Use of ontape and onbar simultaneous

Good afternoon everyone We do implemented an onbar-based backup policy for tape using netbackup. With it we do a level zero backup once a week and level 1 on other days. However, I would also like to have backups to disk because in certain situations it may represent a faster way to restore. To do this I would use the ontape. I would like to make sure that these two tools, ontape and onbar, work completely independent and with separate records. Actually I would like to be sure that when doing a level 1 backup with the onbar it contains everything from the last level zero onbar backup even though in the meantime I have performed a level zero backup using ontape. Best regards Pedro Neves --94eb2c0344f0d6c857054d70f101

> On 18 Apr 2017, at 14:32, Pedro Ivo <pedroivomz@gmail.com> wrote: > > Good afternoon everyone > > We do implemented an onbar-based backup policy for tape using netbackup. > With it we do a level zero backup once a week and level 1 on other days. > > However, I would also like to have backups to disk because in certain > situations it may represent a faster way to restore. To do this I would use > the ontape. > > I would like to make sure that these two tools, ontape and onbar, work > completely independent and with separate records. Actually I would like to > be sure that when doing a level 1 backup with the onbar it contains > everything from the last level zero onbar backup even though in the > meantime I have performed a level zero backup using ontape. Y THO?

Original post: Good afternoon everyone We do implemented an onbar-based backup policy for tape using netbackup. With it we do a level zero backup once a week and level 1 on other days. However, I would also like to have backups to disk because in certain situations it may represent a faster way to restore. To do this I would use the ontape. I would like to make sure that these two tools, ontape and onbar, work completely independent and with separate records. Actually I would like to be sure that when doing a level 1 backup with the onbar it contains everything from the last level zero onbar backup even though in the meantime I have performed a level zero backup using ontape. Best regards Pedro Neves Response: The product doesn't work like that. There is no distinction between tools when doing any of the backups. So if you take a level 0 with ontape and then a level 0 with onbar, then the next level 1 will only be good for the last level 0 taken (so in this example it would only go with the onbar backup). Jacques Renaut IBM Informix Advanced Support

Thank you all Jacques... What I would like to confirm is that a level 0 backup made with ontape (after a level 0 onbar backup and before a level 1 onbar backup) will not ruin the onbar set. This could occur if when we make a level 1 onbar backup the tool only check when a last level 0 backup was made without looking at whether it was done with ontape or onbar. Best Regards 2017-04-18 15:59 GMT+02:00 JACQUES RENAUT <jrenaut@us.ibm.com>: > Original post: > > Good afternoon everyone > > We do implemented an onbar-based backup policy for tape using netbackup. > With it we do a level zero backup once a week and level 1 on other days. > > However, I would also like to have backups to disk because in certain > situations it may represent a faster way to restore. To do this I would use > the ontape. > > I would like to make sure that these two tools, ontape and onbar, work > completely independent and with separate records. Actually I would like to > be sure that when doing a level 1 backup with the onbar it contains > everything from the last level zero onbar backup even though in the > meantime I have performed a level zero backup using ontape. > > Best regards > > Pedro Neves > > Response: > > The product doesn't work like that. There is no distinction between tools > when > doing any of the backups. So if you take a level 0 with ontape and then a > level 0 with onbar, then the next level 1 will only be good for the last > level > 0 taken (so in this example it would only go with the onbar backup). > > Jacques Renaut > IBM Informix Advanced Support > > > ************************************************************ > ******************* > Forum Note: Use "Reply" to post a response in the discussion forum. > > --001a11487454b47bab054d71d302

As ontape does not use a storage manager, you would not update your ixbar file when backing up and there would be no record of it come restore time. Therefore I would expect a restore using L0 plus a L1 from Netbackup/onbar still to work. Jacques has pointed out a potential pitfall when taking a level 1 backup. I would politely ask why you can't let your Netbackup policies handle this by doing a disk backup first and then archive to tape. A disk-based parallel Netbackup/onbar restore is far faster than other methods like ontape (and also ifxclone) as well as seamlessly recovering your logical logs. Ben.

What you're trying to do can risk the ability to recover the instance with level 1s, so don't mix the 2 utilities. If you really want to have extra ontape backup, then schedule it to run AFTER last onbar level 1 backup and just BEFORE the next onbar level 0 -- not the other way around, am I wrong anyone? Let's go GreenThis email contains 100% recycled electrons. From: Pedro Ivo <pedroivomz@gmail.com> To: ids@iiug.org Sent: Tuesday, April 18, 2017 10:37 AM Subject: Re: Use of ontape and onbar simultaneous [38966] Thank you all Jacques... What I would like to confirm is that a level 0 backup made with ontape (after a level 0 onbar backup and before a level 1 onbar backup) will not ruin the onbar set. This could occur if when we make a level 1 onbar backup the tool only check when a last level 0 backup was made without looking at whether it was done with ontape or onbar. Best Regards 2017-04-18 15:59 GMT+02:00 JACQUES RENAUT <jrenaut@us.ibm.com>: > Original post: > > Good afternoon everyone > > We do implemented an onbar-based backup policy for tape using netbackup. > With it we do a level zero backup once a week and level 1 on other days. > > However, I would also like to have backups to disk because in certain > situations it may represent a faster way to restore. To do this I would use > the ontape. > > I would like to make sure that these two tools, ontape and onbar, work > completely independent and with separate records. Actually I would like to > be sure that when doing a level 1 backup with the onbar it contains > everything from the last level zero onbar backup even though in the > meantime I have performed a level zero backup using ontape. > > Best regards > > Pedro Neves > > Response: > > The product doesn't work like that. There is no distinction between tools > when > doing any of the backups. So if you take a level 0 with ontape and then a > level 0 with onbar, then the next level 1 will only be good for the last > level > 0 taken (so in this example it would only go with the onbar backup). > > Jacques Renaut > IBM Informix Advanced Support > > > ************************************************************ > ******************* > Forum Note: Use "Reply" to post a response in the discussion forum. > > --001a11487454b47bab054d71d302 ******************************************************************************* Forum Note: Use "Reply" to post a response in the discussion forum.

