B&R 9.5 to Synology - current best solution

Availability for the Always-On Enterprise

B&R 9.5 to Synology - current best solution

Veeam Logoby Trin » Tue May 02, 2017 3:43 pm

We're looking at getting a Synology RS2416RP+ to store our backups and I'm trying to find out the best way of connecting our Veeam installation to the NAS.

I've read a bunch of articles, some of which say connect directly from Veeam with the NAS as a Linux server and other that suggest connecting the NAS to the Windows server using iSCSI or NFS and then connecting Veeam to that.

Is there a current best practice for this situation at all?

Many thanks
Trin
Influencer
 
Posts: 17
Liked: never
Joined: Fri Apr 28, 2017 10:38 am

Re: B&R 9.5 to Synology - current best solution

Veeam Logoby jmmarton » Tue May 02, 2017 7:34 pm

If you connect to the Synology directly as NFS, we'll have to install our data mover on the appliance. But if you set it up as iSCSI you can connect it to either a Windows or Linux server, using it as a Windows repo or an NFS repo with the data mover going on a general purpose OS rather than the customized Linux-based firmware on the appliance. If it were up to me, I'd avoid making that sort of change to the appliance if possible.

Joe
jmmarton
Veeam Software
 
Posts: 844
Liked: 89 times
Joined: Tue Nov 17, 2015 2:38 am
Location: Chicago, IL
Full Name: Joe Marton

Re: B&R 9.5 to Synology - current best solution

Veeam Logoby nmdange » Tue May 02, 2017 8:56 pm

If you haven't actually bought anything yet, I would highly recommend using a physical Windows server with directly attached storage (either disks internal to the server chassis or in a SAS JBOD attached to a hardware RAID controller.)
nmdange
Expert
 
Posts: 203
Liked: 58 times
Joined: Thu Aug 20, 2015 9:30 pm

Re: B&R 9.5 to Synology - current best solution

Veeam Logoby Trin » Wed May 03, 2017 7:08 am

jmmarton wrote:...If it were up to me, I'd avoid making that sort of change to the appliance if possible.

Joe


I presume you're wanting to avoid your first suggestion there, the direct attach method?

We've picked the Synology for more than just a backup repository as it's the best method for various things we want to do.
Trin
Influencer
 
Posts: 17
Liked: never
Joined: Fri Apr 28, 2017 10:38 am

Re: B&R 9.5 to Synology - current best solution

Veeam Logoby Trin » Wed May 03, 2017 9:08 am

In addition, is there any benefit of using iSCSI file level or iSCSI block level?
The plan is to have, perhaps, several LUNs on the storage, with certain servers being backed up to different LUNs, so I'm guessing Veeam will be better off using the 'iSCSI block level multiple LUNs on RAID' option...?
Trin
Influencer
 
Posts: 17
Liked: never
Joined: Fri Apr 28, 2017 10:38 am

Re: B&R 9.5 to Synology - current best solution

Veeam Logoby final » Wed May 03, 2017 10:21 am 2 people like this post

Hi,

I can give you some (maybe useful, maybe not) insights as we're using Synology NAS and B&R 9.5

We use two NAS (2x RS3617RPxs) for Veeam Backups. They're stuffed with 6TB disks (WD Red Pro) and in a raid6 config, giving ~55TB of useable space. They're connected via iSCSI with a DA cable to the server using jumbo frames. We found that connecting them via a switch results in performance loss, regardless of jumbo-frames. The NAS and servers use 10gbps NICs. The unit price per NAS (including disks and NIC) is about $6000.

iSCSI does not give you the best performance (NFS / CIFS has better performance), BUT iSCSI allows you to use Server 2016 dedup functionality, which dramatically increases the retention periods, especially if you do regular active full backups. And the penalty is not that large, especially for large block sizes which is what you usually have with backups.

We get about 350MB/s write and 650MB/s read performance this way (on non-deduped data). Deduped data reads at about 30MB/s average, but the rate is very inconsistent (between 10MB/s and 150MB/s).

