Andreas Neufert wrote:Reverse Incremental is in the product since v1 and is a good recommendation.
Depending on the amount of VMs you want to backup to that apollo system and the nature of the Apollo Raid Controllers forward incremental chains work a bit more performant on this system as more sequential processing happens on storage side.
In most cases Reverse Incremental is as well a good choice for Apollo systems. Just test and compare it.
Andreas Neufert wrote:You can install Linux on the apollos as well so that you can use them as repository servers => then you have to create additional Proxy and Veeam Servers.
Maybe as well an idea to use it as host and ceate backup server + linux repo + windows proxy on it... maybe with Hyper-V to use the Host as DirectSAN Backup with FC if needed.
bg.ranken wrote:So poulpreben, do you have any write ups or anything else on the 4200 yet or was what you posted in this thread the only information you had so far?
poulpreben wrote:bg.ranken wrote:So poulpreben, do you have any write ups or anything else on the 4200 yet or was what you posted in this thread the only information you had so far?
To be fair, Andreas has conducted all the testing for the whitepaper, so I totally agree with the checklist he has already posted above Since we were not able to make the Apollo server sweat even at 1 GB/s backup throughput from our 3PAR, I am planning on doing some simple I/O tests with 'fio' this Friday. We are not including these tests in the whitepaper, as the configuration we are testing only has SATA drives, and thus the performance results will be worse than what most other customers will be experiencing. If you are interested, I will be more than happy to post them here.
Users browsing this forum: Bing [Bot], GlillDat, Google [Bot] and 35 guests