[Pc_Support] Re: Backup methodology -- centralize for lower TCO

[Damien McKenna]

On Jun 27, 2006, at 3:08 PM, Bryan J. Smith wrote:
>> The problem with the former, as I see it, is that you end up with an
>> archive within an archive, i.e you're not backing up the source files
>> you're backing up a 150gb file and that's what you'd be restoring
>> should the need arise.
>
> Actually, the software shouldn't do that.  It will "unarchive" the
> source file into a tape stream.  No double archive.  However, if the
> software is _not_ intelligent, then you're just putting a full plus
> separate incrementals to tape.

Problem solved, BackupExec does what I want in this regard.

>> We have one centralized backup server running BackupExec, I don't see
>> the purpose of having NetBackup.
>
> Far more flexibility.

Examples?

> Oh, if you're using "Advanced File Backup Option," then it may do some
> of what you want.  NetBackup has more options, although most people
> don't take advantage of them.

We don't need the Advanced File Backup Option as it turns out, the  
default BackupExec can do what we want.

> Heck, most people still stream directly to tape today, over the  
> network
> (yikes!).

Yes, right now we're doing that as we don't have the disk space to do  
a local copy first.

> BTW, what is your server?  I/O?  What is its disk as well SCSI
> controller for the tape?

We've had this discussion before.

>> Right now I'm looking at a SCSI enclosure for $55 (http://
>> www.newegg.com/Product/Product.asp?Item=N82E16817145006) and a $20
>> card (http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.asp? 
>> Item=N82E16816132002).
>
> Huh?  Why not just get an eSATA cable converter and use the on-board
> SATA channels?  Or is the server that old?

Slight Freudian slip, I meant a SATA enclosure.

> Furthermore, be _careful_ in plugging in 32-bit PCI cards on servers
> with 64-bit PCI-X slots.  You can't use 5V cards and you will often
> _slow_down_ the PCI-X slots to 33MHz.  Just FYI.  ;->

This server has 1x 64bit/33MHz 5V slot and 2x 64bit/66MHz 3.3V slots.

>> Implementation time isn't a concern, its daily maintenance that's the
>> problem.
>
> And that's where removable drives suck, _hard_.  ;->

You made an assumption there somewhere, you'll see here in a sec.

> The only thing you want to make "manual" in your backup strategy is  
> when
> you take the off-line media (e.g., tape) off-site.

Yep.

> At Boeing, we had 2 labs with Linux and Windows having constant
> _crashes_.  The problem?  External USB 2.0 and FireWire drives.  They
> even tried removable SCSI -- same issues.

That's not good.

> I put in a $100 3Ware Escalade 8006-2LP card with two 3.5" bays.   
> And in
> that 3.5" bay, I put 2.5" drives that were rubber-standoff padded.  At
> no time was more than 1 disc removed.  That prevented the "downing" of
> the server, as well as the reliance on the disk not to have issues.

Cool.

> In your case, your servers are all on the same network.  So in your
> case, you should have 1 backup server with 1 tape drive -- period.

Yep.  That's what we're doing.

>> Two main servers (the file server itself and a second server running
>> MS Exchange) plus a negligible quantity of remote files around the
>> network.
>
> In that case, you're already an ideal candidate for a centralized  
> backup
> server with local, near-line store.

Yes, again, that's what we're doing.

>> They won't be flying around?!
>
> Again, you didn't get what I meant at all.
> If you're pulling drives and moving them around, plan on 50% of 3.5"
> drives _failing_ per year.

Here's the assumption :-P  I never said we'd be swapping out the  
external drive.

Look at what we'll be doing:

* Weekly backup of ~160gb of data.
* Daily backup of <5gb of data times five days = <30gb
Total: < 200gb.

The only reason to look at an external solution is *simply* because  
there isn't enough space internally for more drives.  The *internals*  
of this server (DL380-G2) do not have any free power cords,  
everything is hard-wired to its custom SCSI setup, i.e. no SATA, no  
ATA, not even a 4-pin power cord, nuffink.  As a result of this I  
looked to an external housing of some sort and the most affordable  
way of doing it will be SATA.

>> At what point did I say that we *weren't* doing a centralized backup?
>
> You were talking about getting removable/portable hard drives.
> I was advocating _against_ that.

I was talking about _external_ drives, focusing on the "it isn't  
internal as there isn't the room" aspects rather than the "we can  
swap them out every day" aspects.

> Especially if you have to "down" the server to remove disks?

I expect that to happen rarely, i.e. to only happen upon hardware  
failure.

> Or spend $100-300 on a 3Ware or SAS card so you can hot-swap SATA?

Because they don't make any good SATA cards that are plain PCI and  
not PCI-X or PCI-E, unless I'm missing something regarding  
compatibility between 64bit PCI and PCI-X?

>> In effect I want #1 and #2 to the same.
>
> I'm not getting what you mean.

I missed a word in there, "be", i.e. the tape and nearline complete  
backups should be functionally the same.

>> BackupExec seems a bit dumb, er, crap, in this regard.  Yes, you can
>> create delta backups but it doesn't seem to let you out-of-the-box
>> create a rotating group of disk backup files.
>
> I know.

What I'll do instead is just have separate backup jobs for each day  
of the week.  Its a pain but its manageable, given how often we tweak  
any of them.

>> * One server, with the bare files, has an LTO-2 drive connected to
>> the internal SCSI controller.
>
> What speed?  LTO-2 wants Ultra160.

It is Ultra160 and it shares its bus with the older DLT-1 drive.  We  
only ever have one drive working at any one time, they're just  
sitting there until needed.  Also, the server has two channels, one  
internal and one external.

>> * There's a tiny amount of workstation-level data that's being backed
>> up but I can use something on that specific PC if needed, i.e. it
>> isn't really part of the equation.
>
> But it _does_ take up your time?
> And that requires effort to address.

Cobian Backup, five minutes to set up, forget it afterwards.  Next?

>> * I want to copy the weekly snapshot to tape so I have a 1-to-1
>> relationship between the on-disk weekly snapshot and the tapes.
>
> Why not make your local disk a _superset_ of backups to tape?

The hassle-vs-cost benefit is a bit too high right now, we can cope  
just fine with retrieving a tape from someone's house for the rare  
occasion that we might need to rescue an old file (hasn't happened in  
4 years yet).

>> * At the hardware level we're looking at an external solution due to
>> space limitations.
>
> But how are you going to "hot-swap" those external solutions?

We're not.

-- 
Damien McKenna - Web Developer - dmckenna at thelimucompany.com
The Limu Company - http://www.thelimucompany.com/ - 407-804-1014
#include <stdjoke.h>