none
Offsite Single DPM Server with no Secondary RRS feed

  • Question

  • Is it possible/supported to have a single DPM server that resides offsite with no secondary DPM server; e.g. there would be no on-site DPM server?

    I'm thinking that this could be a good solution for some of my clients who say they can't afford a dual server DPM setup. Unlike some of my clients, many of the small businesses aren't interested in buying primary high availabilty storage, primary backup storage, secondary backup storage, and long-term tape library storage.

    I imagine that due to these customers generally having just 10Mbps WAN links that I would also be taking the initial backups on-site and then moving the server across town after the first sucessful backup.

    Thank you.


    Aaron Marks
    Saturday, February 26, 2011 9:16 AM

Answers

  • Hi,

    Nothing prevents you from having the DPM server offsite and yes that is fully supported provided you have the minumum bandwidth of 512kbs between sites.  Bandwidth limitations will be the determining factor on how feasible that is.  Because of the way DPM does block level backup of just changed data, we're pretty efficient on the backup side of the house, but restores copy entire file(s), so if you have a small pipe, it could take excessively long time if you have a lot to restore.  Moving it back to the home location again for large restore operations may be the only way to recover fast.  So this is something you would need to test ahead of time.


    Regards, Mike J. [MSFT] This posting is provided "AS IS" with no warranties, and confers no rights.
    Saturday, February 26, 2011 2:25 PM
    Moderator
  • Hi,

    Yes, that is a very viable option, using removable HDD to restore large files will work fine.  Probably in most cases restoring via the network will still be the most convient and depending on file size and bandwidth be able to be done reasonably quickly.  You can play with restores in the local office to simulate a remote connection by enabling bandwidth throttling for the protected servers agent and see how long it takes to restore large files with reduced IO. That will hep you determine if having to use external HDD is even necessary.


    Regards, Mike J. [MSFT] This posting is provided "AS IS" with no warranties, and confers no rights.
    • Marked as answer by Aaron M Marks Sunday, February 27, 2011 8:55 PM
    • Unmarked as answer by Aaron M Marks Sunday, February 27, 2011 8:56 PM
    • Marked as answer by Aaron M Marks Sunday, February 27, 2011 8:56 PM
    Sunday, February 27, 2011 1:07 AM
    Moderator

All replies

  • Hi,

    Nothing prevents you from having the DPM server offsite and yes that is fully supported provided you have the minumum bandwidth of 512kbs between sites.  Bandwidth limitations will be the determining factor on how feasible that is.  Because of the way DPM does block level backup of just changed data, we're pretty efficient on the backup side of the house, but restores copy entire file(s), so if you have a small pipe, it could take excessively long time if you have a lot to restore.  Moving it back to the home location again for large restore operations may be the only way to recover fast.  So this is something you would need to test ahead of time.


    Regards, Mike J. [MSFT] This posting is provided "AS IS" with no warranties, and confers no rights.
    Saturday, February 26, 2011 2:25 PM
    Moderator
  • but restores copy entire file(s), so if you have a small pipe, it could take excessively long time if you have a lot to restore.  Moving it back to the home location again for large restore operations may be the only way to recover fast.  So this is something you would need to test ahead of time.


    Regards, Mike J. [MSFT] This posting is provided "AS IS" with no warranties, and confers no rights.

    I think the most efficient way for me to perform any large non-disaster recoveries in this case would be to just perform a restore on the remote-DPM server to a locally attached external HDD. Then just drive the external HDD back to the main location. This would work very well for VHD recoveries in theory.

    What do you think of that?


    Aaron Marks
    Saturday, February 26, 2011 9:23 PM
  • Hi,

    Yes, that is a very viable option, using removable HDD to restore large files will work fine.  Probably in most cases restoring via the network will still be the most convient and depending on file size and bandwidth be able to be done reasonably quickly.  You can play with restores in the local office to simulate a remote connection by enabling bandwidth throttling for the protected servers agent and see how long it takes to restore large files with reduced IO. That will hep you determine if having to use external HDD is even necessary.


    Regards, Mike J. [MSFT] This posting is provided "AS IS" with no warranties, and confers no rights.
    • Marked as answer by Aaron M Marks Sunday, February 27, 2011 8:55 PM
    • Unmarked as answer by Aaron M Marks Sunday, February 27, 2011 8:56 PM
    • Marked as answer by Aaron M Marks Sunday, February 27, 2011 8:56 PM
    Sunday, February 27, 2011 1:07 AM
    Moderator