none
dpm 2010 backing up to tape RRS feed

  • Question

  • What kind of speed should I be getting when dpm 2010 backs up an exchange 2007 sp2 mail database to an LTO-4 Drive.

    Is DPM 2010 simply piping a full backup from dpm disk to tape or is it a full backup from client to tape device.  Currently the backup is taking approx 4 hours for a 150 GB mail database.  Is the backup process also running esetuil on the mail database?

    thanks

    • Moved by Praveen D [MSFT] Monday, July 19, 2010 7:03 AM Moving to DPM Tape Protection Forum (From:Data Protection Manager)
    Monday, June 14, 2010 5:24 AM

Answers

  • DPM uses the latest local disk backup to create the tape backup, it doesn't go back to the client server.  I'm backing up a mixture of HyperV VMs (400Gb) and file server data (1Tb) to an LTO4 tape, it took about 4 hours, which is in around the 100MB/s.  DPM server is a SATA RAID5 server, SCSI Ultrium 1840 backup unit.

    As for using SATA storage for the DPM server, be careful what RAID you are using.  I had issues before with BackupExec taking a VERY long time to do disk-disk backups, turned out the server was using RAID6 (not good with your run of the mill array controller that comes in a SATA storage server), switched to RAID10 and backups rocketed along.  On the DPM server mentioned above I'm using RAID5 over 12 disks, replica of 1.2TB file server (millions of files) copied over in 6 hours, another 900Gb in 3 hours, an 80gb VM in 35 minutes.

    Moral of the story being make sure you've gone over your infrastructure with a fine comb before assuming the software is at fault, it took me 3 days onsite to get to the bottom of that RAID6 with BackupExec issue...

    Friday, August 13, 2010 10:36 AM

All replies

  • It depends how fast your drive is and if you are verifying or compressing the data.

    You have to set up backing up to tape when you create or modify the protection group, I don't think you can copy from disk backup to tape backup (the mail db will have to be written directly to tape on a seperate schedule to the disk backup).

    The option to run eseutil is given when you select the mailbox database to back up, it will ask you to provide a couple of files from your exchange installation to complete this though.

    Tuesday, June 15, 2010 3:50 PM
  • I have compression set. DPM connected to 4 Gbps fiber to the tape drive.  It took 13 hours to back up a 300 GB exchange DB....which is a little long. Since this is a CCR cluster passive node, the node itself isn't busy.  I've done some initial testing with DPM 2010 and I can restore large data chunks from disk at a reasonable speed, so my guess it is the tape drive, connection, or the IBM driver I'm using...or DPM just doesn't play well with IBM LTO-4 drives???

     

    Tuesday, June 15, 2010 4:25 PM
  • DPM seems to be slow with tapes in general is my experience with firsts tests I did
    Thursday, July 8, 2010 10:32 AM
  • DPM 2010 is tested with LTO4 drives and it is known to achieve write speeds upto 110 MBps. The bottleneck for the tape backups would be perhap the IOps available on the disk side.


    Pranay[MSFT] This posting is provided “AS IS” with no warranties and confers no rights.
    Thursday, July 8, 2010 10:53 AM
  • I dont believe this...

    I also have a IBM tape drive that I was using with Symantec for a while getting over 2GB backup speed per minute and now going at snails pace using DPM on the same server, same connections and everything.

    I just think DPM doens't do a good enough job of backing up to tape. I wish there was a rate of speed listed as well. All you can look at is the time elapsed and how much data has been transferred. Wish you could see or know what part of the tape backup it was on. At least in symantec you could see where the backup was and how fast it was going.. Even though Symantec sucks otherwise...

     

    Thursday, July 29, 2010 2:42 PM
  • It depends how fast your drive is and if you are verifying or compressing the data.

    You have to set up backing up to tape when you create or modify the protection group, I don't think you can copy from disk backup to tape backup (the mail db will have to be written directly to tape on a seperate schedule to the disk backup).

    The option to run eseutil is given when you select the mailbox database to back up, it will ask you to provide a couple of files from your exchange installation to complete this though.


    I don't mean to hi-jack the thread here, but I need some clarification on this statement.  So, if disk based is used for short-term backup and tape is used for long-term... are you saying that the tape backup does not utilize the short-term disk recovery point to create the tape?  Basically, the tape backup is still connecting directly to the client and backing it up that way? 

    I was under the impression that the long-term to tape would work similar to a duplication, in that it would just make a copy of the last short-term recovery point from local storage.  This just seems like a complete waste of network I/O when the backed up data is already on local storage.  I hope this isn't how DPM is designed to work, because this is a show-stopper.

