Vembu Technologies

StoreGrid Discussions :: RE: Change Server Roles

kshama — Tue, 16 Mar 2010 15:26:07 GMT

Author: kshama
Posted: Tue Mar 16, 2010 3:26 pm (GMT 0)

Hi StoreD,

If the backup server has replicated all its data successfully, then the backup data in the two servers would be in sync and you dont have to switch the backup data between the two. But you would still need to switch the databases.

Can you please send us some more details on this? Are you doing this just to switch the hardware of the two machines? Are these two servers in the same LAN? Also, can you please let us know the version of StoreGrid running in the two systems and the OS details.

These details will help us address this better.

Regards
Kshama
Vembu Technologies

StoreGrid Discussions :: RE: seed replication server? option for this?

aravind — Tue, 16 Mar 2010 07:14:34 GMT

Author: aravind
Posted: Tue Mar 16, 2010 7:14 am (GMT 0)

Hi BulletproofSean,

The reason we stopped supporting client-server installations after v2.5.1 release is because as we add more and more features to the product, our testing cycles were becoming longer for supporting multiple installation types.

Like we had mentioned in the previous post, we will be supporting installing both client-only and server-only installations in the same machine. Once this is available, the machine can then backup to itself as well as receive backups from other machines, just like a client-server installation.

Regards
Aravind
Vembu Technologies

StoreGrid Discussions :: Change Server Roles

StoreD — Mon, 15 Mar 2010 19:27:25 GMT

Author: StoreD
Subject: Change Server Roles
Posted: Mon Mar 15, 2010 7:27 pm (GMT 0)

Is it possible to change the role of a backup server? Let's say, for example, I have my backup server as server A and my replication server is server B. Is it possible to change server B to become the backup server and server A the replication server?

It seems to me that this could somehow be possible perhaps in a three step process with an intermediary server? Migrate backup server A to server C, migrate replication server B to server A, migrate intermediary backup server C to server B, update DNS.. painful, but possible? Is there an easier way?

StoreGrid Discussions :: RE: Replication seeding takes 10x longer then just copy? on 3.1

kshama — Mon, 15 Mar 2010 19:00:43 GMT

Author: kshama
Posted: Mon Mar 15, 2010 7:00 pm (GMT 0)

Hi dmalishkin,

To speed up the process, you can copy the data into a temporary folder in the drive where the backup data is stored in the replication server and then run the import from that folder. Like for example, if the drive where you have the data from the backup server is F: and the drive where backup data is stored in the replication server is E:\backups, then we would recommend that you copy the data from the F:] drive into a temp folder E:\temp\ and then select the source location as E:\temp\ (instead of F:\). Since the source and the final destination location are both in the same drive, StoreGrid will just move the data during the import, which will be much faster.

regards
Kshama
Vembu Technologies

StoreGrid Discussions :: RE: Selected Size

StoreD — Mon, 15 Mar 2010 17:51:39 GMT

Author: StoreD
Posted: Mon Mar 15, 2010 5:51 pm (GMT 0)

Wow.. I am surprised that hasn't come up. The last two vendors I used for clients online backup (who shall remain nameless) reported selected file size , so I structured my billing around that (combination of selected file size and retention period).

Guess I shall have to rethink how I am going to do my invoicing.

StoreGrid Discussions :: RE: seed replication server? option for this?

BulletproofSean — Mon, 15 Mar 2010 14:18:18 GMT

Author: BulletproofSean
Posted: Mon Mar 15, 2010 2:18 pm (GMT 0)

Not supporting client/server doesn't make much sense. Now in an environment where we have two servers that we want to back up locally, we now need a third box just to have a local backup server?

What is your alternative to this?

StoreGrid Discussions :: RE: Response to your blog....

kshama — Mon, 15 Mar 2010 14:17:55 GMT

Author: kshama
Posted: Mon Mar 15, 2010 2:17 pm (GMT 0)

Hi Rumple,

Our development team has been looking into incremental backup performance improvements for the last few weeks. Some of the areas they are working on are to reduce the number of reads/writes to the client backup DB file, further multi-threading the backup process and moving some of the disk operations to in-memory processes. Like you pointed out, one of the test case scenarios that they would be testing this would be with drives with low disk I/O performance.

