- Posts: 51
- Liked: 10 times
- Joined: Apr 17, 2014 8:25 am
- Full Name: Jens Siegmann
Currently, with our old and outdated Veeam B&R 8.0 infrastructure we're keeping a reverse incremental backup chain of around 180 days and switch storage devices thereafter. This was done to cope with limits on the storage side and yes, we are aware of how bad such a long (reverse) chain of backups is.
Now that we're moving to Veeam 9.5, I get a chance to completely redo the setup, but am also limited on the storage side, but can do ReFS (Windows Server 2016, ReFS repo on affordable but not do bad SAS backend - 24x4 TB HDD, dual controller, quite some cache). We've switched all jobs to Forever Forward Incremental with weekly synthetic fulls on ReFS. Now my idea was either to use a backup copy job to a new location (on same storage), and set up weekly and monthly retentions. As this makes use of ReFS, it should not consume a lot of storage (1x initial copy + a weeks delta plus ReFS pointer overhead, right?).
On the other hand, I am wondering if there's any downside in having a long Forever Forward Incremental chain with weekly Synthetic Fulls? As the change rate is not so much compared to the net capacity (50 GB/day), we could just go with this setup...
- Veeam Software
- Posts: 18790
- Liked: 1650 times
- Joined: Jul 11, 2011 10:22 am
- Full Name: Alexander Fogelson
- SVP, Product Management
- Posts: 25782
- Liked: 3968 times
- Joined: Jan 01, 2006 1:01 am
- Location: Baar, Switzerland
The need for second storage is kind of perpendicular to retention: you need this regardless of whether your retention requirements are short or long term. Normally, you'd have a primary backup repository (fast storage, short retention to cover operational recoveries) - and a secondary backup repository holding backup copies (cheaper slow storage, long retention to cover your data retention requirements).
Users browsing this forum: Bing [Bot] and 25 guests