1. Welcome Guest! In order to create a new topic or reply to an existing one, you must register first. It is easy and free. Click here to sign up now!.
    Dismiss Notice

Backups

Discussion in 'Windows Home Server' started by Ed, Sep 21, 2009.

  1. Ed

    Ed Guest

    I need to copy about a terabyte of data a day from my datacenter to our DR
    site. Does anyone know of a good solution for this? I am copying CIFS acroos
    a 3mbps WAN link. I am running windows 2003 servers using a BlueARC SAN
     
  2. Suppose you can use maximum bandwidth and don't do anything else but backup,
    you can use simple math:
    3 Mbps = 300 kBps
    300 kBps * 3600 seconds (1 hour) = 1.08 GBph
    1.08 GBph * 24 hours (1 day) = 25.92 GB per day
    1000 GB (1TB) / 25.92 = 38.5802 days

    This math does not take into account compression. Even at the best rate of
    compression (let's say 50%), you would need 19 days.

    I would suggest you start thinking about two stage backup.
    1st stage disk based.
    2nd stage tape based.
    With fast arrays/SANS and link speeds 2GBps and above.

    You've got steps above, just substitute the numbers.

    Good luck


    "Ed" <Ed@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
    news:F9D81F7A-78B4-447E-9C88-72A4401C29A1@microsoft.com...<!--coloro:blue--><span style="color:blue <!--/coloro-->
    >I need to copy about a terabyte of data a day from my datacenter to our DR
    > site. Does anyone know of a good solution for this? I am copying CIFS
    > acroos
    > a 3mbps WAN link. I am running windows 2003 servers using a BlueARC SAN <!--colorc--><!--/colorc-->
     
  3. On Sep 21, 5:44 pm, Ed <E...@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote:<!--coloro:blue--><span style="color:blue <!--/coloro-->
    > I need to copy about a terabyte of data a day from my datacenter to our DR
    > site. Does anyone know of a good solution for this? I am copying CIFS acroos
    > a 3mbps WAN link. I am running windows 2003 servers using a BlueARC SAN<!--colorc--><!--/colorc-->

    Because, as Dusko pointed out in his post, you can't get a terabyte
    down a 3mbps link, you need to look at what your data differential is
    per day.

    You want to only send the change in data, rather than all the data.

    So look for some kind of a disk block method, where only changed
    blocks are sent. This takes very little bandwidth in comparison,
    especially if done in psudo-real-time, meaning throughout the day and
    night, changed blocks are immediately transmitted to the mirrored
    (remote) end.

    Microsoft's Data Protection Manager is supposed to do this, and
    Microsoft hired away one of Double-Take Software's VPs, as I read
    somewhere about a year ago. But Microsoft's product only targets
    their own data types, so if your needs go beyond MS networks and apps,
    you need to look further.

    Double-Take is still in business and offers an excellent stand-alone
    product you can buy and configure yourself - and it's multi and
    possibly cross platform, meaning it has ports for Linux as well as
    Windows.

    Double-Take also performs byte-change transfer as well as block-
    change. This allows it to keep small files completely up-to-date at
    both ends of a mirror.

    I've use Double-Take at one site. It's an expensive (all this
    software is right now) and a brilliant product that duplicates data
    between two (or more) sites (at around $2,500 per site). With Windows
    Server 2003 it's rock solid, and keeps gigs of data fully synchronized
    within minutes. It can sync both ways, or one way.

    While $5,000 for two endpoints from Double-Take seems high,
    Microsoft's DPM is less to start, but climbs right up there too.
    Anybody that can do this well is going to charge a lot for it, because
    frankly, there's no other way as you can see by the math, to pull this
    kind of thing off. It's difficult enough just to get 1TB of data
    backed up on a LAN in an 8-hour window.

    Recently, one of my Dell servers crashed, but the replicated data on
    the mirror was used to restore it. This mirror was remotely located,
    using a DSL-to-Cable modem based VPN capable of no more than 1.5 Mbps
    transfer rate.

    There's a lot of players in this field now, including big names like
    Cisco who are targeting more than just data backup. Specifically,
    they're applying data de-duplication, block and byte differential
    analysis and application specific traffic demand analysis on MS SQL,
    Oracle, DB2, MS Exchange, CIFS (MS File Systems) and many other apps
    and file structures to accelerate data availability over remote or
    slow networks.

