SMB3 or standard windows server

[staun]

Hope someone can give me a little information regarding the two different server types for backup repositories. I have had both,but just had an issue using a SMB3 host (windows) and Veeam Support helped me move the failing repositories to a normal Windows Host.

So can anyone tell me the difference?

[soncscy]

Hi Jørgen,

SMB is just chatty, even SMB3, and it's not as resilient of a repository as a regular local host as the local host can have the data mover for Veeam running directly on it whereas SMB3 will always have an additional network component even with a gateway close.

Performance generally is better with a local host, and I'd avoid SMB (any dialect) and NFS unless you absolutely need it.

[Gostev]

Performance will always be much better with a regular server, plus SMB stack has some quirks that impact reliability... so there are multiple drawbacks but no real benefits, thus it is best to avoid. Unless you have a requirement to build a highly available backup repository, in which case an HA share with SMB Transparent Failover is probably the easiest solution.