Merge Using Different Machine

[majones]

Hi. I have a couple of laptops at remote locations that link to my local server over broadband connections, and they use VEB to maintain backups on the server. Is there a way of running the merge process (to move the full backups forward in time) for the laptops on the server rather than the laptops, so reducing the amount of data needing to flow over broadband?

[Dima P.]

Hello Martin,

Unfortunately, it’s not possible. If you are backing up to the VBR repository, you could use backup copy job for VEB backups and then delete the existing backup manually.

By the way, backup files are not transferred during merge operation – only backup metadata, so the average amount on traffic consumption should be low.

[majones]

Thanks for clarifying that. My other worry is that the machine being backed up could become disconnected from the backup target on the server during the merge process - either because the machine user shuts it down, or because the broadband link goes down. If that happens, then what is the status of the merge process? - does it recommence where it left off, or does the new full backup risk being corrupted?

[Mike Resseler]

Martin,

There is no corruption possible if it fails when there is an issue during the merge. In fact, you might have not noticed it but when we do the merge you do need some additional space because we build it from the full and incremental as a new file and then delete the obsolete one.

When you get disconnected, the merge will fail I believe and the user will get that notification in the UI

Hope it helps

Mike

[majones]

I was a bit suspicious of your assertion that no corruption is possible if it fails during the merge, because I noticed that the full back itself was modified during the merge and I thought "well, that's bound to go wrong!" leaving me with a corrupt full backup. But I've tested it by disconnecting the machine being backed up during the merge, actually during the phase when the full backup is being modified (growing in size), and whilst I got a scary message saying "process finished with errors", when I reconnected and started another backup I got the reassuring message "completing previously interrupted transform", followed by "merging oldest incremental backup into full backup file", followed by "merge (%)", and then the merge completed correctly. So, I'm very impressed! Thank you for such a great invention.

[majones]

The remote laptops are on ADSL broadband packages that allows transfer rates to my server of 5 Mbps, and the incremental backups complete OK daily but take a few hours. But the merge process is interminable I think because my ADSL broadband package only allows a transfer rate to the laptops of 1 Mbps, and so the merge gets to about 40% and then progress grinds to a halt (albeit at at 1 Mbps). One solution is to set the number of retained backups to a very large number thereby avoiding merges until the laptops are brought back on site with the server - but is this safe or sensible?

[Dima P.]

Martin,

Yup, it should work.