Veean Backup Space vs vranger7

VMware specific discussions

Re: Veean Backup Space vs vranger7

Veeam Logoby Supi_Du » Wed Apr 16, 2014 9:56 am

I will do... when back home :-) right now business ours in germany,
Supi_Du
Influencer
 
Posts: 11
Liked: never
Joined: Mon Apr 14, 2014 10:43 am
Full Name: Stefan Zimmer

Re: Veean Backup Space vs vranger7

Veeam Logoby Gostev » Wed Apr 16, 2014 4:15 pm

Supi_Du wrote:@Gostev: As we not compare the exact same environment your 4GB is not comparable. (As not written: your backup was runing against a fresh SRV2008R2 Install?

Stefan, perhaps you have simply missed a part of my post, because I did explain our test in details:

Gostev wrote:I've asked our QC to perform the exact same test: backup fresh install of Server 2008R2. No extra steps such as drive cleanup or anything - literally just install OS, logon for the first time, and perform the backup.

We will be waiting to hear your new test results. Thanks!
Gostev
Veeam Software
 
Posts: 21390
Liked: 2349 times
Joined: Sun Jan 01, 2006 1:01 am
Location: Baar, Switzerland

Re: Veean Backup Space vs vranger7

Veeam Logoby Supi_Du » Wed Apr 16, 2014 9:12 pm

So, fresh Test and fresh results.
First, I can repeat the 4GB size with Veeam... but vranger has again better compression Engine. 3,5GB. 8)

First Picture, Test from new Server 2008R2 SP1 install. Size about 9GB, both Programms with good compression.
Image

Second, a backup mixture. SRV2008R2 fresh, 2008R2 with updates, SRV2012 with updates and fresh Win 8.1 Pro. Surprise, Vranger beat's again.
Image

Third Picture to show the size of the vm's and the Infos from Veeam.
Image

Enough testing from me. More tests are only be done for free Veeam License. :lol: (looking for 2x Veeam Essentials Standard 2 socket for Vmware , 2 ESXI Host with 2 sockets ) :mrgreen:
Supi_Du
Influencer
 
Posts: 11
Liked: never
Joined: Mon Apr 14, 2014 10:43 am
Full Name: Stefan Zimmer

Re: Veean Backup Space vs vranger7

Veeam Logoby Gostev » Wed Apr 16, 2014 10:43 pm 1 person likes this post

Supi_Du wrote:So, fresh Test and fresh results.
First, I can repeat the 4GB size with Veeam... but vranger has again better compression Engine. 3,5GB. 8)

Thanks for the follow up and confirmation. vRanger may provide better compression *by default*, but remember that we give you a choice of compression engines in the advanced job settings. Feel free to switch to higher compression levels if you are ready to put more load on your Backup Proxy CPU.

Our results were:

4GB with "Optimal" (our default starting v7) < best "size to CPU consumed" ratio
3.2GB with "High" (was the default until v7) < this one is already better than vRanger
There is also "Extreme" (we did not test this one, but I would expect backup size slightly over 3GB).
Gostev
Veeam Software
 
Posts: 21390
Liked: 2349 times
Joined: Sun Jan 01, 2006 1:01 am
Location: Baar, Switzerland

Re: Veean Backup Space vs vranger7

Veeam Logoby jsprinkleisg » Sat Apr 26, 2014 10:05 pm

foggy wrote:Anton is talking about NTFS design here. Deleting files from NTFS volume does not change the actual content of the corresponding disk blocks, instead those blocks are marked as unused. Since Veeam B&R is a block-level image-based solution, all it cares is the contents of blocks. If a block is not zeroed, but has some data in it (though it might be marked as free by NTFS), it will be backed up. If you have large amount of blocks like that, those blocks get into the backup file and hence you see the large backup file size (while non image-based solutions will copy actual data only). This is why sdelete should help to obtain comparable backup sizes.

