Backup script to Append
From: Gerhard (gerhardpremovethis_at_inch.com)
Date: 01/04/05
- Next message: Pravin Prabhu: "NTOSKRNL.exe Missing or Corrupt"
- Previous message: Gary Smith: "Re: Incorporating desktop shortcuts in to an unattended install"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Date: Mon, 3 Jan 2005 23:43:43 -0500
I'm reposting this here, because the rest of the thread seems to have
disappeared, at least on my client. Probably because of the title, not the
date.
This is the link that has the script, the article is by Mark Minasi:
http://www.winnetmag.com/Windows/Articles/ArticleID/25961/pg/2/2.html
My appends are still working, tommorow we change tapes, and we will see how
that goes. I don't expect anything unusual. There is of course much that
can be added to the basic scripts, such as job titles and ejects. But that
is a well known area.
Again, thanks to all who helped,
Gerhard
---------------------------- last message
12-30-04 ------------------------------
The scripts work, two scheduled append jobs just completed successfully. I
pared down the /um script considerably:
ntbackup backup @C:\winnt\backup.bks /v:yes /hc:on /m incremental /p "DLT"
/um
But the important thing is that the append script works. Mark Minasi did a
good thing with that. It made sense to me when I first looked at it: Start
with the known value and find the one that is constantly changing. It's
actually a beautiful piece. And it works.
BEGIN/END CALLOUT A is not recognized by the command processor. When I
googled it most of the references were to XML. But it does not break the
execution either. I eventually commented it out.
You are right, rsm is a trip. It is best to use prepared tapes, but I am
not finished experimenting with that. The fact that I am re-using old sql
tapes probably contributed to some of the problems. I'll report on the
eventual outcome of that next week.
It occurs to me that maybe we should put up a FAQ on NTBackup under W2K,
right now there is a lot of information out there by different people, but
it's scattered. I mean this must be a problem for other people as well?
Anyway, I want to wish everyone who participated in this thread a Happy New
Year, and I want to thank you all for sitting it through with me. Thank
you, you guys are great,
Gerhard
"Enkidu" <enkidu@xyzcliffpxyz.com> wrote in message
news:1ma2t0hakv6s4ev8lj6pgf0h0urj2ag103@4ax.com...
>
> I've used incrementals. They are a PIA, especially when the second or
> third tape refuses to work on a restore.... If you have a back spread
> over 5 tapes that is multiplying the possible points of failures by 5.
> OK, probably MORE than enough of that as you say!
>
> Gerhard, if you do get the script to work, please post back here, so
> that others can benefit.
>
> Cheers,
>
> Cliff
>
> On Tue, 28 Dec 2004 02:04:07 -0500, "Gerhard"
> <gerhardpremovethis@inch.com> wrote:
>
> >I wonder to what degree this overwhelming enthusiasm for full backups is
> >colored by the difficulty of doing incrementals, as it was introduced by
> >W2K? After all, doing an incremental backup with NT4 was no different
than
> >doing a full backup, only shorter.
> >
> >We are now wandering from a desire to solve the NTBackup problems of W2K
to
> >a wham bam thank you Mam, just use the /um switch and be done with it
> >argument.
> >
> >I am going to give that Guid retrieving script a try. It is entirely
> >possible that it does not work, and that there really is no way to append
> >backups under W2K. In that case I will be forced to do full backups,
> >whether I need them or not. And I will end up singing in the chorus.
> >
> >Gerhard
> >
> >"Enkidu" <enkidu@xyzcliffpxyz.com> wrote in message
> >news:69s1t0hc2qtdv7n2asjhtmlvv356qcik5h@4ax.com...
> >>
> >> I'll add my vote to the "full backup" lot. Also, I *don't* verify
> >> tapes but do do periodic tests of backups. When I have verified tapes,
> >> I don't recall a failure. Do you actually get many?
> >>
> >> Cheers,
> >>
> >> Cliff
> >>
> >> On Mon, 27 Dec 2004 22:30:37 -0500, "Gerhard"
> >> <gerhardpremovethis@inch.com> wrote:
> >>
> >> >Yeah, some of those full backups run for over 8 hrs with the verify
> >option
> >> >on, I can handle that once a week. But daily?
> >> >Also, it is virtually impossible to find the daily work in full
backups,
> >> >very easy with incremental backups.
> >> >Let's face it, backups are mostly used to get files back that people
> >> >accidentally delete, not to restore entire machines.
> >> >Gerhard
> >> >
> >> >"Leythos" <void@nowhere.lan> wrote in message
> >> >news:MPG.1c3a99559c83ef2c989d88@news-server.columbus.rr.com...
> >> >> In article <OY9f27G7EHA.1392@tk2msftngp13.phx.gbl>,
> >> >> gerhardpremovethis@inch.com says...
> >> >> > Ok, I see what the problem is, the /um switch does not allow you
to
> >> >append.
> >> >> > It simply overwrites the tape. This would be excellent to
initialize
> >> >the
> >> >> > tape. Our normal backup sequence is as follows:
> >> >> >
> >> >> > Tue - append a full backup to the existing tape
> >> >> > Wed - initialize a new tape with an incremental backup
> >> >> > Th,Fri, Mon - append incremental backups to existing tape
> >> >>
> >> >> Why would you not do a full backup every day?
> >> >>
> >> >> Incremental backups are such a PITA, if your tape will hold an
entire
> >> >> day, what's preventing you from just doing a full backup?
> >> >>
> >> >> I run full backups ONLY, never incremental, and I've been doing this
> >for
> >> >> more than 10 years, it's never failed me.
> >> >>
> >> >> --
> >> >> --
> >> >> spamfree999@rrohio.com
> >> >> (Remove 999 to reply to me)
> >> >
> >>
> >> --
> >>
> >> The National Party manifesto can be viewed here:
> >>
> >> http://www.labour.org.nz/policy/index.html
> >
>
> --
>
> The National Party manifesto can be viewed here:
>
> http://www.labour.org.nz/policy/index.html
- Next message: Pravin Prabhu: "NTOSKRNL.exe Missing or Corrupt"
- Previous message: Gary Smith: "Re: Incorporating desktop shortcuts in to an unattended install"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Relevant Pages
|
