UrBackup Review plus Configuration Options
-
@FATeknollogee said in UrBackup Review plus Configuration Options:
@JaredBusch said in UrBackup Review plus Configuration Options:
And this is the second reason I refuse to run XS in production.
If Veeam would/could just support XS, we'd all be in heaven!!
Veeam supports it, but not through the old product that people call Veeam. Veeam's two new agent based product lines don't talk to the hypervisor and obviously support both XS and KVM (and everything else) in that case.
-
@DustinB3403 said in UrBackup Review plus Configuration Options:
@JaredBusch said in UrBackup Review plus Configuration Options:
@DustinB3403 said in UrBackup Review plus Configuration Options:
@JaredBusch said in UrBackup Review plus Configuration Options:
@DustinB3403 said in UrBackup Review plus Configuration Options:
@JaredBusch said in UrBackup Review plus Configuration Options:
As I use Hyper-V and Veeam, I have file level restores available form the VM backup images.
With both VMWare and Hyper-V this is already possible in the normal backup solutions (Veeam/Unitrends). No need to go to yet another backup mechanism.
@JaredBusch your argument here is to use Veeam, or Unitrends, all I'm saying is you could use UrBackUp as an alternative to either of those (or Shadow Protect).
So what is your point? You're still using file level backups (with block type restore capabilities). Same here.
Just a different solution.
No, I am only using Veeam/Unitrends to back up the VM. Those products are capable of opening the VM to restore single files.
Ahh, so that is a very good thing for those solutions. 1 package to take care of block and file level restores.
And this is the second reason I refuse to run XS in production.
But why, Unitrends support XenServer. Unless you are saying that the solution for Unitrends on XS differs from Unitrends for Hyper-V.
Are you?
He might not be, but it does
-
@JaredBusch said in UrBackup Review plus Configuration Options:
@DustinB3403 said in UrBackup Review plus Configuration Options:
@JaredBusch said in UrBackup Review plus Configuration Options:
As I use Hyper-V and Veeam, I have file level restores available form the VM backup images.
With both VMWare and Hyper-V this is already possible in the normal backup solutions (Veeam/Unitrends). No need to go to yet another backup mechanism.
@JaredBusch your argument here is to use Veeam, or Unitrends, all I'm saying is you could use UrBackUp as an alternative to either of those (or Shadow Protect).
So what is your point? You're still using file level backups (with block type restore capabilities). Same here.
Just a different solution.
No, I am only using Veeam/Unitrends to back up the VM. Those products are capable of opening the VM to restore single files.
Unitrends does it via agent (so the same as UrBackup or StorageCraft or whatever) or needs to mount an image which any image based backup could do. Veeam is unique in not needing to do an image mount to do a file restore.
-
@scottalanmiller said in UrBackup Review plus Configuration Options:
@DustinB3403 said in UrBackup Review plus Configuration Options:
@JaredBusch said in UrBackup Review plus Configuration Options:
@DustinB3403 said in UrBackup Review plus Configuration Options:
@JaredBusch said in UrBackup Review plus Configuration Options:
@DustinB3403 said in UrBackup Review plus Configuration Options:
@JaredBusch said in UrBackup Review plus Configuration Options:
As I use Hyper-V and Veeam, I have file level restores available form the VM backup images.
With both VMWare and Hyper-V this is already possible in the normal backup solutions (Veeam/Unitrends). No need to go to yet another backup mechanism.
@JaredBusch your argument here is to use Veeam, or Unitrends, all I'm saying is you could use UrBackUp as an alternative to either of those (or Shadow Protect).
So what is your point? You're still using file level backups (with block type restore capabilities). Same here.
Just a different solution.
No, I am only using Veeam/Unitrends to back up the VM. Those products are capable of opening the VM to restore single files.
Ahh, so that is a very good thing for those solutions. 1 package to take care of block and file level restores.
And this is the second reason I refuse to run XS in production.
But why, Unitrends support XenServer. Unless you are saying that the solution for Unitrends on XS differs from Unitrends for Hyper-V.
Are you?
He might not be, but it does
My entire point is why look at a multiple products to handle backups.
Veeam does not offer XS support yet (agents do not count, that is effectively baremetal).
Unitrends does support XS, and has the ability to mount a backup and restore files directly.Unless another backup solution can do both the VM level and support individual file restores I would never consider it a viable solution.
All that using multiple products to perform the same function does is add complication.
-
@JaredBusch said in UrBackup Review plus Configuration Options:
As I use Hyper-V and Veeam, I have file level restores available form the VM backup images.
With both VMWare and Hyper-V this is already possible in the normal backup solutions (Veeam/Unitrends). No need to go to yet another backup mechanism.
That's what I wish someone would get in the open source space. It's a lot of work to get that working. Everyone has just been sticking to agents. In the defense of open source, in the closed source world no one but Veeam has gotten this working either. It's really just a unique and awesome Veeam feature. And even Veeam is offering agents additionally for more functionality.
-
Agree with @JaredBusch
It's Host based backups or the product doesn't exist. Agents are so yesterday!! -
@JaredBusch said in UrBackup Review plus Configuration Options:
@scottalanmiller said in UrBackup Review plus Configuration Options:
@DustinB3403 said in UrBackup Review plus Configuration Options:
@JaredBusch said in UrBackup Review plus Configuration Options:
@DustinB3403 said in UrBackup Review plus Configuration Options:
@JaredBusch said in UrBackup Review plus Configuration Options:
@DustinB3403 said in UrBackup Review plus Configuration Options:
@JaredBusch said in UrBackup Review plus Configuration Options:
As I use Hyper-V and Veeam, I have file level restores available form the VM backup images.
