none
Using DPM 2016 to backup a 32Tb File Share RRS feed

  • Question

  • Hi,

    We currently use another product to backup a small number of physical and virtual servers and PCs to disk and tape.  The amount of data is currently small, however the customer is looking at increasing this by adding a 32Tb file share of photos and videos.

    If the 32Tb file share is provided on a physical server, I am thinking of changing to DPM 2016 but wanted to know if anyone had any advice or experience relating to using DPM to backup a large file share of this size.  I would still be looking at backing up to disk and then to tape, but having experienced using DPM 2012 R2 before, my concern is more to do with backing up such a large file share on a weekly basis to tape.

    I have seen previously very slow throughput to tape when backing up a 1Tb file share with a large number of small compressed files to tape (LTO6) and subsequently read articles where people have mentioned this as a problem, however we will be using LTO7 tapes in a tape library.

    Is this scenario likely to be too much for DPM 2016 or should I realistically be able to protect a 32Tb share on disk and tape if running daily short term disk backups and weekly long term backups run on a Friday night?

    Any advice / thoughts would be greatly appreciated,

    Thanks

    Chris

    Monday, September 2, 2019 12:08 PM

Answers

  • Hello Chris,

    I can tell you from personal experience from a few customers running different versions of DPM.

    I have a few customers backing up quite a big amount of data (some have less than 32TB and some have more) with DPM 2016/2019 some use disk only, some use both disk and tape. I have experienced some cases with slowness regarding DPM 2016 and tapes, while nothing has been officially confirmed by Microsoft regarding this, it is clear though that backups have become slower overtime.

    Another thing that might be worth noting is that disk storage is more affordable nowadays, and is definitely a faster alternative.

    Theoretically your scenario should work but slowness might occur, there are no guarantees I'm afraid.

    If you're considering buying tapes, also make sure to check the compatible tape libraries for DPM over here:
    System Center DPM 2012 R2, 2016 and 2019 : Compatible Tape Libraries

    If you already have the storage in place, you could always give the DPM 2016 evaluation a try, that's why an evaluation version exists :-)

    Best regards,
    Leon


    Blog: https://thesystemcenterblog.com LinkedIn:

    • Marked as answer by chris624 Wednesday, September 25, 2019 10:16 AM
    Monday, September 2, 2019 12:30 PM

All replies

  • Hello Chris,

    I can tell you from personal experience from a few customers running different versions of DPM.

    I have a few customers backing up quite a big amount of data (some have less than 32TB and some have more) with DPM 2016/2019 some use disk only, some use both disk and tape. I have experienced some cases with slowness regarding DPM 2016 and tapes, while nothing has been officially confirmed by Microsoft regarding this, it is clear though that backups have become slower overtime.

    Another thing that might be worth noting is that disk storage is more affordable nowadays, and is definitely a faster alternative.

    Theoretically your scenario should work but slowness might occur, there are no guarantees I'm afraid.

    If you're considering buying tapes, also make sure to check the compatible tape libraries for DPM over here:
    System Center DPM 2012 R2, 2016 and 2019 : Compatible Tape Libraries

    If you already have the storage in place, you could always give the DPM 2016 evaluation a try, that's why an evaluation version exists :-)

    Best regards,
    Leon


    Blog: https://thesystemcenterblog.com LinkedIn:

    • Marked as answer by chris624 Wednesday, September 25, 2019 10:16 AM
    Monday, September 2, 2019 12:30 PM
  • Thanks Leon,

    That's kind of what I thought.  We currently use 2 different Quest products, one for disk backups and one for tape, however due to tech refresh options I was contemplating changing to a single product solution but I hadn't backed up such a large file share before with DPM.

    It may be a bit risky, as the possibility of a disk to disk solution is not really an option due to bandwidth and availability.  The network is also ring fenced so offsite disk options are limited.  I have used several versions of DPM in the past and whilst it seems to be relatively reliable (particularly the later versions) I have experienced a very slow tape backup rate recently (about 40Mbps) and subsequently read articles where people with older versions of DPM have reported similar issues for folders with a large number of smaller files, which makes me hesitant about using it in this situation.

    Unfortunately I don't have the option of being able to test this scenario either before making a decision.

    Thanks again for your help,

    Regards

    Chris

    Monday, September 2, 2019 1:09 PM
  • Hi Chris,

    I’m not much aware of which other backup software support backup to tapes, but having been using DPM myself for a long time I still trust this product.

    As for performance there can be many factors to why backups are slow, proper configuration and supported hardware are key factors to accomplish a good reliable backup environment.

    Slowness is often a sign of a configuration error somewhere (unless the hardware doesn’t support certain speeds), as for backups you should consider using a dedicated backup network, this usually helps backup times.

    Improving performance with a backup network address


    Blog: https://thesystemcenterblog.com LinkedIn:

    Tuesday, September 3, 2019 5:46 AM
  • Hi Leon,

    I know what you are saying and have looked at hardware, drivers, firmware etc.  I have used DPM, Rapid Recovery, Netvault, Backup Exec and NetBackup over the years, with DPM 2012 R2 being the main one we use for the majority of our systems.  To disk it has always been reliably solid and similarly to tape, apart from a few issues when the drives need cleaning and occasionally fail the jobs that are queued or running.

    This issue became apparent recently where we were backing up a large file share with a large number of small files which were compressed and we noticed that the throughput was terrible and had been over the last month (that is as far as I could see back).  Other backups were running at a reasonable rate which made me think this was a wider DPM issue rather than hardware.

    As we are proposing a solution for a customer, I am hesitant using DPM as the largest amount of data to backup is the 32Tb fileshare consisting mainly of photos and videos and I don't want to risk any issues with slow throughput for the tape backup, although it will have a weekend to run.

    Thanks for your advice and help,

    Regards

    Chris

    Tuesday, September 3, 2019 12:55 PM