Physical Server Backup

Availability for the Always-On Enterprise

Re: Physical Server Backup

Veeam Logoby baatch » Wed May 22, 2013 9:31 pm

Would using built-in Windows backup to a virtual disk on a VM and then use Veeam to back it up work?
baatch
Enthusiast
 
Posts: 30
Liked: 4 times
Joined: Thu May 16, 2013 12:52 am
Full Name: Alexander

Re: Physical Server Backup

Veeam Logoby Vitaliy S. » Thu May 23, 2013 7:45 am

Yes, this is what I was initially thinking about ;)
Vitaliy S.
Veeam Software
 
Posts: 19564
Liked: 1103 times
Joined: Mon Mar 30, 2009 9:13 am
Full Name: Vitaliy Safarov

Re: Physical Server Backup

Veeam Logoby Doug.Butler » Fri Dec 13, 2013 3:33 pm

I've seen several posts in various communities that talk about this strategy (use native Windows backup to back a physical machine up to a disk file, then use Veeam to back up that file).

It seems like more often than not, most people talk about putting that backup onto a VM disk, then backing that VM up (which seems to make sense). For me, I think it will be less confusing (no other benefit, really) to just use a "File to Tape" job to directly lay those Windows .bkf files onto tape.

I may be missing some important benefit here - what is the advantage of just backing up the VM that holds the .bkf files, vs. doing the "File to Tape" job and laying just those files on tape?
Doug.Butler
Enthusiast
 
Posts: 30
Liked: 4 times
Joined: Wed Jun 22, 2011 10:41 pm
Full Name: Douglas J. Butler

Re: Physical Server Backup

Veeam Logoby Gostev » Fri Dec 13, 2013 4:02 pm

There is no benefit. It is just that only one third for all Veeam users have tape, and can do File to Tape...
Gostev
Veeam Software
 
Posts: 21396
Liked: 2349 times
Joined: Sun Jan 01, 2006 1:01 am
Location: Baar, Switzerland

Re: Physical Server Backup

Veeam Logoby flempitsky » Mon Dec 16, 2013 1:54 am 1 person likes this post

I keep hearing when customers ask for physical. What about those that are potential customers and they just do not want two products. There are many times my customers decided not to implement Veeam not because they did not like the Veeam features but because you did not do physical. I think Veeam market share could be much bigger if the considered Physical. So do not look at it from what existing customers are asking for but how many more customers could you have. I just had one this week.

Just what I have observed in my travels. :roll:

Frank
flempitsky
Novice
 
Posts: 3
Liked: 1 time
Joined: Wed Jan 06, 2010 3:10 am
Full Name: Frank Lempitsky

Re: Physical Server Backup

Veeam Logoby habibalby » Mon Dec 16, 2013 2:01 am 1 person likes this post

Talking on sales side, I think Veeam should really think to attracted every customers with Their solution by introducing the support of physical servers.

For instance, why I have to pay for Veeam License and Symantec Support? Why Veeam not think in this direction? And let the customers instead of paying to Customers of Symantec, veeam will get this amount by introducing physical backup support.
habibalby
Expert
 
Posts: 350
Liked: 23 times
Joined: Mon Jul 18, 2011 9:30 am
Location: Bahrain
Full Name: Hussain Al Sayed

Re: Physical Server Backup

Veeam Logoby vmJoe » Mon Dec 16, 2013 3:06 am 2 people like this post

Why in is anyone still even thinking about supporting physical servers anymore anyway? I don't anyone who is working on growing their physical environment? When I was a customer our policy was "virtual first", now I think everyone is "virtual only."

I think we are at a point that adding support for physical servers would be a step backwards, when the market is clearly moving away from physical servers.
vmJoe
Veeam Software
 
Posts: 212
Liked: 33 times
Joined: Tue Aug 02, 2011 1:06 pm
Full Name: Joe Gremillion

Re: Physical Server Backup

Veeam Logoby habibalby » Mon Dec 16, 2013 3:46 am

As you know that not every application/system can be virtualized.. Having this in your environment, will certainly must have to have two backup solution, one for VMs and one for the physical servers which cannot be virtualized. I'm one of those customers who still have few physical boxes and I use Symantec to back them up. In this case, in this case I have to have two supported solutions, Supported = Pay support fees to get it. On another hand, I have Veeam Support = Money.. Having combined two-in-one solutions from Veeam to support Physical servers, will allow us to save other SLA support fees and less headaches to maintain two Backup Solution.

Since my legacy servers are not yet supported on VMs or due to system design the system/application cannot be moved to Virtual, I have to stick to two vendors.
habibalby
Expert
 
Posts: 350
Liked: 23 times
Joined: Mon Jul 18, 2011 9:30 am
Location: Bahrain
Full Name: Hussain Al Sayed

Re: Physical Server Backup

Veeam Logoby Fiskepudding » Mon Dec 16, 2013 9:22 am 2 people like this post

I agree with Joe.

In addition, I would hate it if Veeam lost it focus on Virtual environment.
And regarding growth and Veeam, I feel they don’t need to grow faster than they are.
It can be very unhealthy for a company to grow too fast. They need to keep their customer base happy.

If we can agree that physical machines is not the future, then imagine Veeam starting working on physical support now. 1-2 years down the line, they might have a product ready for release.. that might match competitors.
Well, then physical machine backups are probably a bigger niche then now.

