Hi,
BMR and BESR each have their own benefits.
Here is some more info about BMR:
1. License is free 6.5 onwards, but yes, it needs to be requested for
separately.
2. Since BMR provides cross platform support. complexity of configuration
depends a bit on the OS that you are using BMR on.
3. BMR Basically has 3 components:
a. A BMR Master Server that ALWAYS goes on the NBU Master Server.
(If your NBU Master Server is on Windows, no separate installation of
BMR Master Server is needed, but you need to configure it by running a command
called bmrsetupmaster, it is very simple, does not ask you for any kind of
inputs, just goes ahead and initializes BMR Database.)
b. A BMR Client that is ALWAYS present on all NBU Clients. This is the one
who collects the Machine configuration in terms of n/w & storage configuration
information.
c. A BMR Boot Server. This is a component that hosts platform specific
entities called "SRTs" (Shared Resource Trees) and is only required if you have
to restore a client. This Boot Server supports booting a bare metal machine
over network as well as using a CD/DVD/ISO image. Normally 1 boot server per OS
Type is needed. Creating the SRTs is very simple on Windows and slightly
complex on Unix since it asks you for OS media/images.
The main benefit of BMR is that the client data and configuration are two
distinct entities. Which makes it possible for BMR to provide facilities like
DSR (Dissimilar System Restore - Available on Windows only) and DDR (Dissimilar
Disk Restore - Windows as well as Unix) these are very useful when you dont
have an exact same machine as the one that has just crashed in terms of general
hardware and disks (number, size etc.)
Incremental BMR Backups are fast since BMR does not collect all the files to
create an "image" for every incremental backup. It can exploit the 1st full and
later incremental backups taken by NBU.
HTH,
Amol.
Brendan Clover wrote:
> Hi Simon
>
> BESR and BMR work quite differently. BESR creates a complete image of the
> hard drive which can be restored via the BESR recovery disk and the server is
> usable again. BMR stores server specific information (e.g. registry) on tape
> but requires another server with the OS files on it. A BMR restore is done
> from the Netbackup Console, once initiated it gathers the required
> information from tape, combines with the OS data stored on the recovery
> server and pushes it to the server being restored.
>
> BESR is much easier to set up and can be managed through a central management
> console (although this is a separate purchase) but has its quirks and the
> service occasionally hangs on the client (although this seems to be greatly
> reduced with 8.5) meaning that backups aren?t run. I haven?t tested BMR yet,
> it is one of those when I get time projects, but have been advised by
> Symantec that it is more reliable than BESR.
>
> The other thing with BESR is backups can take a while and consequently I
> would only recommend it for the system partition/drive. For example our
> Windows 2008 servers have a 30Gb System drive and are using around 15Gb of
> that, the backup can take 20 ? 30 minutes.
>
> Regards,
>
> Brendan Clover
> Information Technologist
> Systems Infrastructure
> University of South Australia
> Phone: +61 8 830 23641
> Fax: +61 8 830 25800
>
> Log your own service calls here: http://www.unisa.edu.au/helpdesk
> (http://www.unisa.edu.au/helpdesk)
> AskIT documentation and FAQs: http://www.unisa.edu.au/askit
> (http://www.unisa.edu.au/ists/ITHelpDesk/FAQS/)
>
> -------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> This e-mail may be privileged and/or confidential, and the sender does not
> waive any related rights and obligations. Any distribution, use or copying of
> this e-mail or the information it contains by other than an intended
> recipient is unauthorised. If you received this e-mail in error, please
> advise me (by return e-mail or otherwise) immediately
>
> From: veritas-bu-bounces < at > mailman.eng.auburn.edu
> [mailto:veritas-bu-bounces < at > mailman.eng.auburn.edu] On Behalf Of Ed
> Wilts
> Sent: Tuesday, 12 May 2009 6:28 AM
> To: Simon Weaver
> Cc: VERITAS-BU < at > mailman.eng.auburn.edu
> Subject: Re: [Veritas-bu] BackupExec Sys Recovery 8.5 or NetBackup 6.x
>
>
> On Mon, May 11, 2009 at 3:44 PM, Simon Weaver <Simon.Weaver < at > iscl.net
> (Simon.Weaver < at > iscl.net)> wrote:
>
> So on the basis it was included with 6.5, it should do the same or in fact
> similar job to BE System Recovery ?
> Not had chance to try or even see this in action.
>
>
> I have never used BE System Recovery nor have I actually gotten around to
> setting up BMR yet so I don't know how they compare.
>
>
> >
> >
> > You say it needs to be installed seperately.... I assume you mean license
> > key?
> >
>
>
> License key plus mucho configuration.
>
>
> >
> >
> >
> > From: Ed Wilts [mailto:ewilts < at > ewilts.org (ewilts < at > ewilts.org)]
> > Sent: 11 May 2009 21:43
> > To: Simon Weaver
> > Cc: VERITAS-BU < at > mailman.eng.auburn.edu (VERITAS-BU < at >
> > mailman.eng.auburn.edu)
> > Subject: Re: [Veritas-bu] BackupExec Sys Recovery 8.5 or NetBackup 6.x
> > On Mon, May 11, 2009 at 3:15 PM, Simon Weaver <Simon.Weaver < at > iscl.net
> > (Simon.Weaver < at > iscl.net)> wrote:
> > As I understand it, the "BMR" feature is part of the 6.x suite. So if they
> > upgrade from 5.1 to 6.x they are going to get the features of 6.x plus BMR?
> >
> >
> > The license was included starting with 6.5. It still needs to be installed
> > separately.
> >
> >
> >
> > >
> > > .../Ed
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
+----------------------------------------------------------------------
|This was sent by amol_vaikar AT yahoo DOT com via Backup Central.
|Forward SPAM to abuse AT backupcentral DOT com.
+----------------------------------------------------------------------
_______________________________________________
Veritas-bu maillist - Veritas-bu AT mailman.eng.auburn DOT edu
http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/mailman/listinfo/veritas-bu
|