Regarding Exchange Backup setup in the client, we have been continuously improving the client for Exchange backups. Is there any particular usability issue that you still see as a major problem? Please let us know and we'll try to fix the UI for it.

Regards
Kshama
Vembu Technologies

StoreGrid Discussions :: RE: Selected Size

sundar_SGS — Mon, 15 Mar 2010 12:37:21 GMT

Author: sundar_SGS
Posted: Mon Mar 15, 2010 12:37 pm (GMT 0)

Hi,

Unfortunately, StoreGrid doesn't have option to estimate the original size of the data configured for backup in the client end. We haven't heard this feature request from our partners.

Probably you can write your own script in the client end to calculate the size of the data configured for backup and write it in to log file. You can run that script through StoreGrid pre backup commands. This way, you can calculate the original size of the data configured for backup when each backup scheduled.

To more about pre backup command, please refer the 'Pre & Post Backup Commands' section in the following url,
http://www.storegrid.com/online-backup/help/PageHelp/configure-backup-schedule.html

Regards,
Sundar N,
Vembu Technologies.

StoreGrid Discussions :: RE: Questions about Synthetic Full Backups

aravind — Mon, 15 Mar 2010 11:07:09 GMT

Author: aravind
Posted: Mon Mar 15, 2010 11:07 am (GMT 0)

Hi Rumple,

Since our team is currently busy with the v3.2 (v2.5.x to v3.x migration) release, synthetic full backup is taking longer. But please be assured that once v3.2 is released, we'll try our best to complete the development work for synthetic backup and release it as quickly as we can - as this is one of the high priority items for us.

Regards
Aravind
Vembu Technologies

StoreGrid Discussions :: RE: SGTrash

kshama — Mon, 15 Mar 2010 10:41:23 GMT

Author: kshama
Posted: Mon Mar 15, 2010 10:41 am (GMT 0)

Hi compdocs,

We are making a change in the product itself to provide better manageability of the files moved into SGTrash. Once it is available, you could then choose to delete them without moving to SGTrash or choose to move it SGTrash and keep it there for 7 days before automatically deleting it etc.

But since our team is super busy with the v3.2 (v2.5.x to v3.x migration) release, for now, we can give you a patch where the files will be deleted without moving them to SGTrash. If you would like to get this patch, please contact our support team with the details on the StoreGrid version you are running in your backup server and the OS details.

Regards
Kshama
Vembu Technologies

StoreGrid Discussions :: RE: Windows Client Slow Server

kshama — Mon, 15 Mar 2010 07:32:29 GMT

Author: kshama
Posted: Mon Mar 15, 2010 7:32 am (GMT 0)

Hi Jasonm,

StoreGrid uses VSS to backup open files. StoreGrid instructs the Windows OS to run a volume shadow copy of the files that are in use when StoreGrid is trying to backup those files. If you disable VSS and if the files that you have configured for backup is in use by other applications when StoreGrid is trying to back them up, then StoreGrid will skip them and will not be able to backup in that backup schedule.

Therefore, we would recommend that you adjust the CPU settings accordingly. If you see that the overall time take for the backups increases considerably when changing the CPU settings to medium/low, then please contact our support team at storegrid-support AT vembu DOT com.

Regards
Kshama
Vembu Technologies

StoreGrid Discussions :: Selected Size

StoreD — Mon, 15 Mar 2010 06:06:42 GMT

Author: StoreD
Subject: Selected Size
Posted: Mon Mar 15, 2010 6:06 am (GMT 0)

I know its possible to see a customers original backup size and the size it is taking on the backup disk but is it possible to see somewhere the size of the file selection in the backup schedule?

To elaborate in case that doesn't make sense. If I have a customer with a file share that is 50GB in size with a backup schedule selected to backup 100% of it, then I end up after the first backup with an original size of 50gb and a used space of say 40gb.. now over time, my understanding is that based on retention policy, the original size and used space will change as files are added, modified, and deleted. However the change in original size will be disproportionate to the size of the files selected in the backup schedule correct? If I had a customer that theoretically never added or deleted a file but changed the contents of every file in the share the size of the files in the share may still be close to 50GB but the value for original size in your reports doesn't look at selected size does it? It looks at the size of all the files and all their versions? So it might say 65gb now but the file share on the server is still close to 50gb..

Assuming that my speculation is true, is there a way to see selected size?

