ADSM-L

Re: [ADSM-L] disadvantages / limitations to using Exchange restores from VE backup?

2016-09-19 08:44:52
Subject: Re: [ADSM-L] disadvantages / limitations to using Exchange restores from VE backup?
From: Stefan Folkerts <stefan.folkerts AT GMAIL DOT COM>
To: ADSM-L AT VM.MARIST DOT EDU
Date: Mon, 19 Sep 2016 14:43:02 +0200
Nobody using this and willing to share some experiences?

On Thu, Sep 15, 2016 at 6:18 PM, Stefan Folkerts <stefan.folkerts AT gmail DOT 
com>
wrote:

> Thanks Lee but I would think those are more VE issues in general and not
> really specifically related to using VE backups for Exchange restores right?
>
> I'm wondering what experiences people have with using VE data for Exchange
> restores via the "open .edb file" option in the Exchange TDP.
>
> On Thu, Sep 15, 2016 at 2:07 PM, Lee, Gary <glee AT bsu DOT edu> wrote:
>
>> The major things I've run into are
>>
>> 1. if vmware is using nfs for its storage, after a vmotion, the next
>> backup of that vm will be a full, including unused disk space. CBT doesn't
>> work.
>>
>> 2. same as one, but occurs if disk volumes are added.  Same cause.
>>
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: ADSM: Dist Stor Manager [mailto:ADSM-L AT VM.MARIST DOT EDU] On Behalf 
>> Of
>> Stefan Folkerts
>> Sent: Thursday, September 15, 2016 4:28 AM
>> To: ADSM-L AT VM.MARIST DOT EDU
>> Subject: [ADSM-L] disadvantages / limitations to using Exchange restores
>> from VE backup?
>>
>> Hi all,
>>
>> I'm looking into using VE-based backups for Exchange restores via the TDP.
>> I've never used this before but it seems pretty great since you don't have
>> to do any full backups (VE incremental forever) or reserve the space for a
>> recovery mailstore to be restored on disk.
>>
>> Anybody using this that can give some practical tips or limitations for
>> implementing/using this?
>>
>> Or anybody that looked at this and decided not to go ahead with it willen
>> to share the reasons to not use it?
>>
>> Regards,
>>    Stefan
>>
>
>

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>