Discussion:
Third party backup tools
(too old to reply)
Anne R
2008-08-21 16:14:34 UTC
Permalink
Looking for info on any third party backup software anyone
may be using with ASE 12.5 (on AIX). We are currently using
legato, but are moving to TSM for our enterprise backup
solution. I am having to create scripts to backup 70+
databases to disk that will then get picked up by TSM.
thanks
Mark A. Parsons
2008-08-21 22:32:09 UTC
Permalink
Sorry, I don't know about any 3rd party tools, but just curious ...

You *do* know that if designed properly you should only need one script for backing up all 70+ databases, right?

[Can't tell from your post if you've already figured this or, or if you're trying to write/maintain 70+ different scripts.]
Post by Anne R
Looking for info on any third party backup software anyone
may be using with ASE 12.5 (on AIX). We are currently using
legato, but are moving to TSM for our enterprise backup
solution. I am having to create scripts to backup 70+
databases to disk that will then get picked up by TSM.
thanks
mpeppler@peppler.org
2008-08-22 11:17:56 UTC
Permalink
Post by Anne R
Looking for info on any third party backup software anyone
may be using with ASE 12.5 (on AIX).  We are currently using
legato, but are moving to TSM for our enterprise backup
solution. I am having to create scripts to backup 70+
databases to disk that will then get picked up by TSM.
thanks
At my previous job we used TSM as the backup solution. We had a fairly
straightforward script that did a database dump of all the databases
on a server (to disk), and then used the TSM command-line utility
(dsmc) to copy these files to TSM with the proper retention
parameters.
Assuming that you have standard paths to backup directories, etc, it's
relatively easy to do.

Michael
Mikhail Teterin
2008-10-21 16:25:05 UTC
Permalink
and then used the TSM command-line utility (dsmc) to copy
these files to TSM with the proper retention parameters.
If dsmc accepts the data on stdin (rather than via existing files), one
would, probably, rather use the pipe-plugin -- http://libpipe.com/

dump database foo to 'pipe::dsmc ......' [stripe on 'pipe::dsmc .....' ...]

Yours,

-mi

Bret Halford
2008-08-22 15:14:16 UTC
Permalink
Post by Anne R
Looking for info on any third party backup software anyone
may be using with ASE 12.5 (on AIX). We are currently using
legato, but are moving to TSM for our enterprise backup
solution. I am having to create scripts to backup 70+
databases to disk that will then get picked up by TSM.
thanks
Pretty easy to automate creation of such scrips. As
a simple example:

select "dump database " + name + " to /dumpdirectory/"
+ name + ".dmp" + char(10) + "go"
from master..sysdatabases
go
Jason L. Froebe [TeamSybase]
2008-08-24 07:08:08 UTC
Permalink
Post by Anne R
Looking for info on any third party backup software anyone
may be using with ASE 12.5 (on AIX). We are currently using
legato, but are moving to TSM for our enterprise backup
solution. I am having to create scripts to backup 70+
databases to disk that will then get picked up by TSM.
thanks
SQL Backtrack works quite well from what I'm told on AIX.
--
Jason L. Froebe
TeamSybase
http://www.froebe.net/blog
MyDatabases Free Magazine http://froebe.net/blog/mydatabases-magazine/
Derek Asirvadem
2008-08-26 02:17:13 UTC
Permalink
Much has been said, I'll address what is left.
1. You DO know that if you dump db to disk, then have whatever copy
the dump file to tape, upon recovery bing demanded, you will have to
restore the dump file, then load db from dump file. Are you sure you
want to do this ? Why not dump the db to a tape or tape silo or tape
library in the first place and cut out the two-step backup as well as
restore. Yes you will have two volume types.

2. I have used SQL BackTrack, Legato, etc. Not the "new" TSM. By far,
the best is NetBackup which has a Sybase "Knowledge Module" which lets
it understand sybase tran and db dumps; and you need to set up
BackupServer to see it. You dump db/tran to NetBackup; it returns an
image file name (which you record along with your db dump records)
which you reference when you load db/tran. Simple and clean from the
Sybase DBA side, and enterprise-scale on the common offsite volume side.