    Just google "ip based data duplication remote mirror sync" and other
    stuff like "double-take" and go from there, and get educated. There's
    a lot of solutions and an awful lot to learn about what's good, and
    what's not. Be weary of supposed "White Papers" as they are often not
    independent and are very, very biased toward their own products.

    'gluck
     
  4. Ed

    Ed Guest

    is it possible to do compression at the server level- with third party
    software than do compression across the WAN with a hardware appliance like a
    Cisco WAAS

    "Dusko Savatovic" wrote:
    <!--coloro:blue--><span style="color:blue <!--/coloro-->
    > Suppose you can use maximum bandwidth and don't do anything else but backup,
    > you can use simple math:
    > 3 Mbps = 300 kBps
    > 300 kBps * 3600 seconds (1 hour) = 1.08 GBph
    > 1.08 GBph * 24 hours (1 day) = 25.92 GB per day
    > 1000 GB (1TB) / 25.92 = 38.5802 days
    >
    > This math does not take into account compression. Even at the best rate of
    > compression (let's say 50%), you would need 19 days.
    >
    > I would suggest you start thinking about two stage backup.
    > 1st stage disk based.
    > 2nd stage tape based.
    > With fast arrays/SANS and link speeds 2GBps and above.
    >
    > You've got steps above, just substitute the numbers.
    >
    > Good luck
    >
    >
    > "Ed" <Ed@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
    > news:F9D81F7A-78B4-447E-9C88-72A4401C29A1@microsoft.com...<!--coloro:green--><span style="color:green <!--/coloro-->
    > >I need to copy about a terabyte of data a day from my datacenter to our DR
    > > site. Does anyone know of a good solution for this? I am copying CIFS
    > > acroos
    > > a 3mbps WAN link. I am running windows 2003 servers using a BlueARC SAN <!--colorc--><!--/colorc-->
    >
    >
    > <!--colorc--><!--/colorc-->
     
  5. Ed

    Ed Guest

    is it possible to do compression at the server level- with third party
    software than do compression across the WAN with a hardware appliance like a
    Cisco WAAS

    "Dull Nouvelle" wrote:
    <!--coloro:blue--><span style="color:blue <!--/coloro-->
    > On Sep 21, 5:44 pm, Ed <E...@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote:<!--coloro:green--><span style="color:green <!--/coloro-->
    > > I need to copy about a terabyte of data a day from my datacenter to our DR
    > > site. Does anyone know of a good solution for this? I am copying CIFS acroos
    > > a 3mbps WAN link. I am running windows 2003 servers using a BlueARC SAN<!--colorc--><!--/colorc-->
    >
    > Because, as Dusko pointed out in his post, you can't get a terabyte
    > down a 3mbps link, you need to look at what your data differential is
    > per day.
    >
    > You want to only send the change in data, rather than all the data.
    >
    > So look for some kind of a disk block method, where only changed
    > blocks are sent. This takes very little bandwidth in comparison,
    > especially if done in psudo-real-time, meaning throughout the day and
    > night, changed blocks are immediately transmitted to the mirrored
    > (remote) end.
    >
    > Microsoft's Data Protection Manager is supposed to do this, and
    > Microsoft hired away one of Double-Take Software's VPs, as I read
    > somewhere about a year ago. But Microsoft's product only targets
    > their own data types, so if your needs go beyond MS networks and apps,
    > you need to look further.
    >
    > Double-Take is still in business and offers an excellent stand-alone
    > product you can buy and configure yourself - and it's multi and
    > possibly cross platform, meaning it has ports for Linux as well as
    > Windows.
    >
    > Double-Take also performs byte-change transfer as well as block-
    > change. This allows it to keep small files completely up-to-date at
    > both ends of a mirror.
    >
    > I've use Double-Take at one site. It's an expensive (all this
    > software is right now) and a brilliant product that duplicates data
    > between two (or more) sites (at around $2,500 per site). With Windows
    > Server 2003 it's rock solid, and keeps gigs of data fully synchronized
    > within minutes. It can sync both ways, or one way.
    >
    > While $5,000 for two endpoints from Double-Take seems high,
    > Microsoft's DPM is less to start, but climbs right up there too.
    > Anybody that can do this well is going to charge a lot for it, because
    > frankly, there's no other way as you can see by the math, to pull this
    > kind of thing off. It's difficult enough just to get 1TB of data
    > backed up on a LAN in an 8-hour window.
    >
    > Recently, one of my Dell servers crashed, but the replicated data on
    > the mirror was used to restore it. This mirror was remotely located,
    > using a DSL-to-Cable modem based VPN capable of no more than 1.5 Mbps
    > transfer rate.
    >
    > There's a lot of players in this field now, including big names like
    > Cisco who are targeting more than just data backup. Specifically,
    > they're applying data de-duplication, block and byte differential
    > analysis and application specific traffic demand analysis on MS SQL,
    > Oracle, DB2, MS Exchange, CIFS (MS File Systems) and many other apps
    > and file structures to accelerate data availability over remote or
    > slow networks.
    >
    > Just google "ip based data duplication remote mirror sync" and other
    > stuff like "double-take" and go from there, and get educated. There's
    > a lot of solutions and an awful lot to learn about what's good, and
    > what's not. Be weary of supposed "White Papers" as they are often not
    > independent and are very, very biased toward their own products.
    >
    > 'gluck
    > <!--colorc--><!--/colorc-->
     
