[Veeam B&R + NetApp AltaVault] - Design Considerations

Availability for the Always-On Enterprise

[Veeam B&R + NetApp AltaVault] - Design Considerations

Veeam Logoby stephen.cilesio » Mon Jun 19, 2017 12:10 pm

We currently have Veeam B&R 9.5 (Update 2) connected to our NetApp AltaVault system doing streaming backups. The Backup Repository is being presented as an NFS export via a Linux Server mount-point. The thing is, when doing full backups for large servers, it does take amount of time.

It also takes time restoring from backups on the AltaVault when considering these days, SLA for Data/Server restores are much more prominent now.

The idea i have is to put a caching tier in front of the AltaVault so for example, On the caching tier running faster disks (SAS), would have 7 - 14 Dailies with an active-full. Then from there have a Backup copy job and tick the option for the GFS restore points to be copied from the caching tier repository.

We have followed all best practice guides with setting up Veeam with NetApp AltaVault integration and was wondering if anyone else has specific design considerations or more efficient way of implementing this for larger deployments/Servers? Also getting those restore times down?
stephen.cilesio
Novice
 
Posts: 3
Liked: never
Joined: Fri Nov 20, 2015 6:21 am
Full Name: Stephen Cilesio

Re: [Veeam B&R + NetApp AltaVault] - Design Considerations

Veeam Logoby csinetops » Mon Jun 19, 2017 3:46 pm

I also have a AltaVault and use it for backup copy jobs, running Veeam 9.5 U2 and AltaVault code 4.3.1, presented as CIFS share in Veeam. Proxies are Server 2016 boxes. I would add a backup repository big enough to have a few restore points in front of your AltaVault, then backup copy jobs to the AltaVault. This is the way I have it setup and it works well. My main jobs with a few days retention go to by main fast backup disk/repository ( a HP server with a direct attached shelf). Then I run copy jobs to get the data onto the AltaVault and streamed to Azure.

When we were looking at the AltaVault a year ago, the NetApp engineer recommended setting it up this way as you don't want to try and dump directly to a dedupe/compression device. Same with restores, if you have to do all your restores from it, it's going to be slower than having some plane-jane disk and a few normal restore points. The AltaVault really isn't meant to be the main landing site for backups. It's a long term/2nd tier/archival ( or whatever you want to call it) storage device. I think of it as a replacement for tape drives.

That being said. My biggest VM's are ~6TB, they take under 5 minutes to mount a FLR from local data on the AltaVault. Cloud data you have to factor in the time it takes to pre-populate the data on the AltaVault before kicking off the restore. What kind of restore times/speeds are you seeing?
csinetops
Expert
 
Posts: 107
Liked: 15 times
Joined: Fri Jun 06, 2014 2:45 pm
Full Name: csinetops

Re: [Veeam B&R + NetApp AltaVault] - Design Considerations

Veeam Logoby MichaelCade » Fri Jul 28, 2017 9:27 am

Hi Guys, Exactly right, If set on NetApp AltaVault then use this as the Backup Copy target. A primary backup set of storage should be used for that short term retention for really fast recovery, also keep in mind other technologies and features we have around Instant VM Recovery will not run very well from that global dedupe device. Neither will SureBackup to verify those backups are in a good state before heading off to the cloud from the AltaVault, Doesn't need to be anything special for that primary backup storage. Direct Attached Storage in most cases can give you the performance that you require, depending on the size of environment and requirements.
Regards,

Michael Cade
Technical Evangelist
Veeam Software
Email: Michael.Cade@Veeam.com
Twitter: @MichaelCade1
MichaelCade
Veeam Software
 
Posts: 59
Liked: 8 times
Joined: Mon Mar 23, 2015 11:55 am
Location: Cambridge, United Kingdom
Full Name: Michael Cade


Return to Veeam Backup & Replication



Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 29 guests