I've only seen this mentioned a few different spots. Is anyone using the feature in windows called storage replica to replicate windows based repositories? Any success stories?
Looks like it can handle change block tracking replication
-
- Influencer
- Posts: 15
- Liked: 1 time
- Joined: Oct 03, 2018 8:07 pm
- Contact:
-
- Product Manager
- Posts: 8191
- Liked: 1322 times
- Joined: Feb 08, 2013 3:08 pm
- Full Name: Mike Resseler
- Location: Belgium
- Contact:
Re: Anyone using Windows storage replica for repositories?
Hi brlomaba1.
I haven't tried this but I don't see any issues at this point in time (which means I can't guarantee though so test first please ). Storage Replica operates below the file level so technically our repositories are not even aware that they are being replicated. It works with delta's so yes you can consider this "change block tracking". The difference with Veeam VBR is that it doesn't use snapshots for it, only uses some sort of journal of IO's that are changed. So every IO that has been done on the source is synchronously (or async depending on the network and your settings) is sent to the target and applied there also. It does mean however that we are looking into crash-consistency and not application-aware consistency. But as said, I see not really issues as it operates below the file-level (besides maybe some serious IO overhead whenever new files are being written in the repository, or a transform is active on the source)
I haven't tried this but I don't see any issues at this point in time (which means I can't guarantee though so test first please ). Storage Replica operates below the file level so technically our repositories are not even aware that they are being replicated. It works with delta's so yes you can consider this "change block tracking". The difference with Veeam VBR is that it doesn't use snapshots for it, only uses some sort of journal of IO's that are changed. So every IO that has been done on the source is synchronously (or async depending on the network and your settings) is sent to the target and applied there also. It does mean however that we are looking into crash-consistency and not application-aware consistency. But as said, I see not really issues as it operates below the file-level (besides maybe some serious IO overhead whenever new files are being written in the repository, or a transform is active on the source)
Who is online
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 67 guests