|
Re: [Networker] VTLs and backups
2011-06-07 20:15:04
On 6/7/2011 5:21 PM, mitch808 wrote:
VTL's are a dieing technology. People much prefer to backup to disk, going
further with backing up to a disk target that does deduplication.
Your 9TB's of Exch is nothing with modern dedupe appliances.
VTL's are complex when they don't need to be. They emulate tape,and suffer the same
physical limitations that tape has, even though it's "virtual."
It's much easier to move data over an NFS mount or CIFS share, and let your
backup app clone or duplicate to tape from there.
My personal preference is just get the correct sized DataDomain box, and call
it a day. Go one step further and throw in BOOST, and a 2nd box and you can
replicate your data through NW as a simple clone job. Now you can minimize or
completely eliminate your tape requirements if you replicate to a different
location.
I agree with this. We got a VTL a number of years ago on one server
(primarily for license reasons), and went with AFTD on another (that we
considered less critical). Given it all over again I'd get a plain array
and do AFTD on it. No sense in an overly complex device to emulate
something I don't really need it to emulate any more.
Maximizing client parallelism to spindles could be an interesting
exercise...
-Brian
To sign off this list, send email to listserv AT listserv.temple DOT edu and type
"signoff networker" in the body of the email. Please write to networker-request
AT listserv.temple DOT edu if you have any problems with this list. You can access the
archives at http://listserv.temple.edu/archives/networker.html or
via RSS at http://listserv.temple.edu/cgi-bin/wa?RSS&L=NETWORKER
|
|
|