StoreGrid Discussions :: RE: I feel like 95% of server maintenance is disk space

kshama — Mon, 15 Mar 2010 06:04:00 GMT

Author: kshama
Posted: Mon Mar 15, 2010 6:04 am (GMT 0)

Hi wintensive,

While you wait for the other partners to reply on your post, just thought I should let you know that StoreGrid backup server has this feature where it can alert you through emails when the disk space usage exceeds a certain percentage of the allocated space.

For more information, please refer:
http://storegrid.com/online-backup/sp-help/PageHelp/email-alert-settings.html

Regards
Kshama
Vembu Technologies

StoreGrid Discussions :: RE: seed replication server? option for this?

kshama — Mon, 15 Mar 2010 05:59:22 GMT

Author: kshama
Posted: Mon Mar 15, 2010 5:59 am (GMT 0)

Hi BulletProofSean,

When you mean source location, do you mean in the backup server or in the client machine? Backups that are encrypted will have the filenames changed (scrambled) in the backup (and replication) server.

Regarding the utility to copy over the files, we'll update this post once we have the utility uploaded with instructions to run it.

client-server installations are no longer supported in v3.x (and in v2.5.5). When you upgrade your v2.5.x client-server installations to v3.2, you need to change it to either client only or server only installation.

We are also working on supporting both client-only and server-only installations in the same machine. Once this is available, you can install both client-only v3.x and server-only v3.x installations in the same machine.

Regards
Kshama
Vembu Technologies

StoreGrid Discussions :: RE: seed replication server? option for this?

BulletproofSean — Sun, 14 Mar 2010 19:09:19 GMT

Author: BulletproofSean
Posted: Sun Mar 14, 2010 7:09 pm (GMT 0)

Oh, so I went through most of this and I've discovered that I can't upgrade 2.5.1 Client/Servers to 2.5.5 (which hadn't occurred to me but makes sense since 2.5.5 is "Server Only"). So I guess I'll need to open a case after all.

Which leads to another question - are client/server 2.5.1 branded build boxes going to be able to be upgraded to 3.2?

StoreGrid Discussions :: RE: seed replication server? option for this?

BulletproofSean — Sun, 14 Mar 2010 17:12:27 GMT

Author: BulletproofSean
Posted: Sun Mar 14, 2010 5:12 pm (GMT 0)

Maybe I just need to move this customer to 2.5.5 first and then try again. I see that it's a totally different procedure from 2.5.1 and doesn't involve a file copy in Windows. Maybe I'll try that first.

StoreGrid Discussions :: RE: seed replication server? option for this?

BulletproofSean — Sun, 14 Mar 2010 17:10:04 GMT

Author: BulletproofSean
Posted: Sun Mar 14, 2010 5:10 pm (GMT 0)

So I forgot about this because your forum doesn't seem to "Notify me when a reply is posted", even though I've selected this option in multiple locations, both in the thread and through my forum profile.

The name of the file on the source location was the name -Windows- thought it had, so that's what I was looking for. I don't see how this would be different regardless of how your encryption works.

So instead of me opening a case, how about _you_ have your people change the procedure for local to remote replication seeding so that it uses this new utility?

Also, don't you dare throw version 3.x at me in this case. I'm waiting for YOU guys to figure out how to upgrade existing Storegrid branded partners to 3.2. Existing branded build partners are getting completely screwed on this right now, so it's not my fault I'm not using version 3 yet. All I know is "maybe next month". So we'll see.

StoreGrid Discussions :: I feel like 95% of server maintenance is disk space

wintensive — Sun, 14 Mar 2010 00:45:38 GMT

Author: wintensive
Subject: I feel like 95% of server maintenance is disk space
Posted: Sun Mar 14, 2010 12:45 am (GMT 0)

Currently using server 2.5.5. I will have 3.1 soon so not sure if its different.

My current billing model is that I just bill for what is used.

How does everyone else manage disk space? I really don't want to allocate too much more than is used because then I run out of available disk space. Also, what if you have 250 customers........then what. So I'm always in there updating disk space to accommodate the increases that are naturally expected.

Any suggestion are appreciated!

