CIFS Pro / Con

[cdfosburg]

Hello All,

I have been googleing around and such and it seems everyone is a little different. Here is the deal we are using a LenovoEMC px12-400r with about 27TB of usable space. I orginally mounted a lun of 15TB on a virtual Veeam proxy server, but found that for some reason wither Lenovo or VMWare is limiting me in size to 15.84TB for the disk. I don't really want to span the disks in Windows. So I am going to take the CIFS repo approach in Veeam 8.0. I am using the closest proxy as a data mover.

Before I start my backup copy jobs again to this new repo, and move 15Tb back for holding, is there any downside to this?

[Gostev]

Hello. The down side is poor reliability (most data corruptions cases in support are observed with CIFS repositories). Thanks!

[cdfosburg]

Is there any indication that I can watch for in cases of data corruption? Such as long write times etc? I just am not sure what my other options are given the amount of data that needs to be written.

[Gostev]

No indications except failed restores with metadata corruption or data decompression error.

To ensure recoverability of your backups, we recommend using SureBackup. Alternatively, you can also use Backup Validator tool, but this will catch storage-based data corruptions (such as discussed here). So, while it will guarantee that your backups are not corrupted, successful VM recovery cannot be guaranteed. While SureBackup covers it all.