I could not find an existing post or something similar in the documentation.
As per documentation (https://helpcenter.veeam.com/docs/backu ... 20restores ) - if you combine the "Copy" and "Move" options in capacity tier in SOBR Veeam will keep the active and inactive backup chains in the capacity tier as ber backup job retention.
I am trying to get Veeam to upload the backup copy job to S3 (capacity tier) and immediately delete the local copy. Is there a way to achieve that? For instance, to set the capacity override to 0%?
Obviously I am trying to avoid creating fulls with every backup job.
The reason I am trying to do this is to avoid having 2 or 3 full backups taking up space in S3 (customer is stingy), rather just keep 1 full with deltas.
Here is a more detailed description of the setup I just created and my understanding of what is going on:
We have an SOBR repository (call it SOBR1) for daily backup jobs (26 day retention) with only the performance tier to local disk.
I've setup another SOBR repository (call it SOBR2) with the same local disk, but with a capacity tier (S3 Wasabi bucket). I created new backup copy jobs that take the existing daily backup copy jobs and copy them to this SOBR. I've also set to immediate copy and move with 0 days. The backup copy retention is set to 90 days.
Both SOBRs are set for data locality.
From what I understand SOBR2 will still keep a local copy in the performance tier anyway, since there is no "active" or "inactive" chains for a backup copy. I've just set it up so I am going to way and see what happens.
-
- Service Provider
- Posts: 22
- Liked: 1 time
- Joined: Apr 16, 2018 8:24 am
- Contact:
-
- Veeam Software
- Posts: 538
- Liked: 192 times
- Joined: Mar 07, 2016 3:55 pm
- Full Name: Ronn Martin
- Contact:
Re: SOBR - immediate move without keeping local copy
Correct SOBR2 will continue to keep a local copy.
Note that all capacity tier offloads to S3 are forever forward. There will not be a case where multiple "fulls" are stored in S3.The reason I am trying to do this is to avoid having 2 or 3 full backups taking up space in S3 (customer is stingy), rather just keep 1 full with deltas
-
- Service Provider
- Posts: 22
- Liked: 1 time
- Joined: Apr 16, 2018 8:24 am
- Contact:
Re: SOBR - immediate move without keeping local copy
Wait, so you are saying that I can have a job with periodic fulls with an S3 offload and S3 won't fill up with fulls?
Is that with all capacity tiers or just S3?
Can you please help me find that in the docs - I am getting a bit lost in the sections.
Is that with all capacity tiers or just S3?
Can you please help me find that in the docs - I am getting a bit lost in the sections.
-
- Product Manager
- Posts: 20406
- Liked: 2299 times
- Joined: Oct 26, 2012 3:28 pm
- Full Name: Vladimir Eremin
- Contact:
Re: SOBR - immediate move without keeping local copy
Capacity Tier regardless of the underlying storage system works in forward forever incremental way, meaning data already copied to object storage is not offloaded again. A bit more information regarding how it works can be found here (Index).
By the way, direct backup to object storage (ability to point primary and secondary jobs directly to object storage repository) is coming in v12, so stay tuned.
Thanks!
By the way, direct backup to object storage (ability to point primary and secondary jobs directly to object storage repository) is coming in v12, so stay tuned.
Thanks!
-
- Service Provider
- Posts: 22
- Liked: 1 time
- Joined: Apr 16, 2018 8:24 am
- Contact:
Re: SOBR - immediate move without keeping local copy
Thanks for the link to the docs and your answers!
Do you know if the new feature of direct object storage backups will be part of Standard licensing? We have customers that are hanging on to standard socket licenses as for dear life (due to VM to socket ratio VUL is much more expensive for them).
Do you know if the new feature of direct object storage backups will be part of Standard licensing? We have customers that are hanging on to standard socket licenses as for dear life (due to VM to socket ratio VUL is much more expensive for them).
Who is online
Users browsing this forum: MrSpock and 7 guests