Discussions related to exporting backups to tape and backing up directly to tape.
Post Reply
TommyB
Expert
Posts: 123
Liked: 16 times
Joined: Aug 28, 2013 9:46 am
Full Name: Thomas Braun
Location: Germany.Europe.Terra.Sol.Milkyway.Localgroup.Virgo
Contact:

Still missing important tape backup handling features

Post by TommyB »

Hi,

I'm still missing the following functionality in Veeam 7:

(I'm using a single standalone tape drive)

- Notify me via email when tape is full, add name(s) of "next free" tape(s) into this email.
- Option to eject tape when it is full
- Notify me via email when wrong tape is in tape drive.
- Option to define more than one person to be notified = multiple email addresses (this is nice-to-have, I could probably solve this by using distribution groups on my exchange server)

Thomas
Dima P.
Product Manager
Posts: 14396
Liked: 1568 times
Joined: Feb 04, 2013 2:07 pm
Full Name: Dmitry Popov
Location: Prague
Contact:

Re: Still missing important tape backup handling features

Post by Dima P. »

Hello Thomas,
Thank you for your feedback!
Notify me via email when tape is full, add name(s) of "next free" tape(s) into this email.
Correct me if I am wrong - you want to get a notification email containing the name of the tape(s) which is next in backup to tape operation?
Option to eject tape when it is full
This option is in the Tape Job settings - Eject media once the job finishes check box
- Notify me via email when wrong tape is in tape drive.
Same as the first one - notification that wrong tape is loaded and needs to be changed to the correct tape?
Option to define more than one person to be notified
Granular tape notification option was already added to the feature list; however currently it is possible in the general notifications for VBR to add multiple recipients “ ; “ (no quotes) separated.
veremin
Product Manager
Posts: 20270
Liked: 2252 times
Joined: Oct 26, 2012 3:28 pm
Full Name: Vladimir Eremin
Contact:

Re: Still missing important tape backup handling features

Post by veremin »

Option to eject tape when it is full
The QA team has just confirmed that if you have “Eject media once the job finishes” option enabled, the corresponding tape medium will be automatically ejected when it gets full and you will be asked to input another cassette in order for tape job to continue.

Thanks.
rgcooper
Novice
Posts: 4
Liked: never
Joined: Apr 26, 2013 8:13 pm
Full Name: Robert Cooper
Contact:

Re: Still missing important tape backup handling features

Post by rgcooper »

v.Eremin wrote: The QA team has just confirmed that if you have “Eject media once the job finishes” option enabled, the corresponding tape medium will be automatically ejected when it gets full and you will be asked to input another cassette in order for tape job to continue.

Thanks.
Odd, I had tried this with an IBM TS3500 library and after the job ran the tape stayed in the drive. Next, I tried to dump another Veeam tape backup to the same drive/tape and the backup job was waiting for the tape to mount (even though the tape was still in the drive). To work around, I used the TS3500 web gui to dismount and remount the tape in the drive which resulted in the Veeam tape backup job progressing and eventually finishing successfully.

Thomas, what previous backup environment are you coming from?
veremin
Product Manager
Posts: 20270
Liked: 2252 times
Joined: Oct 26, 2012 3:28 pm
Full Name: Vladimir Eremin
Contact:

Re: Still missing important tape backup handling features

Post by veremin »

Hi, Robert. Even before patch#1 was introduced, “Eject media once the job finishes” option had worked properly with tape libraries. So, if you’re experiencing different behavior, kindly, open a ticket with our support team and let them investigate it directly.

Thanks.
dualdj1
Enthusiast
Posts: 47
Liked: 4 times
Joined: Feb 05, 2013 6:56 pm
Full Name: Jason K. Brandt
Contact:

Re: Still missing important tape backup handling features

Post by dualdj1 »

I experience the same issue when the job is scheduled as: As new backup files appear. Could this be because the job is running continuous and never truly "ends", even though the current operation may be completed? Both my incremental and full tapes stayed in the drives of my library, until I ejected them. I would much prefer that they eject after the current set of passes on my backup jobs completes. Also, following erase operation, you have to manually eject the tapes as well. Can this be at least added as an option, if eject isn't the default post erase operation?

The manual eject command works just fine for me.
veremin
Product Manager
Posts: 20270
Liked: 2252 times
Joined: Oct 26, 2012 3:28 pm
Full Name: Vladimir Eremin
Contact:

Re: Still missing important tape backup handling features

Post by veremin »

Hi, Jason,

According to QA team, currently automatic ejecting doesn’t work in case of “continuous” job schedule. However, it should be fixed in one of the next product patches/releases.

