving it back to UNIX to upper management - but my points have been muted. The opportunity is there for me if I can solidify my argument to a degree; and I appreciate everyones insight. Yes, I do agree that it would be best on UNIX also, but that is why I posted this thread. Not just to get a corral, but to get real non-biased advice. Thanks again. -D

[Stumpr2]

OK, pass the ammunition. Here ya go!
NT is end-of-life with Netbackup 5.x
It is NOT supported in NetBackup6.xMessage was edited by:
Bob Stump

[Donna_Maya]

Seriously?

[Stumpr2]

check the compatibility matrix
Veritas NetBackup (tm) 6.0 Operating System Compatibility List (Updated December 27, 2006)
http://support.veritas.com/docs/278064

Veritas NetBackup (tm) 5.x Operating System Compatibility (updated December 4, 2006)
http://support.veritas.com/docs/263839
in the 5.x you will see note 98:
98. Next major release following NetBackup 5.0 will not support this OS version.Message was edited by:
Bob Stump

[grumpyface]

I think Bob really meant Windows NT4. Windows 2003 (and Longhorn or whatever) will still be supported.

[Rakesh_Khandelw]

from NBU 6.0 Release Notes -

Operating Systems Not Supported as of NetBackup 6.0
Backward compatibility with NetBackup 6.0 client software is retained for at least one
release level. The following operating systems are no longer supported at the release of
NetBackup 6.0 and beyond.
Platforms Not Supported as of NetBackup 6.0 and Beyond
Hardware Type Operating System and Version Server Client Notes
HP Tru64/Alpha Tru64 5.1, 5.1a X X 1
HP - Integrity HP-UX 11.23 IA-64 ARIES Translator X
IBM AIX 4.3.3.10 X X
IBM z800/900 Red Hat 7.2 X
IBM z800/900 Red Hat AS 2.1 X
IBM z800/900 SuSE SLES 7, SLES 8 X
IBM z800/900
(31-bit mode)
Linux SuSE zSeries 8 X
Intel X86/Novell Novell 5.0 X
Intel X86/Novell Novell 6.0 X X 2
Intel X86,Windows Windows NT 4.0 SP6 X X
Intel X86,Windows Windows XP SP1 X 4
Intel X86/FreeBSD FreeBSD 4.7, 4.8, and 4.9 X
Intel X86/Linux Linux Debian GNU/Linux 3.0 X
Intel X86/Linux Linux Red Hat 8.0 and 9.0 X 3
Intel X86/Linux SuSE 8.1 and SuSE 8.2 Desktop X
Intel X86/Novell SCO UnixWare 7.1.2 and 7.1.3 X
Intel X86/UNIX Solaris 7 (X86) X
Macintosh (680x0 or PPC) MacOS X10.2.2 and 10.2.6 X
SGI IRIX 6.5.15 � 6.5.22 X
SGI IRIX - All versions for Media server X
Sun (Sparc) Solaris 7 X X

[Donna_Maya]

I'm pretty sure they'll pick Windows Server 2003 SP1 or any Windows (just because they can). I can't seem to convince them otherwise on the benefits that have already been mentioned.

[Dennis_Strom]

the only way to convince is through cost. You have to prove that the hardware, OS (Solaris is Free), Support, upgrades, is cheaper on UNIX. When you do you cost analysis you have to assign a cost to reboots. Admin time for the reboot, and loss of availability has to be assigned a cost. This includes upgrades for patches, typically windows is patched monthly, sometimes more often with critical bug fixes. Also factor in cost for having to reboot for device management. For all of that with Windows you are looking at let's say 3 reboots a month, Solaris one boot every 6 months. Assign numbers and go from there. Do not forget to assign cost for the ability get reports from unix and also scripting 2x faster on unix.

[grumpyface]

You could go for a compromise; Solaris master and Windows media servers. I have worked with a system like this and they play well together. Later on you could slowly replace the media servers with Unix or Linux.

[AKopel]

Donna,
We run Windows Server 2003 SP1 and it is rock solid for us. I 'personally' wouldn't go to UNIX for NBU just because of my unfamiliarity on Unix/Linux, and and I very comfortable with Windows.
For that same reason, since YOU are a Unix admin, I would imagine you should really push for a Unix master/media server setup. I really feel that OS familiarity and competent admins is the true reason for stability of a platform. I think Windows gets a bad rap because there are a LOT of BAD windows admins out there.
Just my 2 cents :)
AK