From: JRD@USU.BITNET (Joe Doupnik)
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.novell
Subject: Re: various topics
Date: 16 Oct 92 17:15:15 GMT
Reply-To: Novell LAN Interest Group <NOVELL@SUVM.BITNET>
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
X-Envelope-to: NOVELL@SUVM.BITNET
X-VMS-To: IN%"NOVELL@SUVM.BITNET"
X-VMS-Cc: JRD
MIME-version: 1.0
Content-type: TEXT/PLAIN; CHARSET=US-ASCII
Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT

>
>Sorry if these are FAQ, but the red books do not seem to provide too many
>answers.
>
>1.  I have been building the Novell network under my own account, having
>given myself supervisor equivalent rights.  Recently I noticed that all the
>directories that I created in APPS and other public directories belong to
>me rather than to the (anonymous) supervisor or to the system itself.
>Could this create problems in the future; should I go back and recreate all
>those directories (oh what joy!) as the SUPERVISOR?
        Use FILER to change the ownership. Keeping ownership straight is
        a wise idea but not always necessary.

>2. In volume information, I came across the following chart which really
>makes no sense, given that I have at most two accounts with two three-word
>files in the INSTRUCT volume (I count a total of three directories: USERS
>and the two accounts under USERS, and three files including the VOL$LOG.ERR
>file in the root):
>
>                     SYS                 ADMIN              INSTRUCT
>                  Total   Free        Total    Free      Total      Free
>Kilobytes       307,200  259,360    512,000  503,124    456,192   454,332
>Directories       6,080    1,595      4,384      440        256       177
        This is NW 3.x. Directory entries are created as needed, and not
        removed from the system; it's dynamic. Look for deleted but not
        PURGEd files (FILER and SALVAGE, also look in sys:\deleted.sav on
        NW 3.11).
>Is this normal or is there something wrong?  If the latter, where would I
>find the answer to the problem?  Why should INSTRUCT be limited to 256
>directories compared to the number in the other volumes and claim that 79
>are used up?
>
>3. The backup system I will be using is external to the network, and
                                                  ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^you mean server
>therefore will not backup the Bindery.  Moreover, I was told during the
 ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ No. This is not true at all.
        My tape backup system normally resides on my PC, a DAT unit. The
backup software is Novaback from Novastor and it backs up both the bindery
and the trustee rights (located in directory structures rather than in
the bindery) across the net. A visible copy is easily made by running BINDFIX
and using the *.OLD files in sys:\system. Novaback is not unique in this
ability. However, PC personal/casual backup programs (Fastback, Norton, et al)
haven't a clue about NetWare and should be ignored when maintaining servers.
In a worst case situation they can be used and the bindery can be restored
later by BINDREST which uses the .OLD files above.
        You will soon discover that backing up to floppies is too time
consuming. A tape backup system is vastly superior, and more expensive.
The two kinds recommended for serious server work are DATs (4mm) and Exabytes
(8mm). DAT external drives (SCSI interface) can be purchased from $1500,
such as my Archive Python unit (good stuff), and Exabytes generally are
in the high $2K range and up. Ignore tape drives working off the floppy
controller (Colorado Mem Systems Jumbo class) as these are too slow and
unreliable to secure your server's contents over several years. Money
can buy quality here, but shop carefully to avoid paying 2X or 3X the
real value. Do not depend on Novell's SBACKUP at all, please.
>Thanks,
>Michael_Kessler@HUM.SFSU.EDU
        Joe D.
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.novell