On a closer look:
- About 13TB of VMs (~40VMs total, largest is 2.3TB)
- physical server at the datacenter, connected to one NAS as well as the SAN storage
- physical server at our main office, connected to the other NAS as well as a tape library (MSL 4048 with one LTO-7 Ultrium drive).

Backup jobs run as follows:
- Backup all VMs from the NAS to the SAN (during lunch and at evenings of business days, with weekly active full, starting on friday, 7pm).
- As soon as a backup job finishes, copy the backups to the NAS at the main office. (10gbps line)
- As soon as the weekly active full backup copy job finishes, write the copy of the backups to tape
- Dedup any data that is older than 10 days

Our learnings after playing a lot with this setup:
- We can only achieve this our backup schedule by using post-job scripts
- Use single file per VM for your repositories, as this makes the life of the dedup job a lot easier.
- iSCSI is not the bottleneck. It's usually the disks themselves, because the backup takes place at large block sizes.
- We use GFS Tape Jobs. As GFS Tape Jobs do not support parallel processing, there is no point in having two Tape drives in your library (and those LTO-7 drives are quite expensive, we paid ~$5000 for ours).
- Do not dedup your newest active full, as it would slow down your desaster recovery significantly (30MB/s read instead of 600MB/s read). We're deduping only data that is older than 10 days.
- Dedup needs sh*tloads of RAM. In our case, we have about: 80TB of deduped user data (8TB dedup chunk stores), and 40GB of avaibale RAM (available for the dedup job, the server has 48GB of RAM). This is the limit - increasing the deduped data results in aborted dedup jobs. We will upgrade our servers to 192GB of RAM in the near future in the hope that this will increase the potential deduped data significantly.

The result of this setup is:
- desaster recovery speeds of about 600MB/s (newest restore point), which gives a full recovery time of <8 hours (including some admin overhead) in case of a SAN failure.
- 100 restore points on disk at two sites (which will hopefully go to 200 - 300 restore points after the RAM upgrade).
- Weekly, Monthly, Quarterly and Yearly backups on Tape (2 Tapes per full backup set).
final
Influencer
 
Posts: 24
Liked: 7 times
Joined: Sun Aug 14, 2016 7:19 pm

Re: B&R 9.5 to Synology - current best solution

Veeam Logoby Trin » Wed May 03, 2017 10:59 am

That's really useful, thanks. A couple of questions, if I may;
How did you configure your Synology boxes - single LUN or multiple?
Are you using Windows to do the dedupe rather than Veeam?

We're in the middle of a large storage and backup overhaul, hence this thread, so I'm just after best practice or successful implementation really. Our original use of VB&R was a rather hasty requirement to replace the previous solution which crashed and burned one afternoon so I'm fairly new to it.
Trin
Influencer
 
Posts: 17
Liked: never
Joined: Fri Apr 28, 2017 10:38 am

Re: B&R 9.5 to Synology - current best solution

Veeam Logoby final » Wed May 03, 2017 11:06 am

They're configured as a single LUN, but I don't think that makes much of a difference really.
We're using Windows dedup. Make sure to use a (fully patched) Server 2016, as it improves deduplication significantly. Our setup would not work with server 2012 R2.

The physical server at the datacenter is also the main veeam B&R server (as well as our vSphere server). The physical server at our main office is a DC and DHCP for the local subnet.
final
Influencer
 
Posts: 24
Liked: 7 times
Joined: Sun Aug 14, 2016 7:19 pm

Re: B&R 9.5 to Synology - current best solution

Veeam Logoby Trin » Wed May 03, 2017 11:15 am

The only reason I ask about the LUNs is because we currently backup our production VMs to one NFS and backup the data from our media server, specifically, to another so I was looking to perhaps replicate this. Not sure if it would make management any easier as we wouldn't be backing up the media to tape...

