-
- Enthusiast
- Posts: 35
- Liked: never
- Joined: Jun 25, 2009 6:55 pm
- Full Name: Martin Schedlbauer
- Contact:
Problems after v5 upgrade
I upgraded to v5 yesterday.
Here are the issues I encountered so far.
1) After the upgrade the settings for 'Automatic Notifications' by mail and 'VM Notes' were lost for all my jobs
2) The settings to enable 'VMWare tools quiesence' were lost
3) The backup method was set to 'Reverse incremental'. I expected it to stay 'Traditional incremental' because that was how it worked with v 4.1.2.
In order to make it work like before, I have to change the backup-settings backup to Incremental with 'enable Synthetic Full'.
Is that right ?
Is there a way to change the 'Automatic Notifications' by mail for more than one job at the same time ?
Kind regards
Martin
Here are the issues I encountered so far.
1) After the upgrade the settings for 'Automatic Notifications' by mail and 'VM Notes' were lost for all my jobs
2) The settings to enable 'VMWare tools quiesence' were lost
3) The backup method was set to 'Reverse incremental'. I expected it to stay 'Traditional incremental' because that was how it worked with v 4.1.2.
In order to make it work like before, I have to change the backup-settings backup to Incremental with 'enable Synthetic Full'.
Is that right ?
Is there a way to change the 'Automatic Notifications' by mail for more than one job at the same time ?
Kind regards
Martin
-
- Enthusiast
- Posts: 35
- Liked: never
- Joined: Jun 25, 2009 6:55 pm
- Full Name: Martin Schedlbauer
- Contact:
Re: Problems after v5 upgrade
I checked the User guide again and realized that 'Reverse incremental' is the way backups worked in 4.1.2.
But in 4.1.2 the synthetic full-backup is named Jobname.vbk, now it is named Jobname%Date%%Time%.vbk.
Can I change that to Jobname.vbk ?
But in 4.1.2 the synthetic full-backup is named Jobname.vbk, now it is named Jobname%Date%%Time%.vbk.
Can I change that to Jobname.vbk ?
-
- Enthusiast
- Posts: 54
- Liked: never
- Joined: Jan 19, 2010 12:59 pm
- Contact:
Re: Problems after v5 upgrade
I also noticed this and I was very happy the date was added!
I regularly take the VBK files home on external HDs and I always had to manually rename the files to include the date (because I also want to keep some history on the external HD). So, this saves me quite a lot of rename actions
I also can't really see the disadvantage of having the datestamp in the filename.
I regularly take the VBK files home on external HDs and I always had to manually rename the files to include the date (because I also want to keep some history on the external HD). So, this saves me quite a lot of rename actions
I also can't really see the disadvantage of having the datestamp in the filename.
-
- VP, Product Management
- Posts: 27325
- Liked: 2778 times
- Joined: Mar 30, 2009 9:13 am
- Full Name: Vitaliy Safarov
- Contact:
Re: Problems after v5 upgrade
Hello Martin,
That's correct, a Synthetic backup was renamed to Reversed Incremental as well as the date stamp was added to the VBK file name. Could you please elaborate why do you want to switch back to the previous naming convention for VBK files?
As for 'VMWare tools quiesence' and 'Automatic Notifications' settings losses...we've just confirmed this behavior, thank you for noticing it, we will fix it in the next update for 5.0
I believe there could be a possibility to mass configure the jobs to set automatic notifications, but that would require manual SQL database editing, which I wouldn't recommend to do. By the way what is the number of jobs in question?
Thanks!
That's correct, a Synthetic backup was renamed to Reversed Incremental as well as the date stamp was added to the VBK file name. Could you please elaborate why do you want to switch back to the previous naming convention for VBK files?
As for 'VMWare tools quiesence' and 'Automatic Notifications' settings losses...we've just confirmed this behavior, thank you for noticing it, we will fix it in the next update for 5.0
I believe there could be a possibility to mass configure the jobs to set automatic notifications, but that would require manual SQL database editing, which I wouldn't recommend to do. By the way what is the number of jobs in question?
Thanks!
