Re: New Backup Solution

Replies inline:

-Cliff


"Scott Rymer" <tsrymer/at/hotmail/dot/com> wrote in message
news:A13A34F9-293A-4D8C-B180-...
> I'm going to be replacing my 72GB (3x36GB) RAID 5 with a 292GB (3x146GB)
> RIAD 5 and will also need to change my backup strategy. I'm currently
> using a DAT72 tape drive with SBS2003 and I'm slowing excluding more and
> more from the backup so it will fit on the tapes (don't worry... using an
> external USB w/ Robocopy for the rest).

Ugh. I feel your pain. Time to step up to something more manageable for
sure.

>
> Keeping SBS2008 in mind, I'm contemplating just using external USB drives
> but I've been given a competitive quote on Backup Exec (for SBS) with a
> DLT 160/320 tape solution and I'm told that this is far superior to the
> native SBS backup. Price wise, I could buy a lot of portable external USB
> drives and use the free NT Backup for the price of the Backup Exec/Tape
> solution.

Backup Exec is definitely a higher-end product. No argument. However
"superior" is in the eye of the beholder. A tractor-trailer is a superior
vehicle in almost all regards to a minivan. Both are designed to transport
"stuff" (unlike a sports-car, for example) but obviously the big rig
outclasses the mini-van. That doesn't mean that soccer-moms should start
driving big rigs everywhere.

So, in my opinion, Backup Exec has a place, but for most SBS deployments,
the SBS backup is actually the better solution. It is easier to set up,
better integrated, and has all of the major features most people need.

Ultimately, however, the only real way to make the decision between the two
is to ask "what does Backup Exec do FOR ME that SBS backup doesn't." Backup
to tape? Sure. But if you are buying new across the board, as it sounds
like you are, is that a feature you NEED. Probably not, since you can buy
external drives. Don't let a salesperson talk you into a solution just
because it is "superior." Ask them WHY and decide if the features fit your
needs and if the cost is worth it.

> I know Backup Exec includes an Exchange Agent and an add-on SQL Agent but
> what if I were to setup my future SBS2008 in a Hyper-V 1+1 scenario? Does
> Backup Exec cover this as well? What about NT Backup?

NTBackup is officially gone in '08. "Windows backup" is not even related,
code-wise. Just an FYI. If someone were skimming, they could give you
incorrect information since NTBackup is, feature-wise, different than the
built-in backup on SBS.

But address your question specifically, both products can handle Hyper-V.
But *how* they handle hyper-v (or even if then need to) depends entirely on
your backup strategy. There is a difference between running the backup
within the guest OS where it behaves (and will restore) just like a
traditional backup, and running the backup from the host, where a snapshot
of the entire running OS occurs.

Backup Exec can backup a guest OS from the host but it requires the purchase
of another agent. Specifically you'll need a MS Virtual Server agent for
Backup Exec. Windows Backup can also backup virtual machines from the
parent partition as long as you register the Hyper-V VSS Writer. There is a
technet article on how to do this and the process is simple, but I won't
bother posting more about this yet since it really isn't relevant to the
conversation. All that is important is that it *can* be done.

One important thing to consider here is that in a 1+1 setup, your SBS server
is going to be a child OS, so the "Windows Backup" path for backing up the
hyper-V OS will *not* be set up in SBS. For the backup to run via hyper-v,
you need to do so in the parent OS, so you'd use the standalone Windows
Backup program on the parent OS, which is not SBS integrated. But neither
is Backup Exec, so ultimately it is a wash.

Ultimately you have to decide why you'd want to back up a guest OS from the
host. I don't want to imply that you can't or shouldn't do this; there are
benefits to backing up guest OS's from the host. But neither do I want to
imply that it is necessary. Backups can certainly still be run in the guest
OS without ever being aware that they are running in a hyper-v server since
hyper-v drivers appear real to the guest OS. Backup products can be
blissfully unaware.

There are trade-offs with each approach, and you could, of course, do guest
AND host backups to get the best of both worlds. There is still a cost
though. this time in storage space. A *lot* of space. You are essentially
getting two backups of every server every time. So there is a lot of
thought that must go into a DR plan, regardless of product, when you add
hyper-v. Most of those decisions need to be driven by a needs assessment.
There is no shortcut.

....which brings us full circle. Yes, you *can* backup hyper-v guests with
either product, but *how* you back them up is the question.

> My gut is telling me to just go with USB drives as it seems the most
> popular option in the newsgroups...

Don't go with your gut any more than you should go with a salesman's
recommendation blindly. The only way to make this decision is to sit down,
make a list of what you need, and then choose the product that fits those
needs. It takes time. It takes planning. Google disaster recovery
whitepapers. Read. Set up a test machine to use the products you are
considering. Get a feel for their UIs, then decide which product has the
best cost/benefit ratio for your needs.