Hello,
I have one question, I read this document:
https://h20195.www2.hpe.com/v2/getdocum ... 0023056enw
This document recomend this:
• Storage-level corruption guard settings can be left unchecked. HPE StoreOnce has internal data integrity checking and self-healing mechanisms.
This for mantenance backup Job, but I run backup copy with Catalyst replication (with two StoreOnces), and the option mantenance for this Job is checked by default. I don't understand, because HPE document recomended not check for backup Job, but Veeam check default for backup copu jon HPE StoreOnce Repository by default.
https://1drv.ms/u/s!AhEgG4C2IYtVg9UYoqr ... g?e=p5flCj
regards!
-
- Enthusiast
- Posts: 74
- Liked: 3 times
- Joined: Dec 28, 2018 12:06 pm
- Contact:
-
- Chief Product Officer
- Posts: 31818
- Liked: 7312 times
- Joined: Jan 01, 2006 1:01 am
- Location: Baar, Switzerland
- Contact:
Re: Storage-level corruption guard with replication Catalyst
Hello!
HPE document recommends not check this option because it is quite slow. But they optimized the performance of this process on their side by now, and we included the corresponding Catalyst API changes in v11.
StoreOnce's internal data integrity checking and self-healing mechanism are great, but they have no content awareness. In other words, they can guarantee you that a corrupted block's content was correctly transferred between two StoreOnces. While storage-level corruption guard guarantees that the block is actually valid and recoverable.
Thanks!
HPE document recommends not check this option because it is quite slow. But they optimized the performance of this process on their side by now, and we included the corresponding Catalyst API changes in v11.
StoreOnce's internal data integrity checking and self-healing mechanism are great, but they have no content awareness. In other words, they can guarantee you that a corrupted block's content was correctly transferred between two StoreOnces. While storage-level corruption guard guarantees that the block is actually valid and recoverable.
Thanks!
Who is online
Users browsing this forum: mschwaermer, neilmcm, Semrush [Bot], sschreven, tioaboa and 125 guests