With both VMWare and Hyper-V this is already possible in the normal backup solutions (Veeam/Unitrends). No need to go to yet another backup mechanism.
@JaredBusch your argument here is to use Veeam, or Unitrends, all I'm saying is you could use UrBackUp as an alternative to either of those (or Shadow Protect).
So what is your point? You're still using file level backups (with block type restore capabilities). Same here.
Just a different solution.
No, I am only using Veeam/Unitrends to back up the VM. Those products are capable of opening the VM to restore single files.
Ahh, so that is a very good thing for those solutions. 1 package to take care of block and file level restores.
And this is the second reason I refuse to run XS in production.
But why, Unitrends support XenServer. Unless you are saying that the solution for Unitrends on XS differs from Unitrends for Hyper-V.
Are you?
He might not be, but it does
My entire point is why look at a multiple products to handle backups.
Veeam does not offer XS support yet (agents do not count, that is effectively baremetal).
Unitrends does support XS, and has the ability to mount a backup and restore files directly.Unless another backup solution can do both the VM level and support individual file restores I would never consider it a viable solution.
All that using multiple products to perform the same function does is add complication.
I assumed, I was just pointing out that Unitrends for Hyper-V and Unitrends for XS were very different under the hood. Actually two different products.
-
@FATeknollogee said in UrBackup Review plus Configuration Options:
Agree with @JaredBusch
It's Host based backups or the product doesn't exist. Agents are so yesterday!!Even Veeam is adding agents for more flexibility. You know in the DevOps world.... it's the opposite. Image backups are the yesterday and agent are the modern. There are two different legacy/modern cycles going on. If you are in the "legacy" snowflake systems world, image backups are awesome. Once you go DevOps modern world, image backups are silly and you go to agents (Or nothing at all in many cases.)
-
Then I be sticking to my snowflakes
Is Veeam adding agents to it's Hyper-V (windows guests) backup? -
@FATeknollogee said in UrBackup Review plus Configuration Options:
Agree with @JaredBusch
It's Host based backups or the product doesn't exist. Agents are so yesterday!!One important thing is that agentless backups are essentially always expensive. It requires Veeam and if you want full functionality a full license. It's very reasonable for what you get, it's great stuff. And Hyper-V is free for that (because Veeam wrote change block tracking for it.) But VMware gets really expensive, too.
It's worth pointing out, Hyper-V and XS are equal here. It's Veeam that made CBT for one and not the other. It's purely Veeam's decision not to support XS (which I understand, I'm just saying) and not a difference between XenServer and Hyper-V that causes one to work this way and the other not. VMware ESXi remains the only hypervisor with change block tracking in it, and not in its free version.
-
CBT is available for UrBackUp as well, in the commercial version.
-
@DustinB3403 said in UrBackup Review plus Configuration Options:
CBT is available for UrBackUp as well, in the commercial version.
CBT? Like an online training module?
-
@scottalanmiller said in UrBackup Review plus Configuration Options:
@DustinB3403 said in UrBackup Review plus Configuration Options:
CBT is available for UrBackUp as well, in the commercial version.
CBT? Like an online training module?
No . . . Change Block Tracking.
-
@DustinB3403 said in UrBackup Review plus Configuration Options:
@scottalanmiller said in UrBackup Review plus Configuration Options:
@DustinB3403 said in UrBackup Review plus Configuration Options:
CBT is available for UrBackUp as well, in the commercial version.
CBT? Like an online training module?
No . . . Change Block Tracking.
Oh, ha ha. But agent based, not for XS, right?
-
There is dedupe according to the site:
"Space efficient. If multiple clients have the same files the UrBackup server saves them only once, leading to reduced storage requirements."
-
@scottalanmiller said in UrBackup Review plus Configuration Options:
@DustinB3403 said in UrBackup Review plus Configuration Options:
@scottalanmiller said in UrBackup Review plus Configuration Options:
@DustinB3403 said in UrBackup Review plus Configuration Options:
CBT is available for UrBackUp as well, in the commercial version.
CBT? Like an online training module?
No . . . Change Block Tracking.
Oh, ha ha. But agent based, not for XS, right?
Well it would work inside of a VM I presume... since you need to install an agent for UrBackUp. .
-
@DustinB3403 said in UrBackup Review plus Configuration Options:
@scottalanmiller said in UrBackup Review plus Configuration Options:
@DustinB3403 said in UrBackup Review plus Configuration Options:
@scottalanmiller said in UrBackup Review plus Configuration Options:
@DustinB3403 said in UrBackup Review plus Configuration Options:
CBT is available for UrBackUp as well, in the commercial version.
CBT? Like an online training module?
No . . . Change Block Tracking.
Oh, ha ha. But agent based, not for XS, right?
Well it would work inside of a VM I presume... since you need to install an agent for UrBackUp. .
Yeah, that's not what anyone is really looking for.
-
I'm in the "Use an Agent" camp... Especially if you can push configuration settings, etc, via the server. (As is the case with UR Backup, IIRC).
As part of the push command to the agent, point it to the server... and let the server manage everything.
-
I'm in the middle, I like both agent and agentless approaches. I like how agent based is more flexible and agnostic. You can push to cloud and keep the agent, too.
-
I find myself in between the two options as well. I really do see the upside to Veeam, but if the solution doesn't work with the infrastructure I couldn't justify changing the entire thing just for a backup solution.