Possible option1:If you want to back up to disk, and if you're using version 12.10, then, set up PSM, this allows onbar to run backup to disk WITHOUT using a storage manager. Possible option2:If your database is not that big (< 100G ?), use ontape and set it up to back up to directory -- level 0, 1, and/or 2 can all be done including logical log. Restore is also simple. Backup directories should then be archived to tape. Let's go GreenThis email contains 100% recycled electrons. From: BENJAMIN THOMPSON <benjamin.thompson@skybettingandgaming.com> To: ids@iiug.org Sent: Tuesday, April 18, 2017 10:53 AM Subject: Re: Use of ontape and onbar simultaneous [38968] As ontape does not use a storage manager, you would not update your ixbar file when backing up and there would be no record of it come restore time. Therefore I would expect a restore using L0 plus a L1 from Netbackup/onbar still to work. Jacques has pointed out a potential pitfall when taking a level 1 backup. I would politely ask why you can't let your Netbackup policies handle this by doing a disk backup first and then archive to tape. A disk-based parallel Netbackup/onbar restore is far faster than other methods like ontape (and also ifxclone) as well as seamlessly recovering your logical logs. Ben. ******************************************************************************* Forum Note: Use "Reply" to post a response in the discussion forum.

These are good options in general but if you have Netbackup I would recommend managing it all in there. PSM is surely for if you don't have a third party storage manager? Ben.

Original post: Thank you all Jacques... What I would like to confirm is that a level 0 backup made with ontape (after a level 0 onbar backup and before a level 1 onbar backup) will not ruin the onbar set. This could occur if when we make a level 1 onbar backup the tool only check when a last level 0 backup was made without looking at whether it was done with ontape or onbar. Best Regards Response: I'm not sure I know exactly what you mean by "ruin the onbar set". If you had a lvl 0 onbar backup, then took a lvl 0 ontape backup, and then took a lvl 1 onbar backup. That combo of lvl 0 and 1 onbar backups would not be good. The pages on the lvl 1 onbar backup would not contain all the changes since the last lvl 0 onbar backup but rather just the changes since the last lvl 0 backup which was an ontape backup. I'm not sure if the server has any code in place to prevent this (I'm doubtful and suspect it probably would let you do this). I think trying to mix onbar and ontape physical backups is going to be complex and risky (should any mistake be made it could invalidate the archives from being able to be restored and having them contain all the correct pages when using both lvl 0 and 1 archives in your restore). I think you would be better off trying to examine other solutions suggested in other responses, like the netbackup to disk option. Jacques Renaut IBM Informix Advanced Support

Wouldn't ontape's -F switch ("fake backup") solve this? The ontape backup=20 wouldn'b be affected, i.e. it would be a full-fledged backup, yet it=20 wouldn't be recorded (in reserved pages) and thus not confuse onbar level=20 0 / 1 backups. Not really recommended usage, though. A. From: "JACQUES RENAUT" <jrenaut@us.ibm.com> To: ids@iiug.org Date: 18.04.2017 20:04 Subject: Re: Use of ontape and onbar simultaneous [38975] Sent by: ids-bounces@iiug.org Original post:=20 Thank you all=20 Jacques... What I would like to confirm is that a level 0 backup made with = ontape (after a level 0 onbar backup and before a level 1 onbar backup)=20 will not ruin the onbar set. This could occur if when we make a level 1=20 onbar backup the tool only check when a last level 0 backup was made=20 without looking at whether it was done with ontape or onbar.=20 Best Regards=20 Response:=20 I'm not sure I know exactly what you mean by "ruin the onbar set". If you=20 had=20 a lvl 0 onbar backup, then took a lvl 0 ontape backup, and then took a lvl = 1=20 onbar backup. That combo of lvl 0 and 1 onbar backups would not be good.=20 The=20 pages on the lvl 1 onbar backup would not contain all the changes since=20 the=20 last lvl 0 onbar backup but rather just the changes since the last lvl 0=20 backup which was an ontape backup. I'm not sure if the server has any code = in=20 place to prevent this (I'm doubtful and suspect it probably would let you=20 do=20 this). I think trying to mix onbar and ontape physical backups is going to = be=20 complex and risky (should any mistake be made it could invalidate the=20 archives=20 from being able to be restored and having them contain all the correct=20 pages=20 when using both lvl 0 and 1 archives in your restore). I think you would=20 be=20 better off trying to examine other solutions suggested in other responses, = like the netbackup to disk option.=20 Jacques Renaut=20 IBM Informix Advanced Support=20 ***************************************************************************= ****=20 Forum Note: Use "Reply" to post a response in the discussion forum.=20