JT

StoreGrid Discussions :: RE: Retention Confusion

Rumple — Sat, 13 Mar 2010 19:09:11 GMT

Author: Rumple
Posted: Sat Mar 13, 2010 7:09 pm (GMT 0)

I second that addition please. It will be much easier after synthetic full's as we have a client with 500GB of data and doing a real full backup outside of the first one is not even possible due to the time it would take for that to happen (not to mention the Data usage on their internet link will get killed).

StoreGrid Discussions :: RE: Response to your blog....

Rumple — Sat, 13 Mar 2010 19:06:34 GMT

Author: Rumple
Posted: Sat Mar 13, 2010 7:06 pm (GMT 0)

I can assist with the large backup sets example.

I have a client with 600,000 files on their server. Their server is not particularily robust, but it is working just fine for these files.

The sg database file for that backup is over 2GB in size. During backups we have had lots of problems with the backups being successful because the delay in writing to the database file (mainly due to the slow disk in the server) is causing problems.
You REALLY need to get some type of real database on the client (even SQL lite or something) that can help process that data faster as writing to what appears to be file level database files is not working) If you are using a database, you might want to look at a different one as that one stinks performance wise.

The issue is that SMB clients typically do have piece of crap server onsite and while I totally understand how the incremental's work, the performance can be really bad for large backup sets.

I also agree that a nicer installation process for exchange backups would be awesome. There is no way to talk a client through how to do that installation for exchange.

StoreGrid Discussions :: RE: Questions about Synthetic Full Backups

Rumple — Sat, 13 Mar 2010 18:54:02 GMT

Author: Rumple
Posted: Sat Mar 13, 2010 6:54 pm (GMT 0)

We are dying for this process. We are getting more and more clients that want to keep a permanent copy of their data using the standard Grandfather, Father son rotation where we take the monthly backups and keep them permanently (in our case it would be by restoring them to a media and giving it to the client) The synthetic full's will enable us to do this much easier.

StoreGrid Discussions :: Replication seeding takes 10x longer then just copy? on 3.1

dmalishkin — Sat, 13 Mar 2010 17:55:16 GMT

Author: dmalishkin
Subject: Replication seeding takes 10x longer then just copy? on 3.1
Posted: Sat Mar 13, 2010 5:55 pm (GMT 0)

Guys, i had a customer who has onsite backup (roughly about 1.5TB total data) they want us to replicate that data over to our data center. i followed the procedure to seed the replication, went onsite created .db files, copied directory 1\ everything per your instructions took few days (Acceptable) Now came to our data center where my backup server is 2x faster, hard drive speed is at least 10x faster then what our customer has, and trying now to import that server to our replication server, and so far it is taking 4 days, and it only completed few jobs out of 14. i checked the resources on the computer and disk speed it is doing about 500k-1MB/a sec disk/network reads, i mean i would call it almost idle.

I checked default customer(where it is imported into right now) and so far it only copied 9gb/1.5TB over the few days

This will take about 1 month or so, Any way to speed this up can i just copy over and then just say where the data is at?

StoreGrid Discussions :: RE: MCAL Required for Sharepoint & Disk Image Backup?

jcloudsnetwork — Sat, 13 Mar 2010 15:48:29 GMT

Author: jcloudsnetwork
Posted: Sat Mar 13, 2010 3:48 pm (GMT 0)

Hi Sundar, thanks for the info

StoreGrid Discussions :: RE: MCAL Required for Sharepoint & Disk Image Backup?

sundar_SGS — Sat, 13 Mar 2010 10:18:13 GMT

Author: sundar_SGS
Posted: Sat Mar 13, 2010 10:18 am (GMT 0)

Hi,

Yes, SharePoint Server Backup from Client running SBS OS will utilize 1 MCAL per Month and SharePoint Server Backup from Client running non-SBS OS will utilize 2 MCALs per Month. For Image backup, StoreGrid client will utilize 2 MCALs per Month.

Regards,
Sundar N,
Vembu Technologies.

StoreGrid Discussions :: MCAL Required for Sharepoint & Disk Image Backup?

jcloudsnetwork — Sat, 13 Mar 2010 04:24:12 GMT

Author: jcloudsnetwork
Subject: MCAL Required for Sharepoint & Disk Image Backup?
Posted: Sat Mar 13, 2010 4:24 am (GMT 0)

Good Day,

I upgraded from v3.0 to v3.1 and found that the Sharepoint backup and Disk Image backup was under "Plugin Backup". Do MCAL is required for Sharepoint and Disk Image?