UrBackup Review plus Configuration Options



  • https://www.urbackup.org/

    So with looking at backup options from all of the different discussions here on MangoLassi.it I decided to try UrBackup, for a few very simple reasons. First its' server is installable to Windows (which doesn't scare people away), it supports Windows, *nix, and Apple product lines, and it's completely free to use (of course there is a paid support option as well), and lastly the interface isn't stuck to an individual client or server, it has a built in Web console.

    So getting down to the nitty gritty, a few things I was looking for was that the server be installable to a Windows. UrBackup supports 64-bit Windows OSX from Vista and newer (Server 2008 says the documentation). Along with *nix server distros.

    This is a no brain-er consideration for me, as we have Volume licensing (of course using a linux server distro would work as well), but again, a main consideration was that the server appliance be installable to Windows for previously mentioned reasons.

    The next consideration I was looking for was a system that supports a variety of client systems. UrBackup does this, supporting Windows, *nix and Mac OSX. Each client has their own installation procedure, but on Windows this is as simple as downloading the client executable.

    The last major consideration I was looking for was something that isn't stuck to an individual master-node. Many solutions like ShadowProtect require you to access a system with the application installed, and then mount the backup finally allowing you to browse the backup and lately restore whatever you need. In my personal opinion this is painful because you may not have a system with the agent installed, which means you have to download the agent to any network system, install it, connect it to the storage, and proceed from there to finally restore whatever it is that needs to be restored.

    Although it works, it's cumbersome to use, and the interface in the most current version is awkward to say the least. And solutions like these cost a small fortune annually, namely because they are sold in license packs (not site packs). A 3-server pack of SP without premium support for 1 year is $3,120.75 as of today 11-7-16). Of course you could purchase a longer term contract. Like buying food at Sam's Club. Bulk discount.

    But still more money upfront 3 years for $4,369.05. So still not a Great Value™ (pun intended).

    So what do we have? Most options are relatively expensive, offer some level of call-in or email support, support for restoring to bare metal, consolidation capabilities along with being able to backup database systems.

    What does UrBackup have over this, well for one the software is free, it has the same capabilities as StorageCrafts' ShadowProtect, including Image creation for bare metal or VM restoration, along with file level backup, plus support for Databases. ( http://blog.urbackup.org/255/windows-backup-api-support-in-urbackup-2-1-x )

    Now a lot of people might say, but why do I need block level and file level restore? To respond I can only say have you ever accidentally deleted a file, and said well crap time to reinstall?

    Well hopefully not, because you'd have a service like Microsoft Volume Shadow Services to restore the file (or a Shadow Protect like solution).

    With any hypervisor, a big ticket item is block level restore capabilities. If you lose a host, you can restore your VM's as they were when the backup was last run. But sometimes if you're running a file server, and a user calls and says "Hey I deleted {insert something} you just need to restore that. Which is where file level restore capabilities come in.

    Restoring a few files, or even several folders (maybe even a few hundred GB of data) will better over all if you could just restore those files, while not effecting the other folders or shares.

    Now while you could use VSS on Windows, this is dependent on Windows, and fine tuning of how much data you want to keep by allocating so many GB of storage to it. Which might never get to exactly what you want. Say 5 days is what you need to keep; Certainly VSS could do it, but it'll only be so close. And this still requires you to perform the restore operations on the local system vs a centrally managed web console.



  • So how does UrBackup work, well it's agent based. Meaning on each client you install an agent which communicates to the server. This is identical to how Shadow Protect works, so no gain / loss here. The gain here is that you can have as many clients as you have systems in your organization. So be it a single server or 1500 servers and 3000 user systems. This is a big item, as licensing for solutions such as Shadow Protect is per system (generally). Which means your cost goes through the roof at some point.

    Which you might just throw out the idea of have file level backups. But what if you had no backup solution choices at all, you had to purchase something, well I guess there is a very shiny penny your about to spend. (sorry)

    Anyways, file level backups can be extremely critical for many businesses, so just throwing them out entirely isn't an option. And while paying a fortune to cover your critical systems is often settled upon, it isn't desired. Another benefit is you can backup your user systems at no additional upfront cost. So for a very simple reason you need file level restore, file servers. It is why people enable and use VSS on windows systems, then they go to Shadow Protect type solutions to cover the block level. Or the "oh %^* moments".

    Which many hypervisors such as XenServer or KVM do block level backups natively and for free. Of course your storage space needs to be considered here, and storage, even as cheap as Spinning rust is, still cost money. So there is that to consider.

    But still no reason to not have multiple backups, the more backups you have, the better your recovery chances are. Just remember to offset your desires with real-world risks.

    Anyways, back on track.