For anyone not aware, vRanger has a feature they call Active Block Mapping, which allows the software to detect blocks marked by NTFS as deleted/free, and skip over them when creating the image-level backup. If this feature is enabled during your testing it may account for some difference in the backup file size depending on how much free space inside the guest had previously been written to. I don't remember if vRanger has ABM enabled by default or not.

I always thought this would be a cool feature for Veeam to have also. But as Anton noted previously, production VMs don't typically have a great deal of deleted data. So vRanger's ABM feature would be of limited usefulness in many environments.
jsprinkleisg
Service Provider
 
Posts: 13
Liked: 2 times
Joined: Wed Dec 09, 2009 9:59 pm
Full Name: James Sprinkle

Re: Veean Backup Space vs vranger7

Veeam Logoby Gostev » Sun Apr 27, 2014 8:20 pm

Limited usefulness would be fine, if it did not come at cost of significant processing overhead to parse the entire MFT for deleted data. This feature works great if you specifically prepare a lab where vRanger should beat Veeam: plain vanilla server install with no applications (so just a few tens of thousands of files in the file system), write a lot of data and delete it immediately just before the test.

But take a real world workload (actually useful server with some real-world application installed and serving many users), and now you have at least 10 times more files on the file system (millions is not uncommon), and ever-growing data set with little to no data deleted without being overwritten. You backups start to crawl due to NTFS parsing process slowing things down significantly, and there is no deleted data to exclude anyway...

On the other hand, there is one thing that we do (that vRanger does not do) that is actually useful saving disk space and yet does not impact backup performance. I am talking about swap file exclusion. That's easily a few GB saved from every backup run of an active server!
Gostev
Veeam Software
 
Posts: 21390
Liked: 2349 times
Joined: Sun Jan 01, 2006 1:01 am
Location: Baar, Switzerland

Re: Veean Backup Space vs vranger7

Veeam Logoby jsprinkleisg » Mon Apr 28, 2014 2:17 am

They've supposedly had capability of skipping the pagefile since vRanger 6.1. Though apparently it didn't work at first. :roll:

https://support.software.dell.com/vranger/kb/111413
jsprinkleisg
Service Provider
 
Posts: 13
Liked: 2 times
Joined: Wed Dec 09, 2009 9:59 pm
Full Name: James Sprinkle

Re: Veean Backup Space vs vranger7

Veeam Logoby Supi_Du » Tue Apr 29, 2014 9:37 am

With vranger 7 the pagefile-skipping should work now. At least i can see an Improvement in Backup-Speed for vranger, see http://vmware-forum.de/viewtopic.php?p=161422#161422.

And to stop thinking of Gostev:
Gostev wrote:....This feature works great if you specifically prepare a lab where vRanger should beat Veeam: plain vanilla server install with no applications (so just a few tens of thousands of files in the file system), write a lot of data and delete it immediately just before the test.

My Test-Setup was not build to say Software "X" is better than Software "Y". I just evaluated the different software for building a new Installation (Switch from ESXi 4.1 + Phys 2008R2 Vcenter to ESXi5.5 + Phys 2012R2) This was done at home in my freetime, your verfiy was surely in Veeam labs.
If Veeam would have support for german language, I would have no Problems to "sell" the Product to my CEO. But as he also supporting me in IT Business , he likes to have Software in German language.
That's the "Plus" for Vranger and BackupExec for example.
Supi_Du
Influencer
 
Posts: 11
Liked: never
Joined: Mon Apr 14, 2014 10:43 am
Full Name: Stefan Zimmer

Re: Veean Backup Space vs vranger7

Veeam Logoby Gostev » Tue Apr 29, 2014 2:56 pm

Hi Stefan, actually I was not talking about you in this case, I just wanted to point out that competition likes to do this kind of stuff in various "comparisons". However, we can be sure your lab was somehow "special" as well, because neither us nor you yourself were able to reproduce the behavior again following this very simple "clean OS install" test from scratch.

