Tape server repository interaction

[AVLoki]

Hi,

We have recently acquired a quite powerful machine running Win2019, which we are using as a Tape Server, with a 6gpps SAS LTO8 tape Library.
Veeam B&R Server / proxy is installed on a VM running on our VMware cluster. Backup repository is a SMB share on a QNAP Nas.

I have recently implemented a GFS Tape Job as a Secondary target for our primary jobs, and noticed how both the Veeam B&R Server and our Tape Server are sharing the network transfer load while the tape is written.
I suppose that the server is the actual proxy / data mover for the GFS Tape Job.
So i tried installing the proxy component on the tape server itself, but then couldn't find where to set the backup proxy for the tape job.

What i would like to accomplish is relieving our B&R Server VM from both calculating the Synthetic Full and loading its network interfaces, and let the tape server machine do the job.
Is there a way to let the tape server machine to act as a proxy for a tape job?

Thanks

[soncscy]

Heya AVLoki,

With Veeam and tape, the only components are the Repository and the Tape server, unless you're doing file to tape (and I ask...why!?)

So, where is your repository handled? By the Veeam Server or the "stronk" server? Who is the gateway for your QNAP?

[AVLoki]

Hi soncscy,

I'm not doing the file to tape, currently configured a Backup to tape job, selecting the 3 jobs i currently need on the tape.

Gateway on the QNAP repository is left on 'Automatic'.

Thanks for pointing me in the right direction.
Looking at the gateway doc it says that whenever a Synthetic Full is needed, the selected gateway will be the mount server. In my case the mount server is the Veeam Server.
However if a synthetic full isn't needed, selected gateway should be the tape server itself... Am i wrong?

At this point: how can i avoid the tape job to synthetize a full backup?
Just scheduling the tape job on the same day of a full backup?

[soncscy]

Ah, don't confuse synthetic full with virtual full.

One is an operation exclusively for disk backups, one is a tape equivalent operation, but the tape Virtual Full operation, from my experience, doesn't require the machine power that Synthetic Fulls do. So in the case of your disk backups, if you __aren't__ doing Synthetic Fulls, then the gateway isn't as important.

But, if your source jobs are doing synthetic fulls and it's the Veeam server being used as the mount server, then the workload goes on the Veeam server.

As I see it you need to sort a few things:

1. Are your primary backup jobs doing Synthetic Fulls?
2. If so, does it work to set the Tape server as your Mount server? (think about the traffic path between your Primary backup proxy server and the tape server -- will there be a bottleneck?)
3. If you can safely do all the operations on the tape server, sounds like you just need to change the Gateway/Mount server for your QNAP to the tape sever and call it a day.

Your topology is a bit hard to imagine based on the above, but hopefully this helps.

[AVLoki]

I was indeed confusing Virtual Full with Synthetic Full.
Now's all clearer, 'culprit' is the mount server configuration.

1. I'm doing weekly Synthetic Fulls and monthly Active Fulls on every job.
2. Bottlenecks are the same as my Veeam Server, since both are on 10Gbe nics on the same switch.
3. Operations are successfull, only using network and cpu from 2 machines (veeam server & tape server) instead of 1 (tape server).

I'll try to switch the mount server for my main (and for now only) repository to the tape server and will monitor all performance.

Thank you