Shadow Protect SPX vs Veeam
-
OK So this is just a bit of nagging question. Which is better? We currently have SPX and while it works fine for our guest level (and file level restores) it seems archaic and bulky.
I've had issues using their recovery environment and flat out told to "just use the windows recovery media creation tool". Which to me seems insane, why have a tool that doesn't work?
Is anyone able to provide a reasonable comparison of these two tools?
-
I think SPX is agent based, Veeam is not.
-
@Dashrender said in Shadow Protect SPX vs Veeam:
I think SPX is agent based, Veeam is not.
SPX is agent based, Veeam makes both agent and agentless type products.
-
That doesn't really answer the question guys. I know Veeam is the go to solution if you need a backup appliance. But I currently have one, and am disappointed with it.
While not my call to get rid of SPX, I can at least bring up the option. Just need to know why we might change from SPX to Veeam.
We are using SPX as an agent on our systems, so the same would likely apply to Veeam.
-
@DustinB3403 said in Shadow Protect SPX vs Veeam:
That doesn't really answer the question guys. I know Veeam is the go to solution if you need a backup appliance.
Veeam doesn't make appliances. That's Unitrends or Datto.
-
@scottalanmiller said in Shadow Protect SPX vs Veeam:
@DustinB3403 said in Shadow Protect SPX vs Veeam:
That doesn't really answer the question guys. I know Veeam is the go to solution if you need a backup appliance.
Veeam doesn't make appliances. That's Unitrends or Datto.
. . .
-
The biggest issue will be that SPX has been around for a while but Veeam's agent based backups are brand new. So almost no one out there using them, especially not the commercial, scheduled ones.
-
@scottalanmiller said in Shadow Protect SPX vs Veeam:
The biggest issue will be that SPX has been around for a while but Veeam's agent based backups are brand new. So almost no one out there using them, especially not the commercial, scheduled ones.
https://go.veeam.com/windows-backup
OK good to know, I didn't know they had agents... Looks like the Windows one is still in Beta.
-
So what is it about SPX you don't like? Their boot recovery disk doesn't work? That does seem like a total failure on their part for full system recovery.
I've used Veeam (pre agent) to backup full VMs and then restore individual files with no issues. I've never restored a full system/VM though through the paid product.
I have used Veeam Endpoint Protection to make full backups and then restored those full backups into a VM and they worked. (in fact in the process of restoring one right now).
-
@Dashrender said in Shadow Protect SPX vs Veeam:
So what is it about SPX you don't like? Their boot recovery disk doesn't work? That does seem like a total failure on their part for full system recovery.
This and the fact that the platform as a whole seems horribly convoluted.
-
I've always been confused why you were/are running two separate backups of your XenServer VMs. SPX should be able to handle everything for you. Sure SPX might not be able to recreate the VMs themselves in XS in case of a full restore need, but it takes like 2 mins to build the VM, assign the VDIs, then boot from the recovery media for SPX - restore done. A one step restore.
With your current method, you restore using XO, then you have to run SPX to put the latest version of the files back from SPX, two step restore.
-
@DustinB3403 said in Shadow Protect SPX vs Veeam:
@Dashrender said in Shadow Protect SPX vs Veeam:
So what is it about SPX you don't like? Their boot recovery disk doesn't work? That does seem like a total failure on their part for full system recovery.
This and the fact that the platform as a whole seems horribly convoluted.
What makes it a failure?
What makes it convoluted? Can you share screen shots of things that you feel are overly complicated? -
@Dashrender said in Shadow Protect SPX vs Veeam:
I've always been confused why you were/are running two separate backups of your XenServer VMs. SPX should be able to handle everything for you. Sure SPX might not be able to recreate the VMs themselves in XS in case of a full restore need, but it takes like 2 mins to build the VM, assign the VDIs, then boot from the recovery media for SPX - restore done. A one step restore.
With your current method, you restore using XO, then you have to run SPX to put the latest version of the files back from SPX, two step restore.
It was an opt'd for approach, to have the block level with XO, and then still have the SPX option.
-
@Dashrender said in Shadow Protect SPX vs Veeam:
@DustinB3403 said in Shadow Protect SPX vs Veeam:
@Dashrender said in Shadow Protect SPX vs Veeam:
So what is it about SPX you don't like? Their boot recovery disk doesn't work? That does seem like a total failure on their part for full system recovery.
This and the fact that the platform as a whole seems horribly convoluted.
What makes it a failure?
What makes it convoluted? Can you share screen shots of things that you feel are overly complicated?The failure is on the recovery environment. The user interface when using the program (i don't have screenshots) is just awkward to say the least.
It doesn't help that I use SPX so rarely in my day to day, but if you recall going from Windows 2000 to XP, you'll understand what it feels like.
-
@DustinB3403 said in Shadow Protect SPX vs Veeam:
@Dashrender said in Shadow Protect SPX vs Veeam:
@DustinB3403 said in Shadow Protect SPX vs Veeam:
@Dashrender said in Shadow Protect SPX vs Veeam:
So what is it about SPX you don't like? Their boot recovery disk doesn't work? That does seem like a total failure on their part for full system recovery.
This and the fact that the platform as a whole seems horribly convoluted.
What makes it a failure?
What makes it convoluted? Can you share screen shots of things that you feel are overly complicated?The failure is on the recovery environment. The user interface when using the program (i don't have screenshots) is just awkward to say the least.
It doesn't help that I use SPX so rarely in my day to day, but if you recall going from Windows 2000 to XP, you'll understand what it feels like.
Is that really the fault of the product? I wouldn't think so. Scott's post from a few mins ago talks about book - really more about reading in this context - but it sounds like you need to sit down and RTFM.
Don't feel bad, I'm not great at doing that myself.
-
@Dashrender I'd love to RTFM if I ever had time, there are other issues that cause me to not be able to do this (management), but also the expectation that I be an "expert" on SPX.
-
@DustinB3403 said in Shadow Protect SPX vs Veeam:
@Dashrender I'd love to RTFM if I ever had time, there are other issues that cause me to not be able to do this (management), but also the expectation that I be an "expert" on SPX.
OK @scottalanmiller Here's a question - would you call Dustin (or anyone) lazy for not taking time out of their non working hours to read manual in the above situation?
If you do, when do you consider yourself 'off the clock' enough to not be learning something new for IT?
-
@Dashrender you are using the example of someone not wanting to work while not paid to compare to an unrelated conversation where someone didn't want to do their job while on the clock.
-
@scottalanmiller said in Shadow Protect SPX vs Veeam:
@Dashrender you are using the example of someone not wanting to work while not paid to compare to an unrelated conversation where someone didn't want to do their job while on the clock.
yes and no - I was more wondering if you consider it an IT person's job to learn regardless of being paid or not.
Let's assume Dustin is personally trying to learn about MariaDB. But his work needs him to learn about SPX. Should he spend that free time that he wanted to spend on MariaDB instead on SPX? or is it his company's job to give him the time to learn on their dime?
-
@Dashrender said in Shadow Protect SPX vs Veeam:
@scottalanmiller said in Shadow Protect SPX vs Veeam:
@Dashrender you are using the example of someone not wanting to work while not paid to compare to an unrelated conversation where someone didn't want to do their job while on the clock.
yes and no - I was more wondering if you consider it an IT person's job to learn regardless of being paid or not.
Let's assume Dustin is personally trying to learn about MariaDB. But his work needs him to learn about SPX. Should he spend that free time that he wanted to spend on MariaDB instead on SPX? or is it his company's job to give him the time to learn on their dime?
Unless the company is paying you, its illegal to work. Learning something for your job is working.
