broncomarc
asked on
Backup exec 8.6 system state backup failing due to \windows\system32\config\systemprofile directory
Something is creating a systemprofile directory under \windows\system32\config on one of my Windows 2003 servers. According to the link below, any user created directories under the config directory will fail the system state backup.
http://seer.support.veritas.com/docs/240385.htm
According to Microsoft, Windows 2003 creates this directory when an application or service used the LoadUserProfile API to load a user profile for a process running as the local system.
(Look under the heading System Profile about 1/3 of the way down on this page
http://www.microsoft.com/technet/prodtechnol/windowsserver2003/technologies/management/user01.mspx
I'm guessing Backup exec 8.6 came out before Microsoft started doing this with XP and 2003, so they don't account for it and they just mark the job as failed.
Is there a patch for 8.6 which will make it not fail the system state jobs when this directory exists?
- Marc
http://seer.support.veritas.com/docs/240385.htm
According to Microsoft, Windows 2003 creates this directory when an application or service used the LoadUserProfile API to load a user profile for a process running as the local system.
(Look under the heading System Profile about 1/3 of the way down on this page
http://www.microsoft.com/technet/prodtechnol/windowsserver2003/technologies/management/user01.mspx
I'm guessing Backup exec 8.6 came out before Microsoft started doing this with XP and 2003, so they don't account for it and they just mark the job as failed.
Is there a patch for 8.6 which will make it not fail the system state jobs when this directory exists?
- Marc
I think you should just upgrade to Backup Exec 10.0. Much nicer and smoother running on Server 2003 from my experience.
ASKER
That would be a last resort. This is actually for a client of ours. It would be a matter of convincing them the pay for the upgrade. I'd like to try to resolve the issue with 8.6 first.
Is 8.6 still officially supported by Veritas?
Is 8.6 still officially supported by Veritas?
ASKER
Any other ideas?
I've got a script that deletes the directory before the backup runs, but it doesn't always work. I'm even using Attrib, Cacls and Subinacl to take ownership and delete the directories.
Any idea what could be creating theses? Below is the directory structure that's there:
\WINDOWS\system32\config\s ystemprofi le\Applica tion Data\Microsoft\SystemCerti ficates\My
Sometimes there are 3 directories below My. There are no files at all. Just the directory structure.
My is the real pain. I usually can not even browse to it. It tells me access is denied even when I'm logged in as administrator.
I've got a script that deletes the directory before the backup runs, but it doesn't always work. I'm even using Attrib, Cacls and Subinacl to take ownership and delete the directories.
Any idea what could be creating theses? Below is the directory structure that's there:
\WINDOWS\system32\config\s
Sometimes there are 3 directories below My. There are no files at all. Just the directory structure.
My is the real pain. I usually can not even browse to it. It tells me access is denied even when I'm logged in as administrator.
ASKER
I came to the conclusion that Backup Exec wasn't designed for Windows 2003. It can't handle the subdirectories that it puts in the config directory.
My solution was to exclude the system state from the Backup Exec backup, use NTBackup to backup the system state and backup the backup file with Backup Exec.
You can close this question.
- Marc
My solution was to exclude the system state from the Backup Exec backup, use NTBackup to backup the system state and backup the backup file with Backup Exec.
You can close this question.
- Marc
broncomarc,
No comment has been added to this question in more than 21 days, so it is now classified as abandoned..
I will leave the following recommendation for this question in the Cleanup topic area:
PAQ / Refund
Any objections should be posted here in the next 4 days. After that time, the question will be closed.
Rindi
EE Cleanup Volunteer
No comment has been added to this question in more than 21 days, so it is now classified as abandoned..
I will leave the following recommendation for this question in the Cleanup topic area:
PAQ / Refund
Any objections should be posted here in the next 4 days. After that time, the question will be closed.
Rindi
EE Cleanup Volunteer
ASKER CERTIFIED SOLUTION
membership
This solution is only available to members.
To access this solution, you must be a member of Experts Exchange.