    Friday, August 6, 2010 3:07 PM
  • I believe it does utilize the copy on disk.  We updated firmware on the DPM storage disks which seemed to have helped some.  Backing up DPM volumes for File Servers has proven to be very close to impossible....at least with SATA disk as your DPM storage.  I'd suggest that if you have the need to backup TBs of data on a file server that contains millions of files, that the target volume not be on SATA disk.  SATA just can't perform well enough.  It takes days to make an initial copy of our file server data (over 10 million files), and if DPM needs to do a resynch...more days can pass where no additional backups can occur to that DPM volume, as DPM checks that things are in sync.  Additionally since DPM can't do incrementals to tape, your only choice is to back a full copy to tape.  In our case DPM is taking days to cut a backup copy to LTO-4....which since we were hoping to do daily....it isn't practical.  Our other backup vendor probably wouldn't fair much better either if it had to do a full backup to tape either.  The ususal debate...buy gobs of cheap storage or pay piles of $$ for the same amount of storage on better performing disk. 
    Monday, August 9, 2010 2:03 AM
  • DPM uses the latest local disk backup to create the tape backup, it doesn't go back to the client server.  I'm backing up a mixture of HyperV VMs (400Gb) and file server data (1Tb) to an LTO4 tape, it took about 4 hours, which is in around the 100MB/s.  DPM server is a SATA RAID5 server, SCSI Ultrium 1840 backup unit.

    As for using SATA storage for the DPM server, be careful what RAID you are using.  I had issues before with BackupExec taking a VERY long time to do disk-disk backups, turned out the server was using RAID6 (not good with your run of the mill array controller that comes in a SATA storage server), switched to RAID10 and backups rocketed along.  On the DPM server mentioned above I'm using RAID5 over 12 disks, replica of 1.2TB file server (millions of files) copied over in 6 hours, another 900Gb in 3 hours, an 80gb VM in 35 minutes.

    Moral of the story being make sure you've gone over your infrastructure with a fine comb before assuming the software is at fault, it took me 3 days onsite to get to the bottom of that RAID6 with BackupExec issue...

    Friday, August 13, 2010 10:36 AM
  • Philip:

    mind me asking ...what  are you using for storage?  I've considered using RAID 5, but on 1 TB disks...we were getting rebuild times in the days timeframe and decided we had to go with RAID 6 as a precaution....but maybe it is more of a thorn than it is worth?  On another thought.....your file server data...what kind of times are you getting from DPM when it does a consistency check on your file volumes?  It takes more than 3 days for DPM to do a consistency check our file server ..which is 5 plus TB and 10 million plus files.  Just wondering what your experience has been?

    Monday, August 16, 2010 5:35 AM
  • HP DL320S with 12 750GB SATAs for storage.  I'm pretty sure rebuild times are considerably less then a day, with rebuild priority set to high on the controller.  Yes RAID6 is a problem on bog standard disk storage type servers, the controllers tend to be quite light weight, often without decent caching and of course there's the slow SATA disks.  It's only a backup server at the end of the day, RAID5 with a hot spare should be more then sufficient, assuming you're backing DPM up to tape.

    I haven't seen any consistency checks yet as DPM is quite new to this site sorry.

     

    Monday, August 16, 2010 9:40 AM
  • Just thought I'd throw down some times for comparison purposes in future.  This is a longterm protection (following short to disk) to tape using Ultrium 1840 onto LTO4 tapes.  I worked out the rates roughly...

     

    Type		Time HH:MM:SS	Transferred	Rate
    
    File		01:36:54	616414.69MB	105MB/s
    File		01:58:52	884980.06MB	123MB/s
    SysState	00:01:37	9755.88MB	101MB/s
    HyperV		00:03:06	25964.75MB	144MB/s
    HyperV		00:02:05	14640.88MB	122MB/s
    HyperV		00:02:06	12292.75MB	102MB/s
    HyperV		00:01:35	11888.81MB	132MB/s
    HyperV		00:11:08	99268.88MB	149MB/s
    HyperV		00:07:08	56106.88MB	131MS/s

    Wednesday, August 18, 2010 1:29 PM
  • Final update on this; you asked about a consistency check speed test.  Just did one on 1.2TB of file data in 820,000 files, it took 2 hours 43 minutes and transferred 2.8Gb.  Same DPM server as above, source data is from a file server running on a fairly basic 3GB/s SAS SAN...
    Thursday, August 19, 2010 1:05 PM
  • Thanks.

    That does hold true in a basic ratio for what I'm seeing......We have 5x the data but millions more files.  The consistency check drags on for days as it chugs away file by file.

     

    Friday, August 20, 2010 5:18 AM
  • Did you consider virtualising the file server and just backing up the VHDs instead of file-by-file?
    Friday, August 20, 2010 7:45 AM