Veeam Backup 4.0 Release

[TrevorBell]

works with getright and the firefox plugin for me..

[withanh]

I'm also Firefox 3.5.4, it's probably a caching thing then. Just wanted to give a heads up.

Nice job on the new release!

[satheesh]

Wow! This is great! Hope the e-mail with the new license-file will be coming soon!

[dlove]

i got the email with .lic file. so far so good but I'm trying a new install wiht the "appliance" feature and so far it's slowwwwww at 10MB/s but I'll mess around with the settings to figure it out.

**Update** it ramped up in speed to 27MB/s with a ver. 7 VM and changed block tracking on! Can't wait to see how long the incremental takes

Thanks Veeam!

[Gostev]

From beta reports, for some people appliance mode works even 10-20% faster than direct SAN access in some cases. Like 70-80MB/s for SAN mode, but 80-90Mb/s for Virtual Appliance mode on the exact same job. Let me start moving some topics from closed beta forum to the main forum, so that you can see the expected numbers for specific hardware.

[drbarker]

not yet 100% sure if this thread still applies to the new version, I know at least one real-world example when having multipathing enabled with EMC PowerPath software on Dell/EMC CX4 SAN did NOT affect vStorage API processing performance on Veeam Backup 4.0 Beta.

fyi: I've just confirmed vStorage API is OK with powerpath x64 5.3 on win 2k3.

[Gostev]

Great, thanks for updating glad to see VMware did not copy VCB issues to vStorage API

Only one thing concerns me now, may be this is because EMC = VMware, and so they do cross-testing and all that... meaning, multipathing from other storage vendors may still be hurting. Cannot say for sure until we here from non-EMC SAN users...

[drbarker]

Great, thanks for updating glad to see VMware did not copy VCB issues to vStorage API

Only one thing concerns me now, may be this is because EMC = VMware, and so they do cross-testing and all that... meaning, multipathing from other storage vendors may still be hurting. Cannot say for sure until we here from non-EMC SAN users...

Seems OK from an EQL array too

[Gostev]

So you are confident that multipathing is no longer the issue? Do you think I should post this in your VCB thread? It has like 5000 views by now, and links to it from all over the internet.

[drbarker]

So you are confident that multipathing is no longer the issue? Do you think I should post this in your VCB thread? It has like 5000 views by now, and links to it from all over the internet.

Yes, I think multipathing is safe with the vstorage api.

(That said, I've only had veeam 4 for 20 hours, and only have two array types to test against! )

[withanh]

I use IBM DS3300 iSCSI storage arrays with what I believe is multipathing and do not see any issues either, but the backups only have run a couple of times using Veeam4.

I'm also not 100% clear on if multipathing is set up, my vendor says that the way I have it configured *is* using multipathing, so I must be, right

So the way I'm configured is on my SAN the controller has 2 1GigE connections. Each of these connections has its own IP address configured. Then on my VMware hosts (and on my Veeam backup server) I have the software iSCSI initiator configured to look at both of those IP addresses. So that's multipathing, right?

And to throw another wrench in it, the SAN actually has 2 controllers, each with 2 connections (all 4 are configured on both ends), so I potentially have 4 connections in to the array, right?

Geez, I started this response intending on giving good feedback on another storage vendor & multipathing only to realize I'm not really that sure about multipathing LOL

[raphael@schitz.net]

Backup of FT VMs will be supported after vSphere update that enables ability to backup FT VMs through vStorage API is released.
http://communities.vmware.com/message/1266792#1266792

Still no support
Any ETA ?

[Gostev]

All that we know for sure is that this feature did not make it into vSphere Update 1.

I have no information at this time on timelines when VMware is going to make this feature available (but even if I had, it would be under NDA, so not something I would be able to share on public forums).

[raphael@schitz.net]

Too bad
Anyway, thank you for your answer