If you need basic backup of a physical machine, there are soultions/workarounds, with windows backups -> VM -> Veeam. If you need more advanced features, I guess it is best to leave that to the dinosaurs that already do physical backups well :mrgreen:
Fiskepudding
Expert
 
Posts: 213
Liked: 26 times
Joined: Wed Feb 01, 2012 7:24 am
Full Name: Espen Dykesteen

Re: Physical Server Backup

Veeam Logoby Gostev » Mon Dec 16, 2013 1:39 pm

habibalby wrote:for the physical servers which cannot be virtualized

Hi, can you please give an example of physical server that "cannot" be virtualized on the latest versions of VMware or Hyper-V and what is the specific reason why they cannot be virtualized.

For example, support for backup of physical Windows and Linux servers would not be too hard for us to add, however there is no sense to have those servers as physical these days, so why spend our cycles on this.

Now, you might be right about some legacy applications running on some strange unsupported OS. But consider the effort required to support those, and the relative value to the product this brings (how many of those servers are still out there). We can spend an effort to add support for that, and increase the value of our product by 1% (best case footprint for these strange apps, ever shrinking). Or, we can spend the same effort perfecting our virtual backup with some new innovative ground-breaking feature that will increase the value of our product in a few times (as we did before more than once). Put yourself in our shoes: what would YOU choose to do?
Gostev
Veeam Software
 
Posts: 21396
Liked: 2349 times
Joined: Sun Jan 01, 2006 1:01 am
Location: Baar, Switzerland

Re: Physical Server Backup

Veeam Logoby habibalby » Mon Dec 16, 2013 1:53 pm

Hello,
BMS systems, buildings management systems, PABX management systems...

Offcourse I would choose to spend time in perfecting the current veeam product.

Thanks
habibalby
Expert
 
Posts: 350
Liked: 23 times
Joined: Mon Jul 18, 2011 9:30 am
Location: Bahrain
Full Name: Hussain Al Sayed

Re: Physical Server Backup

Veeam Logoby Fiskepudding » Mon Dec 16, 2013 5:57 pm 1 person likes this post

Regarding servers that cannot be virtualized, I often find that to only be on paper. In testing they usually work fine,but are "not supported in a virtual environment" by the vendor.

If you install a new system and the above is the case. You can try to tell them..., "Well, we have to find another that supports a virtual environment".
You would be surprised how fast they can add support for virtual environment, at least in your contract :)

It can off cause be a bit harder to get a vendor to add support for a product you are already using and have invested money and time into.
Witch I guess is your case Hussain.
But usually there are alternatives to change to.

Just think of the benefits of phaseing out those, often odd applications, to something new that can run supported in a virtual environment. Other than just for the sake of backups/Veeam.
If all that fails, there are a bunch of other backup solutions to choose from :)
Fiskepudding
Expert
 
Posts: 213
Liked: 26 times
Joined: Wed Feb 01, 2012 7:24 am
Full Name: Espen Dykesteen

Re: Physical Server Backup

Veeam Logoby habibalby » Mon Dec 16, 2013 11:39 pm

You are right Espen, for the coming two years I have major upgrade for those application, and one of them would the Jonson Control System, which I got clear
Statement from the Vendor its not supported on VM. .

But such as my case are plenty of people out there who are using veeam and looking at veeam as All-in-one solutions when it comes to Backup Admins or systems administrators...
habibalby
Expert
 
Posts: 350
Liked: 23 times
Joined: Mon Jul 18, 2011 9:30 am
Location: Bahrain
Full Name: Hussain Al Sayed

Re: Physical Server Backup

Veeam Logoby TieT » Tue Dec 17, 2013 12:13 pm 1 person likes this post

I'm also looking for a all-in-one application when it comes to backup.

We use veeam to backup 100+ VM's and HP Backup Protector for our physical servers.

The physiscal servers consists of:
1 DC
2 Citrix Servers
1 VEEAM Backup to Disk server
1 Hyper-V Windows 2012 Server

It's not much but it would be great if VEEAM would create a plugin that would manage the VSS task.
So that VEEAM backup can pickup the backup and delete the shadow copy when done.

I know that this can be done manually, and there are workarounds.
But you have to admit it would be nice if it's integrated...
TieT
Influencer
 
Posts: 18
Liked: 1 time
Joined: Wed Mar 20, 2013 1:28 pm
Full Name: Tim Tielens

Re: Physical Server Backup

Veeam Logoby Gostev » Tue Dec 17, 2013 4:15 pm

TieT wrote:I'm also looking for a all-in-one application when it comes to backup.

Everyone does, but the market reality is that today, typical enterprise uses, on average, 4.3 different backup solutions (2012 data). "Right tool for the job mentality" is strong and clearly justified, otherwise this approach would have died long ago. Apparently, nobody likes the idea of making a spaceship with Swiss Army knife alone. Understandably!

That said, file level backup is a very different story from server backup. It does not have the complexity of full server backup and restore (mostly restore), and I am not dismissing the need for this feature (although the use case is somewhat different in my mind). In fact, as explained earlier on this page, we already do file level backup with VSS, but currently to tape targets only.
Gostev
Veeam Software
 
Posts: 21396
Liked: 2349 times
Joined: Sun Jan 01, 2006 1:01 am
Location: Baar, Switzerland

PreviousNext

Return to Veeam Backup & Replication



Who is online

Users browsing this forum: dgapinski, Google [Bot] and 34 guests