As to your other point, different vendors choose to invest in different features, this is expected. It all matters in the value each specific feature brings to the product. While vRanger was focused on localization, we were innovating and delivering ground braking technical features. This was our bet, and you know the results... vRanger completely lost market to Veeam, despite they were unquestionable leader in VMware backup 6 years ago. We do realize that lack of localization will make us lose 1 or 2 deals, but it does not matter in the bigger picture. Currently, Germany is our single biggest market in EMEA in terms of revenue (many times bigger than any other country) despite our product is not localized to German.

Let me know via PM if your CEO would like to talk to some of the largest German companies, who all decided Veeam features and reliability was far more important than lack of localization to German language. I can certainly talk to our local team and see if they can organize something.

Dankeschön!
Gostev
Veeam Software
 
Posts: 21390
Liked: 2349 times
Joined: Sun Jan 01, 2006 1:01 am
Location: Baar, Switzerland

Re: Veean Backup Space vs vranger7

Veeam Logoby Supi_Du » Tue Apr 29, 2014 3:45 pm

Top be clear, CEO of a company about 40 employe. So not that big business. I will discuss me findings with him and we will see. Thanks in advance for your offer.
Supi_Du
Influencer
 
Posts: 11
Liked: never
Joined: Mon Apr 14, 2014 10:43 am
Full Name: Stefan Zimmer

Re: Veean Backup Space vs vranger7

Veeam Logoby lp@albersdruck.de » Tue Apr 29, 2014 8:55 pm 1 person likes this post

Supi_Du wrote:My Test-Setup was not build to say Software "X" is better than Software "Y". I just evaluated the different software for building a new Installation (Switch from ESXi 4.1 + Phys 2008R2 Vcenter to ESXi5.5 + Phys 2012R2) This was done at home in my freetime, your verfiy was surely in Veeam labs.
If Veeam would have support for german language, I would have no Problems to "sell" the Product to my CEO. But as he also supporting me in IT Business , he likes to have Software in German language.
That's the "Plus" for Vranger and BackupExec for example.


I am in a similar company as you are: small size (~50 employees, 2 ESXi hosts with 2 sockets each, Veeam Essentials).
Buying Veeam was the right decision to back up our environment. I am lucky though, my CEO is not that "opposed" to english software (although he prefers German localized as well) and trusts my decisions in these matters.

You must have struck a nerve with Gostev though, he got a bit defensive ;)
BTW unless you have a lot of physical servers, stay away from BackupExec. IIRC they still do not support their media server to be installed on 2012R2.
lp@albersdruck.de
Enthusiast
 
Posts: 81
Liked: 31 times
Joined: Mon Mar 25, 2013 7:37 pm
Full Name: Lars Pisanec

Re: Veean Backup Space vs vranger7

Veeam Logoby jsprinkleisg » Thu Jan 21, 2016 10:40 pm

I'm happy to see Veeam finally added the capability of skipping deleted blocks with the BitLooker feature in v9.
jsprinkleisg
Service Provider
 
Posts: 13
Liked: 2 times
Joined: Wed Dec 09, 2009 9:59 pm
Full Name: James Sprinkle

Re: Veean Backup Space vs vranger7

Veeam Logoby Gostev » Thu Jan 21, 2016 11:28 pm

Ha! It was one of those features that was easier to deliver than keep explaining the users why we don't have it... other than that, I still think that aside of corner cases, this feature is largely useless for most server workloads that we expect to see running in VMs. Which is why we did not even bother promoting it, unlike other major v9 functionality.

But in those corner cases, it does get users excited ;)
Gostev
Veeam Software
 
Posts: 21390
Liked: 2349 times
Joined: Sun Jan 01, 2006 1:01 am
Location: Baar, Switzerland

Previous

Return to VMware vSphere



Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Google [Bot], JVA@Alsic and 28 guests