VEEAM O365 Support for Azure StoargeGroup Shares

[njsmee]

we are running a Cloud Connect gateway and a Office 365 backup server in Azure, we are currently using attached disks, but would prefer to use StorageGroup File Shares (it's cheaper!) however, we are aware that the tool does not support mapped drives, and whilst it does support UNC paths, we are unable to use the StorageGroup share as it requires you to Map a drive or at least specify the credentials and access key as parameters.

What are the plans to support mapped drives and / or Azure StorageGroup File Shares? and if its not currently on eth roadmap, can I please place afeature request for it to be added.

Thanks
Nigel

[Mike Resseler]

Hi Nigel,

Thank you for the request. We certainly will discuss it. O365 has a running database so it might not be the best to install it on such a share for performance reasons. But we will look into it, no promises though.

Brgds,
Mike

[ace00007]

Upvoting!

Lesser software allows backup to Azure BLOB or AWS Glacier storage -- Let's get this working with Veeam as well... I don't understand why you'd want to require dedicated storage for your O365 backups over pay-as-you-go types...

<subscribing to this thread>

[Mike Resseler]

Adrian,

Welcome to the forums!

We are aware that in the long run we need to deliver more landing options. We are researching object storage as an option at this moment (but read the word researching ). We do believe it is best that we land the latest data first on a landing zone and then "archive" it off to object storage. Thoughts?

Mike

[ace00007]

Thanks, Mike -- It's good knowing you all have this on your radar. I agree having tiered storage is a great idea, as most recovery is done immediately after an "oops".
From our standpoint (as a both AWS and Azure customer), we'd ideally use something that is "unlimited" in size and pay-as-you-go for pricing. I understand that there may be tradeoffs or limits based on the storage technology, but at very least, it would be great to use Azure's SMB-based storage-as-a-service (i.e. a mapped network share). Estimating the initial storage and growth curve is always a challenge for backup systems, and this would likely remove that problem altogether...

[Mike Resseler]

For the Azure's SMB based storage as a service, are we looking for that for the landing zone? Because frankly I am more looking at blob storage (azure) or S3 directly for the "archive" tier

[ace00007]

Exactly. I believe the storage cost there is $.01/GB, which is about 10% the cost of direct-attach disk, and doesn't have the size limitations of direct-attach. Particularly for O365, we'd like a "set and forget" solution where we're not worrying about adding users to backup scope, or managing/shuffling storage. We rarely need to recover data, so speed here is minimally important. I'd be perfectly fine backing up directly to Cool-tier blob storage on Azure.