VBR 9.5 - REFS

Availability for the Always-On Enterprise

Re: VBR 9.5 - REFS

Veeam Logoby hoFFy » Fri Nov 04, 2016 7:23 am

Mike Resseler wrote:Sebastian,

What do you mean exactly? You installed B&R on a 2012 R2 server and connect a Backup repository that is located on a 2016 server to it?


No, I installed B&R on a Server 2016 and also formatted a volume with ReFS so I'm using it as the backup repository already. I'm just waiting to upgrade to 9.5.
I'm aware that I eventually have to create a new repository to benefit from the new features, but that's no problem for me
VMCE 7 / 8 / 9, VCP-DC 5 / 5.5 / 6, MCITP:SA
Blog: machinewithoutbrain.de
hoFFy
Veeam ProPartner
 
Posts: 159
Liked: 25 times
Joined: Fri Apr 27, 2012 1:10 pm
Location: Germany / Lohne
Full Name: Sebastian Hoffmann

Re: VBR 9.5 - REFS

Veeam Logoby andyg » Fri Nov 04, 2016 9:33 am

It would be nice if Veeam themselves can provide us a step-by-step guide for moving from VBR 9.0 to 9.5 and ReFS. A best-practise guide to follow.

Steps should include creating the new ReFS repository, how to seed or copy existing backups, what tick boxes to enable (as new features don't auto enable things), do we need to then run full backup to use the ReFS etc etc....

Or if someone has been through all this pain, please share so we all benefit.
-= VMCE v9 certified =-
andyg
Service Provider
 
Posts: 54
Liked: 4 times
Joined: Wed Apr 23, 2014 9:51 am
Full Name: Andy Goldschmidt

Re: VBR 9.5 - REFS

Veeam Logoby andyg » Fri Nov 04, 2016 9:36 am

ashleyw wrote: So unless you have a 4 node hyper converged infrastructure running just for backups, the main benefit of using Re-FS on top of ZFS is that we get maximum performance and capacity on the spindles with the benefits of application aware de-dupe in Server 2016 that is coming in Veeam 9.5. End result is that our backup and management layer costs can be kept down to the best bang for the buck.

Wow, are you saying stick with ZFS and run ReFs ontop of it? Will that still apply with VBR 9.5, Win 2016 and storage spaces, or will you drop the ZFS altogether?
-= VMCE v9 certified =-
andyg
Service Provider
 
Posts: 54
Liked: 4 times
Joined: Wed Apr 23, 2014 9:51 am
Full Name: Andy Goldschmidt

Re: VBR 9.5 - REFS

Veeam Logoby Skyview » Fri Nov 04, 2016 2:23 pm

Just a quick question- is storage spaces required behind the REFS volume? Or can I use a SAN based lun and just format with REFS?

Does it have to be 2016 REFS? Or will 2012 work?
Skyview
Service Provider
 
Posts: 22
Liked: 1 time
Joined: Tue Jan 10, 2012 8:53 pm

Re: VBR 9.5 - REFS

Veeam Logoby tsightler » Fri Nov 04, 2016 2:34 pm

It has to be a ReFS volume formatted with Windows Server 2016 as older versions don't support the block clone API (you can't even upgrade ReFS volume created on older Windows versions). Storage spaces is not required, you can format any volume with ReFS and get the benefit of fast clone technology, however, storage spaces (specifically mirrored and parity spaces) provided some additional benefits regarding integrity streams, i.e they can not just detect, but also automatically heal corrupt data blocks.
tsightler
Veeam Software
 
Posts: 4687
Liked: 1699 times
Joined: Fri Jun 05, 2009 12:57 pm
Full Name: Tom Sightler

Re: VBR 9.5 - REFS

Veeam Logoby ashleyw » Sun Nov 06, 2016 10:05 pm 1 person likes this post

andyg wrote:Wow, are you saying stick with ZFS and run ReFs ontop of it? Will that still apply with VBR 9.5, Win 2016 and storage spaces, or will you drop the ZFS altogether?


