Comprehensive data protection for all workloads
Post Reply
Posts: 5
Liked: never
Joined: Apr 20, 2016 2:50 pm
Full Name: Joshua Wu

Suggestion for SureBackup

Post by nike284 » May 17, 2016 2:07 pm

I would like to request a possible new design for SureBackup.
With the current design of masquerade IP and pointered storage, most of the customers who
try to keep up with the market all have very efficient deduplication target storage.
The performance for SureBackup takes a big hit and runs into many false negatives (false verification failures).
I would like to suggest to add another process of doing the actual restore.
Users will need to dedicate non dedup storage for this process. This supposedly should alleviate many performance issues.

I already opened a ticket with support and given up on SureBackup for backup verification due to performance reasons.
Everything else is working great for us. Thanks!

case# 01771974 and 01769571

Veeam Software
Posts: 636
Liked: 159 times
Joined: Dec 10, 2012 8:44 am
Full Name: Nikita Efes

Re: Suggestion for SureBackup

Post by nefes » May 17, 2016 2:15 pm

Currently our best practices already advice to use fast but small primary storage for restores, SureBackup etc, and use deduplication appliances as secondary storage for long-term retention.

Veeam Software
Posts: 18538
Liked: 1605 times
Joined: Jul 11, 2011 10:22 am
Full Name: Alexander Fogelson

Re: Suggestion for SureBackup

Post by foggy » May 17, 2016 3:12 pm

Right, what Nikita is saying is inline with our reference architecture.

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 19 guests