3 AFAIK, TSM supports MS/Oracle but does not support Sybase. Which
means as per (1) you may be better off maintaining a separate Sybase
tape library. Or live with the two-step backup/restore.
--
Cheers
Derek
Senior Sybase DBA / Information Architect
Copyright © 2008 Software Gems Pty Ltd
Quality Standards = Zero Maintenance + Zero Surprises
Performance Standards = Predictability + Scaleability
Jason L. Froebe [TeamSybase]
2008-08-26 02:29:33 UTC
Permalink
Much has been said, I'll address what is left.
1. You DO know that if you dump db to disk, then have whatever copy the
dump file to tape, upon recovery bing demanded, you will have to restore
the dump file, then load db from dump file. Are you sure you want to do
this ? Why not dump the db to a tape or tape silo or tape library in
the first place and cut out the two-step backup as well as restore. Yes
you will have two volume types.
2. I have used SQL BackTrack, Legato, etc. Not the "new" TSM. By far,
the best is NetBackup which has a Sybase "Knowledge Module" which lets
it understand sybase tran and db dumps; and you need to set up
BackupServer to see it. You dump db/tran to NetBackup; it returns an
image file name (which you record along with your db dump records) which
you reference when you load db/tran. Simple and clean from the Sybase
DBA side, and enterprise-scale on the common offsite volume side.
3 AFAIK, TSM supports MS/Oracle but does not support Sybase. Which
means as per (1) you may be better off maintaining a separate Sybase
tape library. Or live with the two-step backup/restore.
I agree with Derek. :)

One thing that hasn't been brought up yet in favor of the two step
backup to disk then to tape, is the fact that you aren't tied to having
access to a tape drive on whatever system you restore the backup to.
The down side is that you have to set aside a chunk of disk space that
might be used for something else.

Personally, I prefer the two step approach.
--
Jason L. Froebe
TeamSybase
http://www.froebe.net/blog
MyDatabases Free Magazine http://froebe.net/blog/mydatabases-magazine/
Derek Asirvadem
2008-08-26 04:18:14 UTC
Permalink
On 2008-08-26 12:29:33 +1000, "Jason L. Froebe [TeamSybase]"
One thing that hasn't been brought up yet in favor of the two step
backup to disk then to tape, is the fact that you aren't tied to having
access to a tape drive on whatever system you restore the backup to.
That is easy to get around. Find a system with a tape AND disk space
(well you should not be archiving tapes if you do not have a system
that can read them).

In Unix, it is pretty easy to mount remote tape drives. Don't know
about Linux.
--
Cheers
Derek
Senior Sybase DBA / Information Architect
Copyright © 2008 Software Gems Pty Ltd
Quality Standards = Zero Maintenance + Zero Surprises
Performance Standards = Predictability + Scaleability
Jeff Tallman
2008-08-29 18:22:07 UTC
Permalink
IRT #1, there are valid reasons for doing this (dump to disk first). At
many sites, the dump file on disk is retained for only a few days (i.e.
next 2 dumps), consequently restoral is faster as the speed of the disk
subsystem generally can outperform the tape library (tape libraries are
usually spec'd on capacity, the throughput just can't match a disks).
Yes this is more expensive and disks are certainly not as cheap as tape
- although some places have opted for cheaper storage (e.g. SATA-RAID
attached to SAN) for dump volumes to offset some of this cost. Part of
the reason for doing this is that tape volumes are sometimes required to
be stored offsite (due to legal or DR requirements) even on a daily
basis.....getting the tape back onsite can take longer than to restore
the tape. A third reason is that the disk dump can be mounted as an
archive database for offline dbcc checks, etc.

