Clarification on individual vm backup chain behavior?

[foggy]

By default, the Data locality policy is selected, where the entire backup chain is stored on the same extent. If you have some considerations towards changing it to Performance policy (for example, using a deduplicating appliance as one of the extents), you can do that while creating the repository.

[readie]

Thanks - I'll go for Performance as all our extents are physically distributed between the same two SANs in the same cabinet . . . I suspect, once I see things developing, I should try to get full backups and incremental on separate SANs if I can, so that a job is using both SANs rather than just one . . . Does B&R do any analysis of performance of the different repositories, in order to improve its own 'decisions'? (Actually, I was thinking over the w/e, it would be good if B&R or ONE which we also have could do an overall performance figure for our repositories, which would then help my decisions.)

[Shestakov]

Hello Bob,

SOBR extents performance is provided in Veeam ONE Monitor.
Is that what you are looking for or any additional info is desired?

By the way, Scale-out Backup Repository report to check if you need to change the configuration.
Thanks!

[rreed]

Morning, everyone. What's the status w/ the fix for the upgraded/imported repositories not switching over to per-vm chain on scheduled full please? I was glancing around at mine this morning and after a good 1-2 months at v9, none of my imported files/repositories from my old v8 install have split out into per-vm files. Only a few random jobs that I had since done a manual active full. Having to disable my scheduled fulls and manually fire them off by hand over the weekend is going to be a real pain in the neck. </whining>

[kkuszek]

No usual early hotfix to v9 released yet, so teething problems are still at play.

Yep, you gotta do things manually or through powershell scripts. You can schedule the scripts. It's not bad if you only have a few jobs. Not ideal but known issue.

[foggy]

As mentioned above, this should be fixed in the upcoming Update 1.

[rreed]

Blarg. Thanks everybody, do appreciate it. Do we have an ETA at this time?

[foggy]

Here's an adjacent thread discussing this.

[veremin]

For now you can use this workaround that will do the required steps in automatic fashion for you. Thanks.