No Backup possible with BE - Veritas Backup Exec

This is a discussion on No Backup possible with BE - Veritas Backup Exec ; Once again... Hi all, we are using BE 8.5 on a NT4.0 Server with SP 6a. There is a Backup Job for every day backing up all data on the server. When our 'tape administrator' forgot to change the tape ...

+ Reply to Thread
Results 1 to 2 of 2

Thread: No Backup possible with BE

  1. No Backup possible with BE

    Once again...

    Hi all,
    we are using BE 8.5 on a NT4.0 Server with SP 6a. There is a Backup Job for
    every day backing up all data on the server.
    When our 'tape administrator' forgot to change the tape on - for example -
    monday and inserts the right tape on tuesday this tape gets ejected because
    BE is still waiting for the monday tape. Is there a work around for this
    problem. What about holidays when nobody is available for changing tapes and
    BE is always waiting for the tape for that particular tape.
    Please help us.





  2. Re: No Backup possible with BE

    For holidays, have a look at the Advanced Scheduling options. For other
    times, I suggest a very large stick. You can always abort jobs that are
    waiting for a mount. If the load message keeps coming up, press Cancel.
    Sometimes you may have to load a tape, just to keep it happy, but it
    shouldn't write to it.

    Ken McNulty

    Jörg Krueger wrote in message
    news:3b1cbdb0@hronntp01....
    > Once again...
    >
    > Hi all,
    > we are using BE 8.5 on a NT4.0 Server with SP 6a. There is a Backup Job

    for
    > every day backing up all data on the server.
    > When our 'tape administrator' forgot to change the tape on - for example -
    > monday and inserts the right tape on tuesday this tape gets ejected

    because
    > BE is still waiting for the monday tape. Is there a work around for this
    > problem. What about holidays when nobody is available for changing tapes

    and
    > BE is always waiting for the tape for that particular tape.
    > Please help us.
    >
    >
    >
    >




+ Reply to Thread