Additionally, some sites have gone to SAN dumps - in which a BCV or
other snapshot utility images the data devices - which are then either
written to tape directly within the SAN frame (or attached) or are
mounted on another server which does the backup....depends on how you
want to look at, SAN utilities can be viewed as a third party (or would
they be the mythical "second party")....how well it would be supported
depends on the SAN vendor. For example, some vendors can record just
the changed blocks as part of a snapshot - and consequently can provide
an almost incremental backup capability. Only problem is that generally
when restoring SAN based backups, the system has to be down. There are
ways around this via the mount/unmount device - but few people separate
their devices well enough to support this. One advantage of the SAN
dump is speed - the IOs never leave the frame - no CPU processing and no
HBA bandwidth issues.
Much has been said, I'll address what is left.
1. You DO know that if you dump db to disk, then have whatever copy the
dump file to tape, upon recovery bing demanded, you will have to restore
the dump file, then load db from dump file. Are you sure you want to do
this ? Why not dump the db to a tape or tape silo or tape library in
the first place and cut out the two-step backup as well as restore. Yes
you will have two volume types.
2. I have used SQL BackTrack, Legato, etc. Not the "new" TSM. By far,
the best is NetBackup which has a Sybase "Knowledge Module" which lets
it understand sybase tran and db dumps; and you need to set up
BackupServer to see it. You dump db/tran to NetBackup; it returns an
image file name (which you record along with your db dump records) which
you reference when you load db/tran. Simple and clean from the Sybase
DBA side, and enterprise-scale on the common offsite volume side.
3 AFAIK, TSM supports MS/Oracle but does not support Sybase. Which
means as per (1) you may be better off maintaining a separate Sybase
tape library. Or live with the two-step backup/restore.
Derek Asirvadem
2008-09-01 00:07:02 UTC
Permalink
Post by Jeff Tallman
IRT #1, there are valid reasons for doing this (dump to disk first).
At many sites, the dump file on disk is retained for only a few days
(i.e. next 2 dumps), consequently restoral is faster as the speed of
the disk subsystem generally can outperform the tape library (tape
libraries are usually spec'd on capacity, the throughput just can't
match a disks). Yes this is more expensive and disks are certainly not
as cheap as tape - although some places have opted for cheaper storage
(e.g. SATA-RAID attached to SAN) for dump volumes to offset some of
this cost. Part of the reason for doing this is that tape volumes are
sometimes required to be stored offsite (due to legal or DR
requirements) even on a daily basis.....getting the tape back onsite
can take longer than to restore the tape. A third reason is that the
disk dump can be mounted as an archive database for offline dbcc
checks, etc.
I was not addressing all readers, I was addressing OP. But please, do
feel free to provide a full and complete treatment of the subject.
Post by Jeff Tallman
Additionally, some sites have gone to SAN dumps - in which a BCV or
other snapshot utility images the data devices - which are then either
written to tape directly within the SAN frame (or attached) or are
mounted on another server which does the backup....depends on how you
want to look at, SAN utilities can be viewed as a third party (or would
they be the mythical "second party")....how well it would be supported
depends on the SAN vendor. For example, some vendors can record just
the changed blocks as part of a snapshot - and consequently can provide
an almost incremental backup capability. Only problem is that
generally when restoring SAN based backups, the system has to be down.
There are ways around this via the mount/unmount device - but few
people separate their devices well enough to support this. One
advantage of the SAN dump is speed - the IOs never leave the frame - no
CPU processing and no HBA bandwidth issues.
That's exactly why I have an Enhancement Request for an online Sybase
incremental database dump. With the server timestamp that we already
have, it is easy to recognise changed pages.
--
Cheers
Derek
Senior Sybase DBA / Information Architect
Copyright © 2008 Software Gems Pty Ltd
Quality Standards = Zero Maintenance + Zero Surprises
Performance Standards = Predictability + Scaleability
Mikhail Teterin
2008-10-21 16:21:35 UTC
Permalink
Post by Anne R
Looking for info on any third party backup software anyone
may be using with ASE 12.5 (on AIX). We are currently using
legato, but are moving to TSM for our enterprise backup
solution. I am having to create scripts to backup 70+
databases to disk that will then get picked up by TSM.
thanks
A not-so-shameless plug:

http://libpipe.com/

With this plugin you can send your dumps to any command-line directly --
without creating the intermediate file. The site offers some examples of
on-the-fly encryption, etc. You can also script a *direct* upload to your
off-site backup (via ssh, or ftp, etc.)

-mi
Loading...