Do you see any benefits to having the VB&R on your vCenter server?
Trin
Influencer
 
Posts: 17
Liked: never
Joined: Fri Apr 28, 2017 10:38 am

Re: B&R 9.5 to Synology - current best solution

Veeam Logoby final » Wed May 03, 2017 11:26 am

server 2016 dedup only works on "physical" volumes to the server. That's why it has to be connected via iSCSI if you want to use that. If you don't want to use server 2016 dedup, then you can use NFS or CIFS as well. I'm not sure if B&R works with CIFS / NFS shares on the NAS as (I think?) it wants to install its transport agent on the box, which will fail on the nas.

And no, there are no benefits of having the vCenter and B&R on the same box. We just felt more comfortable on having the vCenter box on a physical machine rather than a virtual one (out of the feeling that you don't want the management box to die as well if you have a problem with your VMs / Virtual Infrastructure), and our backup-server was the only physical box available :) We call it the "stuff" server, because it runs "a lot of stuff" :)
final
Influencer
 
Posts: 24
Liked: 7 times
Joined: Sun Aug 14, 2016 7:19 pm

Re: B&R 9.5 to Synology - current best solution

Veeam Logoby jmmarton » Wed May 03, 2017 11:50 am

Trin wrote:I presume you're wanting to avoid your first suggestion there, the direct attach method?


Yes, direct to Synology via NFS is what I'd try to avoid if iSCSI is an option.

Joe
jmmarton
Veeam Software
 
Posts: 844
Liked: 89 times
Joined: Tue Nov 17, 2015 2:38 am
Location: Chicago, IL
Full Name: Joe Marton

Re: B&R 9.5 to Synology - current best solution

Veeam Logoby Trin » Wed May 03, 2017 12:52 pm

Thanks Joe.

Are there any thoughts on the one vs multiple LUNs point? I was hoping to be able to essentially point different backups at different drives for ease of admin. Does that sound reasonable?
Trin
Influencer
 
Posts: 17
Liked: never
Joined: Fri Apr 28, 2017 10:38 am

Re: B&R 9.5 to Synology - current best solution

Veeam Logoby final » Wed May 03, 2017 2:19 pm

Trin wrote:Are there any thoughts on the one vs multiple LUNs point? I was hoping to be able to essentially point different backups at different drives for ease of admin. Does that sound reasonable?


I actually recommend against that because you'd need to know your backup sizes quite well so that you could size your luns right. Also, you lose flexibility and gain no security, as both luns reside on the same disks. But I guess in specific use cases, this is viable.
final
Influencer
 
Posts: 24
Liked: 7 times
Joined: Sun Aug 14, 2016 7:19 pm

Re: B&R 9.5 to Synology - current best solution

Veeam Logoby Trin » Thu May 04, 2017 8:10 am

That sounds reasonable, thanks.

We're going to end up with about 100TB to play with, I believe, so I'll perhaps look at the following:

Synology
Single disk group (all same size) on RAID 6 with one iSCSI target with one LUN presented to the windows server on which Veeam is installed.

Veeam
One job for production VMs with one file per VM and one job for the media server, all pointing at the same LUN.

Windows
Not sure about the deduplication yet... (if I don't use it I may stick to single backup file for all VMs).

Obviously you're not aware of our general setup here, but does that sound like a workable configuration?
Trin
Influencer
 
Posts: 17
Liked: never
Joined: Fri Apr 28, 2017 10:38 am

Re: B&R 9.5 to Synology - current best solution

Veeam Logoby BIGNOOKIE » Sun May 07, 2017 10:58 pm

@Final, we have a Synology 3614RPxs that I am going to re purpose as a Veeam Repository.
I see you are using RAID 6. What about RAID 10 whilst acknowledging the lost capacity of doing this?

Also have you explored SSD Cache and would there be any benefit in implementing this for Veeam?
BIGNOOKIE
Lurker
 
Posts: 1
Liked: never
Joined: Sun May 07, 2017 10:51 pm
Full Name: Nick Johnston

Next

Return to Veeam Backup & Replication



Who is online

Users browsing this forum: AlainRussell and 70 guests