Multiple overlapping SOBR on same backend disk to achieve granularity to S3

[mark49808]

It seems that in v11 that if I want to copy data from a SOBR to AWS S3, I need to define that link at the SOBR itself. Which means if I only want a handful of VMs to go to S3 (ie mission critical), I'm also going to get ALL my other VMs with it that also hit that SOBR as the backup destination.

I don't want this behavior.

If I make multiple overlapping SOBRs (ie a folder on the same backend disk), is that valid? Or will I run into problems?

So in other words, where SOBR1 and SOBR2 are the same backend server(s), just a different folder path:

JOB-A (standard VMs) -> SOBR1 -> /backups/standard -> NO S3 capacity tier
JOB-B (critical VMs) -> SOBR2 -> /backups/critical -> S3 capacity tier

Seems backwards to create multiple SOBRs for the same backend infra, but i don't see another way to not send 100TB to S3 that i don't want to send. Or alternatively creating multiple physical servers to create a unique SOBR per retention type. Which is not an option here.

Or is there a better way?

[Mildur]

Hi

It's possible, supported by us and will not create any technical issues. In V10/V11, create a new backup repository or SOBR for the Jobs you don't want to have on capacity tier.
In V12, you can use Backup Copy Jobs to directly copy backups to object storage. I believe, that will solve your scenario in the future.

Thanks
Fabian