yep, I'm saying if you want the biggest bang for the buck in terms of spindles and IO throughput on a single node hyperconverged node, you best best is to run OmniOS and then present a virtual block device via iscsi up to a windows 2016 VM and then format the iscsi block device in the Windows 2016 server as ReFS and make that the backup repository for Veeam... You could of course rush out and get 4 nodes to get similar performance but then you'll be up for more data centre licenses and you'll need more spindles and SSDs as well due to storage spaces architecture. Beauty is if you run everything virtualised you can always change the configuration later should you require, if things improve with storage spaces. ZFS is here to stay for us at least until something else can meet the reliability/performance and price point.
Also a very important point for anyone looking after development shops providing this type of service hoping that their MSDN licenses cover this sort of thing - unfortunately they don't - the MSDN licenses cover development and test machines only - backup and management licenses are line of business services so they need to be commercially licensed - if you are primarily an MSDN shop, make sure you get this right otherwise you could be burned on a software audit.
ashleyw
Service Provider
 
Posts: 137
Liked: 16 times
Joined: Thu Oct 28, 2010 10:55 pm
Full Name: Ashley Watson

Re: VBR 9.5 - REFS

Veeam Logoby dellock6 » Mon Nov 07, 2016 10:48 am

I'm not discussing or judging any design choice, but the only thing I can note in this design Ashley is that with a single volume, there is no chance to enable ReFS Integrity streams. You are still relying on the raid protection offered by underlying ZFS tough, but to me honestly integrity streams and self-healing is a huge deal in the new ReFS.
Luca Dell'Oca
EMEA Cloud Architect @ Veeam Software

@dellock6
http://www.virtualtothecore.com
vExpert 2011-2012-2013-2014-2015-2016
Veeam VMCE #1
dellock6
Veeam Software
 
Posts: 4877
Liked: 1280 times
Joined: Sun Jul 26, 2009 3:39 pm
Location: Varese, Italy
Full Name: Luca Dell'Oca

Re: VBR 9.5 - REFS

Veeam Logoby ashleyw » Mon Nov 07, 2016 5:33 pm

Thanks Luca, to be honest zfs is well proven in terms of avoiding data corruption, from our experience anyway.
But that aside, vast majority of people here are going to be running a single node backup server, so given that someone has 24 or 36 slots on a single node, what are the recommendations to get best use of the spindles and high IOPs bearing in mind you can't stripe across storage pools within a single os instance and that dedicated spares are allocated on a per storage pool basis (in Microsoft world), or are you suggesting we should all move to multi node hyperconverged clusters just for the backup layer?
ashleyw
Service Provider
 
Posts: 137
Liked: 16 times
Joined: Thu Oct 28, 2010 10:55 pm
Full Name: Ashley Watson

Re: VBR 9.5 - REFS

Veeam Logoby dellock6 » Mon Nov 07, 2016 6:03 pm 1 person likes this post

No, I'm not suggesting S2D at all, unless Microsoft would change its licensing schema for it. Datacenter licensing makes the entire idea behind S2D un-usable as of today, as much as it seems really attractive from a design point of view. I wrote a blog post on my website which is going out tomorrow exactly on this topic. It's a pity, but it's what it is.

For single nodes, can you explain me how do you see those as limits? Say I have a Cisco C3260 machine (by the way they have a configured solution with Windows plus Storage Spaces alredy), I can put in it many large HDD and some SSD. I create with this two tiers, I choose simple mirror as the desired protection solution, and here I go, I have a raid10 design. And because I have the mirror option, I can leverage integrity streams.
Luca Dell'Oca
EMEA Cloud Architect @ Veeam Software

@dellock6
http://www.virtualtothecore.com
vExpert 2011-2012-2013-2014-2015-2016
Veeam VMCE #1
dellock6
Veeam Software
 
Posts: 4877
Liked: 1280 times
Joined: Sun Jul 26, 2009 3:39 pm
Location: Varese, Italy
Full Name: Luca Dell'Oca

Re: VBR 9.5 - REFS

Veeam Logoby Mike Resseler » Mon Nov 07, 2016 6:21 pm

While I am not a big fan of the datacenter licensing, it depends a bit... For example, when you use it in a hyper converged way, the license doesn't matter anymore as it becomes datacenter license per node anyway (unless you deploy a really low amount of VMs per node :-))
Mike Resseler
Veeam Software
 
Posts: 2805
Liked: 343 times
Joined: Fri Feb 08, 2013 3:08 pm
Location: Belgium, the land of the fries, the beer, the chocolate and the diamonds...
Full Name: Mike Resseler

Re: VBR 9.5 - REFS

Veeam Logoby alex1002 » Mon Nov 07, 2016 7:16 pm

Sorry to kick in. Are you guys doing the refs filesystem with dedupe?
alex1002
Enthusiast
 
