Hi Folks: Is anyone aware whether or not Veritas Enterprise NetBackup supports ZFS? The customer is currently using NetBackup version 5.0 but is moving to Version 6.0. Thanks Bob
ZFS is not supported by NetBackup engineering yet. No ETA on when that is supposedly coming out. The files themselves appear to be backed up (I tested this using NetBackup 6.0MP3), and can be restored, but ACL information and such is not backed up. Your bpbkar log might fill up with warning messages about not being able to obtain the ACL information, as well. On 9/20/06, Bob Connelly <Bob.Connelly at sun.com> wrote:> > Hi Folks: > > Is anyone aware whether or not Veritas Enterprise NetBackup supports > ZFS? The customer is currently using NetBackup version 5.0 but is moving > to Version 6.0. > > Thanks > Bob > _______________________________________________ > zfs-discuss mailing list > zfs-discuss at opensolaris.org > http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss >-------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <http://mail.opensolaris.org/pipermail/zfs-discuss/attachments/20060920/8e944909/attachment.html>
Hi, I am using Netbackup 6.0 MP3 on several ZFS systems just fine. I think that NBU won''t back up some exotic ACLs of ZFS, but if you are using ZFS like other filesystems (UFS, etc) then there aren''t any issues. Jeff Earickson Colby College On Wed, 20 Sep 2006, Bob Connelly wrote:> Date: Wed, 20 Sep 2006 19:44:53 -0400 > From: Bob Connelly <Bob.Connelly at Sun.COM> > To: zfs-discuss at opensolaris.org, Robert Connelly <Bob.Connelly at Sun.COM> > Subject: [zfs-discuss] Veritas NetBackup Support for ZFS > > Hi Folks: > > Is anyone aware whether or not Veritas Enterprise NetBackup supports ZFS? The > customer is currently using NetBackup version 5.0 but is moving to Version > 6.0. > > Thanks > Bob > _______________________________________________ > zfs-discuss mailing list > zfs-discuss at opensolaris.org > http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss >
Nicolas Dorfsman
2006-Sep-22 08:36 UTC
[zfs-discuss] Re: Veritas NetBackup Support for ZFS
> I am using Netbackup 6.0 MP3 on several ZFS systems > just fine. I > think that NBU won''t back up some exotic ACLs of ZFS, > but if you > are using ZFS like other filesystems (UFS, etc) then there aren''t any issues.Hum. ACLs are not so "exotic". This IS a really BIG issue. If you are using ACLs, even POSIX, moving production to ZFS filesystems means loosing any ACLs in backups. In other words, if you''re using 30 years old UNIX rights, no problem. If I''d have to give a list of complaint on ZFS, that would be the first on my list ! Sun SHOULD make pressure on backup software editor (or send them some engineer) to support ZFS. This message posted from opensolaris.org
Nicolas Dorfsman wrote:>> I am using Netbackup 6.0 MP3 on several ZFS systems >> just fine. I >> think that NBU won''t back up some exotic ACLs of ZFS, >> but if you >> are using ZFS like other filesystems (UFS, etc) then there aren''t any issues. > > Hum. ACLs are not so "exotic". > > This IS a really BIG issue. If you are using ACLs, even POSIX, moving production to ZFS filesystems means loosing any ACLs in backups.There is no such thing as POSIX ACLs. The draft never made it to standard. Veritas NetBackup and Legato Networker both use the Solaris acl(2) system call to get POSIX draft ACLs from UFS. ZFS and NFSv4 use a more modern and much more expressive form of ACLs. The acl(2) system call was extended in a compatible way for them, but some backup programs assume that acl(2) returning ENOSYS is fatal - in some ways it could be. What it actually means in some cases is that the type of argument you passed to acl(2) isn''t supported by this file system. Both are being fixed, as are other programs such as star.> If I''d have to give a list of complaint on ZFS, that would be the first on my list ! Sun SHOULD make pressure on backup software editor (or send them some engineer) to support ZFS.Sun does not control the release schedule of 3rd party software. Sun gave them plenty of heads up, IIRC they knew about this issue even before the first Solaris Express binaries shipped with ZFS or the source hit OpenSolaris.org. Fixes are in progress but 3rd parties will release their patches and their new releases when they are ready. If you are a customer of either of those products it often helps if you put pressure on them. -- Darren J Moffat
Darren J Moffat <Darren.Moffat at Sun.COM> wrote:> There is no such thing as POSIX ACLs. The draft never made it to > standard. Veritas NetBackup and Legato Networker both use the Solaris > acl(2) system call to get POSIX draft ACLs from UFS. ZFS and NFSv4 use > a more modern and much more expressive form of ACLs. The acl(2) system > call was extended in a compatible way for them, but some backup programs > assume that acl(2) returning ENOSYS is fatal - in some ways it could be. > What it actually means in some cases is that the type of argument > you passed to acl(2) isn''t supported by this file system.Sun did have ACLs in 1994 already, but then theACL system was not really useful because of feature problems. Then around Y2000, ACLs became really useful, the POSIX draft was withdrawn and other OS like FreeBSD, Linux and IRIX started supporting it. Since August 2001, star supports POSIX ACLs in a platform neutral way that allows it to become a future POSIX tar extension.> Both are being fixed, as are other programs such as star....> Sun does not control the release schedule of 3rd party software. SunFor ACLs and star, I need to say that Sun did make it hard for me to support. Sun''s tar did support ACLs for a long time but in a way that is a vendor unique POSIX.1-1988 extension and that makes it impossible to ever get standardized by POSIX. In addition there has been a severe conceptional bug that made it impossible to use the ACL feature of Sun tar in a senseful way. Although I files a bug against Sun tar ACL handling in 2001 and altough I did have a discussion with Jeff Bonwick about ACL support in ZFS and star vs. the buggy Sun tar in September 2004, Sun did create a Sun tar version what is still based on the problematic P.1-1988 extensions and that still had the same conceptional bugs as Sun tar had with UFS ACLs. In addition, the library to convert ACLs to/from strings was broken the same way as Sun tar. This kind of habbit is something that prevents software from outside Sun to adopt new features early.... Note that the way star supports ACLs has a good chance to be adopted by POSIX as it cleanly sits on toip of POSIX.1-2001. J?rg -- EMail:joerg at schily.isdn.cs.tu-berlin.de (home) J?rg Schilling D-13353 Berlin js at cs.tu-berlin.de (uni) schilling at fokus.fraunhofer.de (work) Blog: http://schily.blogspot.com/ URL: http://cdrecord.berlios.de/old/private/ ftp://ftp.berlios.de/pub/schily