Veeam and StoreOnce

[pirx]

Hi,

we are currently thinking about switching from our old tape based backup solution with agent backups to Veeam + StoreOnce for our VM environments (~1000 VMs, SAP, Oracle, MSSQL, etc). Are there already experiences with Veeam + StoreOnce, maybe Catalyst? Would it be a good idea to use a SO (maybe 6500) as backup device, without any other arrays as landing area?

Thx!

[Shestakov]

Hi,
Veeam B&R is integrated with StoreOnce from version 8.
And Veeam integrates is to be integrated with HP StoreOnce Catalyst in upcoming v9.
You can search the forums for the related discussions.
Thanks!

[mongie]

I don't use StoreOnce, but i'll give you the standard response they give everyone...

a) They recommend using a landing zone (fast disk) for primary backups, and using the StoreOnce array as your long term storage. I recommend this as well.

b) People use StoreOnce with veeam at the moment, but you should see major gains in V9 where Catalyst is supported natively. This will mean processes like Backup Copy jobs are optimised to avoid moving and rehydrating data.

[pirx]

I was hoping that an additional array would not be necessary with a StoreOnce 6500 device. We are currently using Data Protector, in a planned new backup concept (by HP) with Data Protector and StoreOnce, backups are going directly to SO. I understand that Veeam is different than DP. But I would think that a SO 6500 is sufficient as primary backup device. Given that deduplication is done in StoreOnce and not Veeam.

[foggy]

You may find it sufficient given your particular RPO/RTO requirements, however typically deduplication devices are not considered to be best practice for the primary storage and fit more in the second tier in our reference architecture. Integration with Catalyst, however, makes StoreOnce a more acceptable as primary target than a generic CIFS share on deduplication storage.

[skrause]

I was hoping that an additional array would not be necessary with a StoreOnce 6500 device. We are currently using Data Protector, in a planned new backup concept (by HP) with Data Protector and StoreOnce, backups are going directly to SO. I understand that Veeam is different than DP. But I would think that a SO 6500 is sufficient as primary backup device. Given that deduplication is done in StoreOnce and not Veeam.

If you do synthetic operations, going direct to Dedupe storage is going to have at least some performance penalty from the rehydration needed in the process. It is just the nature of the beast. Instant VM recoveries are also going to be a lot less "instant" from Deduped storage.

One thing I learned from the HP engineers when we were looking at storage options is that you can actually configure a volume on the StorOnce with de-dupe disabled and then either use Veeam Backup Copies or replication inside the StorOnce (which might even be part of the catalyst support in v9?) to move your backups to the deduped volumes for longer term retention. StorOnce is really a pretty flexible technology as far as dedupe appliances go when it comes to configuration options.

[foggy]

One thing I learned from the HP engineers when we were looking at storage options is that you can actually configure a volume on the StorOnce with de-dupe disabled and then either use Veeam Backup Copies or replication inside the StorOnce (which might even be part of the catalyst support in v9?) to move your backups to the deduped volumes for longer term retention.

In this case data will go through the gateway server, so not efficient.

[enoch]

We a looking to try a trial of HP StoreOnce VSA, is Veeam Enterprise or Enterprise Plus needed for Veeam?

[Gostev]

Enterprise Edition is enough.