NTBackup will not see Tape Drive - Calgarypuck Forums - The Unofficial Calgary Flames Fan Community

OilKiller · 08-30-2011, 03:23 PM

Ugh...working on server 2003 here at work. We have NTBackup backing up to several hard drives on a rotating weekly basis, but we want to be able to once a month take the backup file created and write it to the attached tape drive to take the tape off site.

For some reason, NTBackup will not see the tape drive. We have BackupExec installed as well and it does see the tape drive. Really want to stop using BackupExec as we just want to be able to write the backup created to the tape drive when required, simply and easily with NTBackup.

As you can see by the screen shot, NTBackup only wants to create a "file" backup. It does not have a tape drive option available, but in the Device Manager, you can see the tape drive is installed. Anyone have any ideas why NTBackup would not see the tape drive?

Frank MetaMusil · 08-30-2011, 03:48 PM

Is the drive enabled?

Go into Control Panel > Administrative Tools > Computer Management
Expand the tree called Storage > Removable Storage > Libraries. Your tape drive will now be visible.

Right click on the tape drive, and select Properties. Make sure the enable drive checkbox is checked (obviously)

And LTO2? Your work needs to upgrade man....lol

Rathji · 08-30-2011, 03:53 PM

It normally does see it?

Try uninstalling the drive in device manager, making sure you have a copy of the driver available.

If it doesnt normally see it, or has never seen it, then make sure it is installed correctly in Disk management. edit: What frank said

I know this doesn't answer your question, but why dont you just take a hard drive offsite if NT backup to hard drive is what you have configured? Seems like a lot less hassle, even counting the extra measures you would need to take to ensure the drive does not get damaged.

OilKiller · 08-30-2011, 04:03 PM

Says it's enabled under Properties. When I remove the check and recheck it, apply, says the operation cannot be performed on an offline library.

Yes, I know it's old...

Yes, I know it would be easier to simply remove one of the server drives, but when the boss wants something a certain way...well...

sclitheroe · 08-30-2011, 04:09 PM

It's because BackupExec is installed...you'll need to uninstall the product and its drivers. Google around for it, but this is the reason.

Personally, I don't know why you wouldn't stick with BackupExec - I'm almost positive the backups it creates can be read backwards compatible by NTBackup, and you get better reporting, cataloging, and scheduling to boot.

OilKiller · 08-30-2011, 04:17 PM

Thanks. I will see if the boss will allow me to uninstall BackupExec now. I wanted to before, but he said to hold off for now. Agreed, it is a POS and the reason why we were not going to use it anymore and simply go with NTBackup.

Rathji · 08-30-2011, 05:51 PM

Backup exec will allow mutiple machines to be backed up to a single tape though.

Interesting note: on Windows Server 2008, you can run both at the same tine with no issues that I have seen. We back up all servers through our DC to tape and our DC backups using NT backup.

sclitheroe · 08-30-2011, 06:10 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by OilKiller

Thanks. I will see if the boss will allow me to uninstall BackupExec now. I wanted to before, but he said to hold off for now. Agreed, it is a POS and the reason why we were not going to use it anymore and simply go with NTBackup.

It's hardly a POS, and its as close to industry standard in the SMB (and even enterprise) space as you can get. One of its strengths is that it is used EVERYWHERE...in a true emergency, you could walk into almost any IT shop or IT consultancy, and they could read and restore your data for you. (edit: yes, the same could be said of NTBackup, but for what it does, BE is pretty competent, love it or hate it)

OilKiller · 08-30-2011, 06:52 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by sclitheroe

It's hardly a POS, and its as close to industry standard in the SMB (and even enterprise) space as you can get. One of its strengths is that it is used EVERYWHERE...in a true emergency, you could walk into almost any IT shop or IT consultancy, and they could read and restore your data for you. (edit: yes, the same could be said of NTBackup, but for what it does, BE is pretty competent, love it or hate it)

Well, we spent a lot of time screwing around with it trying to restore a single file. Ran into all kinds of problems, Symantec wasn't much help, configuring backups is a pain in the a**...dunno, just don't like it.

TorqueDog · 08-30-2011, 08:22 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by sclitheroe

It's hardly a POS, and its as close to industry standard in the SMB (and even enterprise) space as you can get. One of its strengths is that it is used EVERYWHERE...in a true emergency, you could walk into almost any IT shop or IT consultancy, and they could read and restore your data for you. (edit: yes, the same could be said of NTBackup, but for what it does, BE is pretty competent, love it or hate it)

Symantec has released a LOT of poor versions of Backup Exec and I - up until my change to focus strictly on unified communications - have many a time been the poor sap sent in to fix a Backup Exec deployment that has crapped the bed.

As far as the enterprise space, NetBackup seems to be the preferred solution there if you're looking strictly at Symantec's solutions. Particularly because most large enterprises aren't exclusively Windows shops on the back-end. Backup Exec also cannot write simultaneously to more than one disk for a given job.

Frank MetaMusil · 08-30-2011, 08:30 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by TorqueDog

As far as the enterprise space, NetBackup seems to be the preferred solution there if you're looking strictly as Symantec's solutions. Particularly because most large enterprises aren't exclusively Windows shops on the back-end.

We use only NetBackup across canada and none of our backend servers are windows, everything is either unix or linux. Symantec has even rolled out some crazy appliances that do dedupe/media server/replication all in one. Those run linux as well.

TorqueDog · 08-30-2011, 08:34 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Frank MetaMusil

We use only NetBackup across canada and none of our backend servers are windows, everything is either unix or linux. Symantec has even rolled out some crazy appliances that do dedupe/media server/replication all in one. Those run linux as well.

Right, because while the Backup Exec Client Agent supports *NIX and Windows, the BE Media Server is exclusively a Windows application. NetBackup's media server will happily live on either Windows or *NIX.

sclitheroe · 08-30-2011, 08:39 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by TorqueDog

Symantec has released a LOT of poor versions of Backup Exec and I - up until my change to focus strictly on unified communications - have many a time been the poor sap sent in to fix a Backup Exec deployment that has crapped the bed.

Yeah, I'm certainly not going to claim it's perfect or that it's had an unbroken string of great releases

But I do think it gets a bad rep when a lot of the blame needs to be laid on poor training, poor implementations, and general neglect and lack of ongoing testing/verification once deployed. That's been my ongoing experience cleaning up BE gone bad as well.

Frank MetaMusil · 08-30-2011, 08:55 PM

One of the worst steps with a bad BE implementation used to be calling a cranky old lady in rural Alberta to change the tape out at 3am....lol

sclitheroe · 08-30-2011, 09:04 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Frank MetaMusil

One of the worst steps with a bad BE implementation used to be calling a cranky old lady in rural Alberta to change the tape out at 3am....lol

Ugh!