Discussions specific to the Microsoft Hyper-V hypervisor
Post Reply
APangF1
Novice
Posts: 8
Liked: 1 time
Joined: Sep 18, 2018 9:54 pm
Full Name: Albert
Contact:

Phasing out Reverse Incremental?

Post by APangF1 »

Has there been discussion about phasing-out Reverse incremental? I saw a discussion where Gostev chimed in about this, but cannot find the posting again.

Reverse incremental is great when sending TB sized backups to tape, without having to create a synthetic full (uses more disk space) OR a virtual full (which incurs a heavy resource load on the backup repository server)

Keep reverse incremental for Hyper-V !!!

foggy
Veeam Software
Posts: 20250
Liked: 1909 times
Joined: Jul 11, 2011 10:22 am
Full Name: Alexander Fogelson
Contact:

Re: Phasing out Reverse Incremental?

Post by foggy »

Hi Albert, based on the usage stats and QC overhead we're phasing out the transform into rollbacks option. It will be hidden in v11 for the new product installations, and the plan is to completely remove it in v12. That said, reverse incremental mode will continue to exist.

Gostev
SVP, Product Management
Posts: 28533
Liked: 5138 times
Joined: Jan 01, 2006 1:01 am
Location: Baar, Switzerland
Contact:

Re: Phasing out Reverse Incremental?

Post by Gostev »

Here's our discussion about reverse incremental earlier this month. This basically explains that there are no use cases left for reversed incremental, specifically around tape. If you truly worry about the repository load, then you should definitely stop using reverse incremental mode regardless of whether it will remain (your perception of a virtual full is no longer correct as of v10). Thanks!

APangF1
Novice
Posts: 8
Liked: 1 time
Joined: Sep 18, 2018 9:54 pm
Full Name: Albert
Contact:

Re: Phasing out Reverse Incremental?

Post by APangF1 »

How is virtual full to tape improved on v10?

The reverse incremental option will be hidden in v11, but the mode will still exist ?!?

Thanks

Gostev
SVP, Product Management
Posts: 28533
Liked: 5138 times
Joined: Jan 01, 2006 1:01 am
Location: Baar, Switzerland
Contact:

Re: Phasing out Reverse Incremental?

Post by Gostev »

It was improved drastically... became like 4-5 times faster while reducing the overall storage load. In v11, the same tech will be applied to all reads from backup repositories (so also restores, backup copies, etc.)

Again, as foggy already stated above, nothing at all changes in v11 with the reverse incremental option. There's just no good reasons to use it any longer, at least for the reasons you stated.

APangF1
Novice
Posts: 8
Liked: 1 time
Joined: Sep 18, 2018 9:54 pm
Full Name: Albert
Contact:

Re: Phasing out Reverse Incremental?

Post by APangF1 »

Okay, sounds like reverse incremental is hidden as an option for new jobs in v10+, but still works for existing jobs from v9.5U4.

Is there a document or article about the way virtual full to tape is improved in v10+ ?
My understanding is that in v9.5U4, a virtual pointer file is created in the backup repository server’s memory/virtual memory, prior to writing to tape.

Thanks

Gostev
SVP, Product Management
Posts: 28533
Liked: 5138 times
Joined: Jan 01, 2006 1:01 am
Location: Baar, Switzerland
Contact:

Re: Phasing out Reverse Incremental?

Post by Gostev »

Just to be clear, the reverse incremental option is NOT hidden for ANY jobs either in v10 or v11. And there are no changes planned around the reverse incremental option in the foreseeable future.

We don't document low-level implementation details, since it also constitutes know-how. But no, even 9.5U4 never had to create any special "virtual pointer files". If you think about this, copying certain virtual full state to tape does not require anything different comparing to performing a restore from the same restore point. In either case, Veeam needs to address directly the specific "virtual full" state of the selected restore point, which is comprised of data blocks sitting in various full and incremental backup files. So this has been in the product since v1, and is extremely polished already. For example, you probably already noticed that the restore performance is the same whether you restore from the latest restore point (which is stored in a single VBK file in case of the reversed incremental backup mode), or from earlier restore points (which in turn requires restoring from the "virtual full" representing an earlier image state).

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 6 guests