-
- Enthusiast
- Posts: 35
- Liked: never
- Joined: Jun 25, 2009 6:55 pm
- Full Name: Martin Schedlbauer
- Contact:
Re: Problems after v5 upgrade
I have about 90 jobs. I will edit them manually. Thats not such a big problem.
Greetings
Martin
Greetings
Martin
-
- VP, Product Management
- Posts: 27325
- Liked: 2778 times
- Joined: Mar 30, 2009 9:13 am
- Full Name: Vitaliy Safarov
- Contact:
Re: Problems after v5 upgrade
Wow that's huge, sorry for the inconvenience it may cause for you to edit each job. Just out of curiosity... do you use 1 VM per job or you are a pretty big IT shop?
-
- Enthusiast
- Posts: 54
- Liked: never
- Joined: Jan 19, 2010 12:59 pm
- Contact:
Re: Problems after v5 upgrade
...or perhaps you hit the zero after the nine and only have 9 jobs?
-
- Enthusiast
- Posts: 35
- Liked: never
- Joined: Jun 25, 2009 6:55 pm
- Full Name: Martin Schedlbauer
- Contact:
Re: Problems after v5 upgrade
I use mostly 1-3 VMs per job.
I also have backup- and replica-jobs. I know that I could/should use more vms per job, but I felt more comfortable doing it like this.
I will have to rethink that approach.
Is there a workaround for the problem with the name oft the vbk-files . In 4.1.2 the full-synthetic-backup is named Jobname.vbk, now it is named Jobname%Date%%Time%.vbk.
The name is important because I daily backup all the vbk-files to tape using BackupExec. I created a Backup-Job in BEX containing all the vbk-filenames. If that name changes daily, my backup does not work any longer.
I also have backup- and replica-jobs. I know that I could/should use more vms per job, but I felt more comfortable doing it like this.
I will have to rethink that approach.
Is there a workaround for the problem with the name oft the vbk-files . In 4.1.2 the full-synthetic-backup is named Jobname.vbk, now it is named Jobname%Date%%Time%.vbk.
The name is important because I daily backup all the vbk-files to tape using BackupExec. I created a Backup-Job in BEX containing all the vbk-filenames. If that name changes daily, my backup does not work any longer.
-
- Veteran
- Posts: 391
- Liked: 39 times
- Joined: Jun 08, 2010 2:01 pm
- Full Name: Joerg Riether
- Contact:
Re: Problems after v5 upgrade
Yeah you SHOULD add more vms to a job because the dedup engine can give you great storage savings.
Yeah Yeah the Fullbackup Problem with Backup Exec and the static file name also caught my attention. But don´t worry, you can very easily do that. Check this out:
Edit your BE selection the following way (assuming you do have a d:\veeam folder, reverse increments and always want to backup only the full file).
d:\veeam\*.* /subdir
d:\veeam\*.vbr /subdir /exclude
d:\veeam\*.* /subdir /exclude /accessdays:01
Now this works also without modification if you let´s say do a fullbackup on a certain day. It will work because it will skip all the vbrs and then backup only the files left which are not older than one day.
best regards
Joerg
Yeah Yeah the Fullbackup Problem with Backup Exec and the static file name also caught my attention. But don´t worry, you can very easily do that. Check this out:
Edit your BE selection the following way (assuming you do have a d:\veeam folder, reverse increments and always want to backup only the full file).
d:\veeam\*.* /subdir
d:\veeam\*.vbr /subdir /exclude
d:\veeam\*.* /subdir /exclude /accessdays:01
Now this works also without modification if you let´s say do a fullbackup on a certain day. It will work because it will skip all the vbrs and then backup only the files left which are not older than one day.
best regards
Joerg
-
- Enthusiast
- Posts: 35
- Liked: never
- Joined: Jun 25, 2009 6:55 pm
- Full Name: Martin Schedlbauer
- Contact:
Re: Problems after v5 upgrade
Thanks Joerg !
That worked great.
best regards
Martin
That worked great.
best regards
Martin
Who is online
Users browsing this forum: Bing [Bot], Google [Bot], marcos0317, mkretzer, paolosprea, Semrush [Bot] and 109 guests