    If your business grows in number of servers that it must run for day to day functions, be they VM's or physical (I hope they're VMs by this point) you'll likely want some kind of backup mechanism. Hypervisor level solutions work great, but work at the block level (Xen Orchestra for example). Because just like UrBackup or Shadow Protect you can restore to dissimilar hardware, or insert a recovery ISO (cd dvd w/e) and restore at the block level. But with these since they are agent based, you get the file level granularity you often need.

    Another benefit of file level backup solutions is that you often get a recovery medium (block level restore medium). So you pop in the recovery iso (or dvd) and boot from that medium, browse to your backup location, and restore the whole block device.

    This of course could be redundant, but lets say you get hit with ransom-ware. It may be your only option. Great to have, even if you don't need it, yet another + for UrBackup as this too is available for free.



  • So the options in UrBackup include some really critical things, such as how many backups to keep, what kind of backups to create (image type, file type, or some combination) and of course how many of each type of backup to keep, how often to run, and of course where to store the backups.

    On Windows this is a critical thing to note (most other systems as well, but here more so than others IMO). Windows will (by default I believe) share out the administrative share C$. Which immediately makes that a target for ransom-ware. Now since UrBackup uses a service account (local service account by default) it still needs to be considered, which provides almost no protection, the share of your server could be scanned for. So this must be considered closely if the use of windows as a backup target.

    A best practice is to avoid being stupid, and do not share out your backup directory. Using the Windows Administrative share as a backup directory is obviously a dumb thing to do.

    Besides this, the solution seems solid, has the benefits that many businesses need (file level, block level, and separate recovery media), and is free.

    So anyone else considering their renewal window for their currently paid solution, and wondering... is it worth it?



  • @DustinB3403 Curious how your use of XenServer will be affected by this?



  • I actually just started test UrBackup last week myself, kind of in the same boat. Works pretty good, not nearly as pretty as the paid competitors but for standalone physical boxes it makes for a nice free incremental backup tool. Biggest downside I see is there is no dedupe or compression facility whatsoever and therefore you have to rely on the storage target's filesytem level capabilities for that. But still, beggar's can't be choosers.



  • @FATeknollogee Our use of XenServer won't change, nor would the use of Xen Orchestra.

    The hypervisor is independent of UrBackup (and whatever is running it). What might change is the use of our File Level backup solution.

    Of course the lack of deduplication and compression is something to consider, but these are a bit trivial in comparison. Especially when there are options for deduplication with every modern operating system.

    Windows Server 2012 supports dedup, as well as does the Btfrs and ZFS file systems. Of which you could create a VM, attach iscsi storage to it, and off to the races with you.

    Or just locally inside of the VM, which could also then be backed up with a solution like XO at the block level. This way you'd have deduped file level with block level over it all.

    Which would be pretty neat. . .



  • Oh I know I didn't put this in any post above, but you can restore files on the fly.

    So should a user call you and say "Hey I deleted xyz, can you restore it" You can, just go to the webconsole, browse to the file path, and click restore.

    On the user system, a prompt appears asking if you actually want to restore the file, click yes. The file restoration will begin, which in my testing (very small files) was instantly.


  • Service Provider

    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 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.


  • Service Provider

    @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.



  • @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.


  • Service Provider

    @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.



  • @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?



  • @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!!


  • Service Provider

    @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?

    No, but was that not just added in the last year or so?



  • @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:

    @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?

    No, but was that not just added in the last year or so?

    I'm not certain when Unitrends for XS was released, I just recall seeing it.



  • @JaredBusch said in UrBackup Review plus Configuration Options:

    And this is the second reason I refuse to run XS in production.

    Not to threadjack, but http://www.quadricsoftware.com/products/alike-dr/ supports Hyper-V and XS


  • Service Provider

    @crustachio said in UrBackup Review plus Configuration Options:

    Biggest downside I see is there is no dedupe or compression facility whatsoever and therefore you have to rely on the storage target's filesytem level capabilities for that. But still, beggar's can't be choosers.

    Looks like FreeBSD and ZFS are supported.


  • Service Provider

    AGPL license, that's very good.


  • Service Provider

    @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:

    @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?

    No, but was that not just added in the last year or so?

    I'm not certain when Unitrends for XS was released, I just recall seeing it.

    Unitrends bought PHD Virtual. So the support for XS goes back a really long time, just not under the Unitrends brand. Unitrends XS is not at all a new product.


  • Service Provider

    @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.


  • Service Provider

    @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 :)


  • Service Provider

    @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.


  • Service Provider

    @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.


  • Service Provider

    @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!!


  • Service Provider

    @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.


  • Service Provider

    @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 :smiley:
    Is Veeam adding agents to it's Hyper-V (windows guests) backup?


  • Service Provider

    @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.



Looks like your connection to MangoLassi was lost, please wait while we try to reconnect.