Question on replication

[backupquestions]

I'm researching into using Veeam replication to a VCC provider, and one of them mentioned the following to me which I had not considered..

Basically their stance is if you want off site backup in Veeam, you could just do off site replication rather than backup copies, and use the replication to still do your file/application level restores. You basically lose nothing as long as your retention is not long term and requiring GFS. (which I just use SOBR and capacity tier for that anyway, so I don't need it)

Is this basically a better path than using a backup copy job since it knocks out both restores and DR in one storage of data vs doing both a backup copy job and separately a replication?

I could also just use SOBR and have all recent backups copied into S3 anyway I guess if I wanted, rather than just GFS like I do now.

[soncscy]

Hey Alabaster,

There is some truth to this, but keep in mind the current form of replica keeps restore points in snapshots/checkpoints. This isn't bad, but I feel it's a "putting all your eggs in one basket" situation, and especially if you change around the source VM at all. Changes to the source VM will result in your restore points being nuked, meaning your restore capabilities are suspect. You might think "Well, I'll never change the source VM at all", but can you really guarantee that? Not even a 5 GB disk expansion just to allow some install to go through? Or you can guarantee everyone who has admin access will accurate report such changes?

For me, the current implementation of Replica is fine for having a (mostly) up to date copy of the VM ready to go, but I wouldn't bank on it for full recovery.

[wishr]

Hi guys,

I agree with Harvey because the main purpose of the backup copy job is to satisfy the 3-2-1 rule requirements. Replication would help you the most if the whole primary site went down for whatever reason. So the ideal scenario is to have both options.

Thanks

[backupquestions]

Thanks guys. I did not know that the disk expand (which does happen here and then for me) would result in needing to reseed or at the least knock out the existing points... That's almost a no go for me.

But I think the best solution then is to use wasabi for the newer style immediate copy mode to satisfy backup 3-2-1, and then when you look at VCC provider, you just only use "replication" services instead of both backup and replication.. That way the expensive fee you pay to the VCC is only for the replication.

Thanks again.

[foggy]

Hi Alabaster, just a notice that might be helpful - you can have both with just a single data transfer using the replica from backup functionality.