Thanks.
dualdj1
Enthusiast
Posts: 47
Liked: 4 times
Joined: Feb 05, 2013 6:56 pm
Full Name: Jason K. Brandt
Contact:

Re: Still missing important tape backup handling features

Post by dualdj1 »

Thanks, maybe it's not realistic to have it eject right away, if you have jobs that trigger the tape backup, that have "gaps" in run time. Maybe a more realistic feature would be "eject after idle X min/hour". Appreciate you looking into it.
veremin
Product Manager
Posts: 20270
Liked: 2252 times
Joined: Oct 26, 2012 3:28 pm
Full Name: Vladimir Eremin
Contact:

Re: Still missing important tape backup handling features

Post by veremin »

Ok, thanks for the feedback. According to the recent information, this functionality will be added not in the patch, but in the next product release.
TommyB
Expert
Posts: 123
Liked: 16 times
Joined: Aug 28, 2013 9:46 am
Full Name: Thomas Braun
Location: Germany.Europe.Terra.Sol.Milkyway.Localgroup.Virgo
Contact:

Re: Still missing important tape backup handling features

Post by TommyB »

Hi,

just enabled the eject feature again after installing V8 last weekend... unfortunately, this is still not working as expected - or at least not as I would expect :wink:

The tape (no. 1 of 3) got ejected after it was full, but the tape job did not wait for the next tape to be inserted but instead stopped and sent an error notification by email:
Tape library: HP Ultrium 4-SCSI
Used tapes: FT_2.1
Tape not exchanged. Der Objektverweis wurde nicht auf eine Objektinstanz festgelegt.
The specified network name is no longer available
The specified network name is no longer available
The specified network name is no longer available
The specified network name is no longer available
Probably I need to open a support case for this.

Thomas
Dima P.
Product Manager
Posts: 14396
Liked: 1568 times
Joined: Feb 04, 2013 2:07 pm
Full Name: Dmitry Popov
Location: Prague
Contact:

Re: Still missing important tape backup handling features

Post by Dima P. »

Thomas,

Please open a support case and post the case ID to this thread, so I could forward it to QA team. Thank you.
TommyB
Expert
Posts: 123
Liked: 16 times
Joined: Aug 28, 2013 9:46 am
Full Name: Thomas Braun
Location: Germany.Europe.Terra.Sol.Milkyway.Localgroup.Virgo
Contact:

Re: Still missing important tape backup handling features

Post by TommyB »

Case ID: 00674591 - I also included full log information
Dima P.
Product Manager
Posts: 14396
Liked: 1568 times
Joined: Feb 04, 2013 2:07 pm
Full Name: Dmitry Popov
Location: Prague
Contact:

Re: Still missing important tape backup handling features

Post by Dima P. »

Thomas,

Thank you for the provided information, we will look into this.
Dima P.
Product Manager
Posts: 14396
Liked: 1568 times
Joined: Feb 04, 2013 2:07 pm
Full Name: Dmitry Popov
Location: Prague
Contact:

Re: Still missing important tape backup handling features

Post by Dima P. »

Thomas,

QA confirmed such behavior as unexpected. Please, continue working with support team, once the fix is ready they would let you know. Thank you for your patience and sorry for any inconvenience caused.
TommyB
Expert
Posts: 123
Liked: 16 times
Joined: Aug 28, 2013 9:46 am
Full Name: Thomas Braun
Location: Germany.Europe.Terra.Sol.Milkyway.Localgroup.Virgo
Contact:

Re: Still missing important tape backup handling features

Post by TommyB »

Support fixed this a few days ago via a hotfix.

But there still is an important functional difference between "eject when job finished" and "eject tape when full".

I'm running a weekly tape backup cycle that copies the nightly VM backups to tape the next morning each day.

So on Monday the backup fills 3 tapes with full backups - each of them gets ejected by the "eject when job finished" setting.

But since the last one is not completely filled, it should stay in the drive to be ready for the following tape backup cycle on Tuesday morning that adds new incremental backups from Monday night to the tape.

And despite the notification settings, I did not get any emails telling me to insert the next tape.
Dima P.
Product Manager
Posts: 14396
Liked: 1568 times
Joined: Feb 04, 2013 2:07 pm
Full Name: Dmitry Popov
Location: Prague
Contact:

Re: Still missing important tape backup handling features

Post by Dima P. »

Thomas,
I am glad hotfix helped you to get the issue resolved! We will look into eject options for further releases. Notification for ‘waiting tapes’ case will be enabled in the upcoming patch, however it will be pretty straightforward (since it is the patch and we can’t include any features into patches)
veremin
Product Manager
Posts: 20270
Liked: 2252 times
Joined: Oct 26, 2012 3:28 pm
Full Name: Vladimir Eremin
Contact:

Re: Still missing important tape backup handling features

Post by veremin »

For now you can probably put simple PS script into use. It will check the status of drive and let you know in accordance. Thanks.
TommyB
Expert
Posts: 123
Liked: 16 times
Joined: Aug 28, 2013 9:46 am
Full Name: Thomas Braun
Location: Germany.Europe.Terra.Sol.Milkyway.Localgroup.Virgo
Contact:

Re: Still missing important tape backup handling features

Post by TommyB » 2 people like this post

Thank you both - I wished all vendors I'm working with would be so quick and responsive like Veeam (you can quote me on that :-)

regards
Thomas
Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Bing [Bot] and 20 guests