Link to home
Start Free TrialLog in
Avatar of Bluewhale042399
Bluewhale042399Flag for United States of America

asked on

Next Level in backing up

We are JUST moving beyond normal backup hardware requirements. I've requested scopes and bids from our normal providers, however get the feeling that this moves into an area none of them really handle thus no bids. :[

We have always done a backup to hard drive as well as one to tape for off site storage. 5 days/week plus other backups on the weekends. We currently have an IBM LTO3 tape drive ( 400 gigs native ) and a Quantum S4 ( 800 gigs native ). We are using Backup Exec 11d and Bakbone Netvault ( at separate times ). Due to the fact that most of our data is JPEG's of job sites we get VERY little compression. I might get 880 gigs out of the S4 if lucky.

Our quarterly backup just topped 1.1 TB. I've heard hints of backup software that can back up more than one 'stream' at a time and other ideas to get this much data in a limited time frame. Could you point me in the right direction to resolve our time/size issues?


Paul
Avatar of honmapog
honmapog
Flag of Ireland image

Backing up data in multiple streams is especially useful if you back up data from multiple sources (multiple servers) where the speed of reading the files from the source storage is the bottleneck.
Most backup software can do multiple streams - but not Backup Exec. Examples are CommVault Galaxy/Simpana, CA ArcServe, Symantec NetBackup, EMC Networker, Tivoli Storage Manager, etc...


If you back up to disk as well as tape, you should use the staging features that most software products offer to move the data to tape from the disk backups, instead of getting the data from the source storage again. (Disk-to-disk-to-tape). You may be doing this already using the Backup Exec duplication feature.

Avatar of Bluewhale042399

ASKER

> You may be doing this already using the Backup Exec duplication feature.

No, we're actually doing multiple backups to tape and one large backup to disk each 24 hours.

I was concerned about the file server ( only one ) being a bottleneck. Would going to 10G networking between the server and backup server help?

Our IBM tape drive is actually attached to the file server directly. The BackupExec unit is across a 1gig LAN. However both offer similar speed for actual backups, so I presumed the bottleneck was in the OS or Tape drives.  

My hope was that I would be able to put tape drives in 3 or 4 PC's and backup to all at one time. sigh.

:]  I've read a little about BackupExec's Disk to Disk to Tape: we have the license but have not tried to implement it. Would it be correct to think of it as a slow mirroring? Slower but also much less costly than mirroring the 2 TB partition our files currently reside within.


Thanks

Paul
ASKER CERTIFIED SOLUTION
Avatar of honmapog
honmapog
Flag of Ireland image

Link to home
membership
This solution is only available to members.
To access this solution, you must be a member of Experts Exchange.
Start Free Trial
SOLUTION
Link to home
membership
This solution is only available to members.
To access this solution, you must be a member of Experts Exchange.
Start Free Trial
CPS? I thought Symantec referred to it as CDP.  

Thanks to both of you for your thoughts thus far. I've got to take/find some time to read up on what you've suggested and see what other questions pop up

Paul
CPS (Continuous Protection Server) is Backup Exec's add-on for doing CDP (Continuous Data Protection)