@Dashrender said:

Makes what Katie just posted kinda difficult. 😉

Yeah, I've noticed that even in the Unitrends Community, which is the forum for the community edition (aka Unitrends Free). Unitrends employes have been giving different answers to the same questions. I'm wonderg if they aren't basing their answers off some internal version rather than the Unitrends free public beta. They also said on the forums that the disk based exclusions currently are not working even if selected in the GUI, I don't even have the option for that. So, I'm guessing it's that the non working features are not in the public beta.

@scottalanmiller said:

Hmmmm... how many Euros I wonder?

about 1,400

If the download will ever finish.

Feel free to delete this post from this thread 🙂

@dafyre said:

My thinking was more along @scottalanmiller's this time... But like everything "it depends" on what the server does. For a File Server, or an application server (Exchange, et al) that we previously mentioned, to me an agent would make more sense.

However, I thought that restoring to different hardware was actually a function of the restore process, and not necessarily part of the backup process. (I guess it depends on what backup software we are talking about).

Your first, and thus main, backup should always be the entire VM for anything.

If you then need some of the features a backup from inside the OS gives you, then make secondary backups there.

Veeam can be made application aware and issue commands inside the guest to ensure the specified application is in a state for a valid recovery. I would assume that Unitrends has similar functionality, but no idea.

lol @handsofqwerty
While we are on the subject of yellow attire, I wsa reminded of "the yellow dart":
http://www.homestarrunner.com/sbemail64.html

@nadnerB I just finished coughing and choking on my coffee lol - thanks man

@DenisKelley said:

To be honest, I've never (after close to 20 years in IT) gotten passionate about a backup software before Veeam. It's weird.

Same here.

@dafyre said:

@scottalanmiller said:

That's silly since they said that they were not monitoring it and they were just trusting you to only use 1TB as it is.

In two weeks you get a phone call: SAM, I see you are using 1.6 TB of source data on our free Unitrends package... Would you like to upgrade now?

For we can settle this in court. haha. Buy or else.

@thecreativeone91 said:

@scottalanmiller said:

Yes, Pertino can go directly on the "new" installs of UEB. Not if you have an old CentOS 5 one. You can always reinstall now.

I guess the new beta's are likely CentOS 7?

Pretty sure it's CentOS6

The single biggest complaint that has been held in common by people for several years now has been the fact the web UI is flash based. With a new, sleek HTML5 interface, I would expect Unitrends to see some even more accelerated growth!

@thecreativeone91 said:

@nadnerB said:

@thecreativeone91 said:

@nadnerB said:

We have auditors. They aren't a scam. Sometimes a bit misguided as some of the auditors have very little tech experience but not a scam.
 
However, I will make a point of saying that it's a government requirement and we all work for the same clowns.

Government ones are the worst. CJIS is very strict.

CJIS? What is that?
 
I'll go ahead and make up some silly alternatives because that's the way my head works.
Courtroom Justice In Space
Counter Jargon Idiot Spectrum
Charles Jest Intolerable Stabber
Can Julie Investigate Satchels
Cruise Joke In Ship

CJIS is Criminal Justice Information Systems It's from the FBI.

Oh, I see. That just screams boatloads of red tape, bureaucracy and migraines

@thecreativeone91 said:

@thanksajdotcom said:

@scottalanmiller said:

@thanksajdotcom said:

Ok, I'd think it'd be a simple thing to add the CentOS 6 repos, run a yum update, and allow the packages to update. What makes it not that simple?

That it does nothing. A CentOS 5 system, pointed to CentOS 6 repos will simply see the as not applying. You can't change your OS version using YUM.

Oh, I was not aware of that.

Maybe you are thinking of Minor release updates, not major release.

Yeah, must be.

I use CrashPlan PRO on a Linux machine to mount my Synology NAS via NFS and offsite my Veeam Backups.

This is a supported method of backing up a NAS.

http://support.code42.com/CrashPlan/Latest/Backup/Mounting_Networked_Storage_Or_NAS_Devices_For_Backup

cp

@art_of_shred said:

It really does work most of the time. It's difficult to make a plug and play, one size fits all product for business computing. Every environment is unique, and every admin has their own methodology to configuring their architecture (often, that is driven by general cluelessness and/or ignorance). I think that, given the diversity of what you have to be able to adapt to, the roughly 95% success rate that I have seen with incremental forever is pretty decent. The thing that makes it somewhat aggravating is that it is a proprietary mechanism that is held rather tightly. Even inside of Unitrends, there doesn't seem to be a lot of general knowledge floating around about how to fix it when it doesn't work. The algorithms that control it are basically "unknown". It's a magical thing, powered by pixie dust, and you don't mess with it; it just kinda does its thing. If you have a Unitrends support contract, and it's giving you trouble, they can help diagnose it and get it fixed. For the rest of us...

Only complaint would be that for a backup system, 95% success rate is way, way too low for it to be a recommendation. It should be a "this is really fragile but if you want to give it a shot and monitor it closely, here it is" kind of thing at that point. It's a neat idea but if it doesn't match the reliability of traditional setups, I'd think recommendations should fall to the reliable. No aspect of IT has a stronger leaning towards consistent, conservative and reliable as backups.

@thecreativeone91 said:

Some how I Dont think anyone that can afford the paid version of UEB or an appliance is going to be using C@C for anything they care to backup.

You can get a free UEB over there, which is what I use, and lots of people here are over there, and use C@C.

@scottalanmiller said:

Oh, if on CentOS 5 you are out of luck. Pertino has always been known to not support libraries that far back and because it is so old they have no intention of making it work on a system so old. Sorry, that's just how that works. We have one database server that can't upgrade from CentOS 5 right now and it is left without Pertino 😞

Ah ok. Yeah, they're still using CentOS 5, and I have the latest Unitrends. Dang it...

How did I miss that one? I thought I mentioned to look at the capacity setting in Settings/Storage & Retention/Backup Devices. Since the release of 7.5, I've seen a few systems that have it set to 200GB by default (glitch). It should be a custom size, equal to the actual allocated backup space in the D2D storage (something like 4898GB on an 824, for example). But, I'm glad you found it and got it fixed. Hopefully that will go away in the next updates, but it's been happening fairly regularly for the past few weeks.

Yup, pretty normal. Postgres is the database. Hashing never stops, baby.

Unitrends is constantly preparing itself for need to do an autosynth, and is working on the dedup and inline hashing and everything else all the time. It's pretty normal for postsgres to be pegged.