Posts: 25
Liked: 1 time
Joined: Tue Jan 27, 2015 6:17 pm
Full Name: Alex

Re: VBR 9.5 - REFS

Veeam Logoby Mike Resseler » Mon Nov 07, 2016 7:18 pm

Alex,

If you are talking about MSFT dedupe... That is not existing at ReFS (at this point in time... Since I know that it is the #1 request from the world on ReFS :-))
Mike Resseler
Veeam Software
 
Posts: 2805
Liked: 343 times
Joined: Fri Feb 08, 2013 3:08 pm
Location: Belgium, the land of the fries, the beer, the chocolate and the diamonds...
Full Name: Mike Resseler

Re: VBR 9.5 - REFS

Veeam Logoby dellock6 » Mon Nov 07, 2016 8:14 pm

Mike Resseler wrote:While I am not a big fan of the datacenter licensing, it depends a bit... For example, when you use it in a hyper converged way, the license doesn't matter anymore as it becomes datacenter license per node anyway (unless you deploy a really low amount of VMs per node :-))


Off-topic, as we are specifically talking about storing Veeam backups here, so hyper-convergence is not involved at all. For storing backups, datacenter license makes the design too pricey. A 4 nodes 2 sockets 8 cores to build a minimum S2D cluster to store backups, only for licenses would cost almost 200k usd street price. Too pricey to even think about it for now.
Luca Dell'Oca
EMEA Cloud Architect @ Veeam Software

@dellock6
http://www.virtualtothecore.com
vExpert 2011-2012-2013-2014-2015-2016
Veeam VMCE #1
dellock6
Veeam Software
 
Posts: 4877
Liked: 1280 times
Joined: Sun Jul 26, 2009 3:39 pm
Location: Varese, Italy
Full Name: Luca Dell'Oca

Re: VBR 9.5 - REFS

Veeam Logoby tsightler » Mon Nov 07, 2016 9:14 pm 2 people like this post

dellock6 wrote:A 4 nodes 2 sockets 8 cores to build a minimum S2D cluster to store backups, only for licenses would cost almost 200k usd street price. Too pricey to even think about it for now.

How do you get to $200K? As far as I understand, the retail price for Windows 2016 Datacenter is USD $6155, which covers the first 16 cores across 2 sockets (you need additional core grant licenses if you have more cores). That's only ~$25k USD street price for 4 nodes. And now you can do 2-node S2D if you really want to keep the price down while having some resiliency. Anyone with a volume license agreement will likely pay less than $5000.
tsightler
Veeam Software
 
Posts: 4687
Liked: 1699 times
Joined: Fri Jun 05, 2009 12:57 pm
Full Name: Tom Sightler

Re: VBR 9.5 - REFS

Veeam Logoby ashleyw » Mon Nov 07, 2016 10:01 pm

just from my perspective. There are a number of terms that may confuse people around here (myself included, so please correct me if I'm wrong here on any of this.).

Storage Spaces Direct: a network scale out raid of across multiple nodes (minimum 2) and requires 10GbE networking and 2016 Data Centre Licensing) - it sounds great but cannot be economically viable as a backup architecture for most shops.

Storage Pools on individual nodes: This is where a group of disks can be grouped together to form a single storage pool. SSD cache disks can be added to the pool and hot spares allocated on a per-pool basis.

A Re-FS file system can be across storage presented by Storage Spaces Direct or Storage Pools on individual nodes.
Windows dynamic disks can be created across multiple storage pools on individual nodes (to create a primitive striping across pools), but this is the worst of all worlds IMHO.

So back to the orignal problem with a backup hosts.

So If you don't use ZFS as the underlying storage like we do, and you are say limited to 24 disk bays using 4TB commodity disks what is the ideal configuration on a single node to deliver the best price per TB?
If you run raid 10 and still allow for a couple of hot spares, you are down to a usable space of 4x11TB, which doesn't give a particularly good cost per TB.
If you ran a large raid 5 set (more than 8 spindles) , you are setting yourself up for failure and the fact is the raid set would not perform particularly well.
If you run windows dynamic disks with ReFS over the top, you may be getting the benefits of integrity streams but you are creating another abstraction layer which historically hasn't been particularly reliable (from our perspective anyway).

Also in our case we need the same backup host to function as a VMware host for our other management purposes so the bare metal will run VMware ESXi with everything else running as VMs.
ashleyw
Service Provider
 
Posts: 137
Liked: 16 times
Joined: Thu Oct 28, 2010 10:55 pm
Full Name: Ashley Watson

PreviousNext

Return to Veeam Backup & Replication



Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Bing [Bot], Inferno131, jim3cantos and 40 guests