Skip to main content
  • EN

I know it’s late on a Friday, but I wanted to get this out of my head and off my mind before I forgot.  For our internal backup infrastructure, I’m the proud owner of a new Dell PowerEdge R550 with lots of space on local disk.  It’s going to replace a Synology RackStation that is slowly dying and is several years old.  The new server also has dual 25Gb connectivity (and dual 1Gb connectivity) that will allow me direct ISCSI access to our PowerStore 500T array.  This server will be the primary backup repository for our primary site. 

I am aware that if set this server up as a VHR/LHR, I cannot utilize direct storage access because functions required as a proxy server are not available when the server is hardened.  If I choose to forgo the direct storage access capabilities as a proxy server and move forward with a LHR, are there any caveats of using a LHR as your primary repo?  I don’t really NEED direct storage access.  There’s not that much data to backup every day, and I can still use a proxy on the ESXI cluster and transfer to the repo over the 25Gb network instead, but after utilizing direct storage access on client’s SAN’s with 12Gb SAS cabling, it’s hard to pass up the sexiness of 25Gb direct storage access.

What do you feel is the best option?  Both have the server as the primary repo, but LHR or Direct Storage Access?

Interesting you post this. As of last Fall, I got a nice, sexy Dell R740 which I use solely for the Veeam LHR purpose. I use hotadd and at times can reach 1GB read speeds. I'd go that route. 

I would also do LHR with the local storage as it will be fast and sending across 25GB would be sweet.

If Linux is not a barrier for your company, and you don't use tape, then I would go with the hardened repository. Nothing boosts your backups security so easily then the VHR.

Hotadd or NBD should offer sufficient performance with 25Gbit's. And if you ever want to got with Storage snapshots and direct SAN, you could still add an additional proxy.

Interesting you post this. As of last Fall, I got a nice, sexy Dell R740 which I use solely for the Veeam LHR purpose. I use hotadd and at times can reach 1GB read speeds. I'd go that route. 

I’m hitting 3GB often on my direct SAN storage snapshots. My proxy and repository are on the same server.  The Veeam SAN is actually the bottle neck. 

 

I think I’ll have to make our second site immutable as I don’t want to loose that lol

Alright guys...you’ve convinced me.  The LHR it’ll be.  Now, any caveats about running the primary backup repo as immutable?

Alright guys...you’ve convinced me.  The LHR it’ll be.  Now, any caveats about running the primary backup repo as immutable?

No caveats other than remember the immutability period and when you can delete files if needed.

Thanks Chris.  That’s what I was thinking, but I wanted to be sure!

In my personal opinion, I have seen windows machines as primary destiny, Nases, Linux boxes and storage appliances, with and without deduplication.

nowadays I like / preferred a LHR with i, or a storage appliance (no deduplication or off), and for second repo a deduplicated (and immutable) appliance, and third the cloud storage like wasabi, Backaze, S3.

Cheers.

My plan will be to use the LHR ISO.  I just need to get it on to a thumb drive and the server installed.

Comment


Terms & Conditions