Vitaliy S. wrote:Alex, can you please tell us what issues you're experiencing with this storage? Are they performance related? What is your configuration?
mongie wrote:Firstly, that we're not achieving the dedupe ratio that is advertised (We get 4:1 at best, they advertise 10-15:1).
mongie wrote:Vitaliy - Is there any way to scan files on disk for their Dedupe/Compression ratio as seen by Veeam? Apparently, despite Local Target Dedupe being enabled, we're still only seenig 1.0x or perhaps 1.1x dedupe displayed in Veeam.
If we could get some assistance in determining whether Veeam is in fact the culprit (at least for the dedupe ratio) that may assist.
My colleague was told by Veeam support that we should not use backup copy jobs on our dedupe appliance, because they use a transform process.
We're currently running backup copies with the same appliance as source and destination of the copy, which I realize is going to impact performance.
v.Eremin wrote:It's not advised to point both backup and backup copy jobs to one location, since in case of disaster you will inevitably loose primary backups, as well as, secondary copies.
If applicable, use some local disks on backup server as a target for backup job (short retention), and copy data afterwards to the said dedupe appliance via backup copy job (longer retention).
Users browsing this forum: Ben Milligan, Google [Bot], Google Feedfetcher, Yahoo [Bot] and 15 guests