  6. Yes, both are possible, but your initial copy, or backup, will take the same
    amount of time that Dusko pointed out. There are several third party
    products. Cisco WAAS will cache CIFS and compress it and I hear it does a
    good job. I don't know that it fits your situation unless they've changed
    the way CIFS is handled with it. Still in the same boat though, initial copy
    of data will take forever.

    You need to be thinking, instead of compression for backup across WAN, of
    transmitting block level changes and synching the data. That will be much
    less data going across your WAN. As Dull points out MS DPM will do the trick
    as will several third party products.

    If your Windows 2003 Servers are R2, you can take advantage of the new DFS.
    I've used it very successfully and have been happy with the results.
    Although I did not have 1TB of data to replicate, I did have several GBs of
    data.

    So in short, if you get a hard copy via tape, DVDs, hard drives or whatever
    media to your DR site, you can then use a MS product, or a third party
    product that will synch the data through block changes in data rather than
    the complete files.


    hth,
    Brooke


    "Ed" <Ed@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
    news:2A73E45F-E3E9-41C7-A77E-DA2723BA3197@microsoft.com...<!--coloro:blue--><span style="color:blue <!--/coloro-->
    > is it possible to do compression at the server level- with third party
    > software than do compression across the WAN with a hardware appliance like
    > a
    > Cisco WAAS
    >
    > "Dusko Savatovic" wrote:
    ><!--coloro:green--><span style="color:green <!--/coloro-->
    >> Suppose you can use maximum bandwidth and don't do anything else but
    >> backup,
    >> you can use simple math:
    >> 3 Mbps = 300 kBps
    >> 300 kBps * 3600 seconds (1 hour) = 1.08 GBph
    >> 1.08 GBph * 24 hours (1 day) = 25.92 GB per day
    >> 1000 GB (1TB) / 25.92 = 38.5802 days
    >>
    >> This math does not take into account compression. Even at the best rate
    >> of
    >> compression (let's say 50%), you would need 19 days.
    >>
    >> I would suggest you start thinking about two stage backup.
    >> 1st stage disk based.
    >> 2nd stage tape based.
    >> With fast arrays/SANS and link speeds 2GBps and above.
    >>
    >> You've got steps above, just substitute the numbers.
    >>
    >> Good luck
    >>
    >>
    >> "Ed" <Ed@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
    >> news:F9D81F7A-78B4-447E-9C88-72A4401C29A1@microsoft.com...<!--coloro:darkred--><span style="color:darkred <!--/coloro-->
    >> >I need to copy about a terabyte of data a day from my datacenter to our
    >> >DR
    >> > site. Does anyone know of a good solution for this? I am copying CIFS
    >> > acroos
    >> > a 3mbps WAN link. I am running windows 2003 servers using a BlueARC SAN<!--colorc--><!--/colorc-->
    >>
    >>
    >> <!--colorc--><!--/colorc--><!--colorc--><!--/colorc-->
     

Share This Page