SANless backup

[kghammond]

We would like to backup our ESX server guest vmdk's via one of the scripted tools (vmbk, visbu, esXpress, ESX Ranger). In our scenario, all our ESX servers have local storage so we need to run these scripts on the service console and move the files across the network to a backup location. Our options are FTP, SMB, iSCSI to store the files in a remote location.

First, does anyone have any recommendations on which of the scripted tools will work well in this scenario? Do any or all of them compact or compress the backup files? We are running ESX 3.01.

Second, is there any advantage or disadvantage of using FTP, SMB, ISCSI, NFS to do the backups? Do any of these systems support drive pools for a destination? Our remote file/backup servers will be standard servers with pools of 750 GB and 1 TB SATA drives. We will not be using RAID.

We are looking at this as a disaster recovery solution only. Basically, if the RAID arrays on our local ESX storage get corrupted, we want to have a live vmdk file to restore to a seperate or a new ESX server.

Thank you for any feedback

[RParker]

• *First, does anyone have any recommendations on which of the scripted tools will work well in this scenario? Do any or all of them compact or compress the backup files? We are running ESX 3.01. *

• esXpress works well for FTP. Even with iSCSI you can use, if you have a VMFS volume. If you have 2 ESX servers, they can be backup targets for each other. It will also compress/compact the backups as well as password protect the contents if you desire.

• Second, is there any advantage or disadvantage of using FTP, SMB, ISCSI, NFS to do the backups? Do any of these systems support drive pools for a destination? Our remote file/backup servers will be standard servers with pools of 750 GB and 1 TB SATA drives. We will not be using RAID.

• FTP may offer the easiest cheapest method, and probably the fastest.

• *We are looking at this as a disaster recovery solution only. Basically, if the RAID arrays on our local ESX storage get corrupted, we want to have a live vmdk file to restore to a seperate or a new ESX server. *

I did testing on each of the backup solutions, esXpress was the easiest to implement, the most robust, and ultimately the fastest.. it has a side affect of ALSO being the cheapest solution, but I believe it is the best.

[kghammond]

Thanks for the feedback.

Let me be a bit more specific. We do not want to backup from one ESX server to another via iSCSI. We want to backup to low cost SATA drives not expensive 15K SCSI and SAS drives.

Of the solutions listed, which have more overhead? I assume each of the different scripts have more CPU overhead on the ESX server and some have more RAM overhead. Some are probably easier to manage and to schedule and others will have other benefits. I am looking for some real world insight into the pros and cons for the various backup solutions.

As well, there is probably a varying overhead and performance levels on the ESX server using FTP as compared to SMB, iSCSI, NFS. Our preference is that the remote server will be a Windows 2003 server running FTP on IIS or a software iSCSI target, UNIX services to get NFS or simply a UNC share. From other systems, we have found SMB to be a bit unreliable for large UNC based file utilities, that is why we are considering iSCSI in particular.

Any other thoughts would be greatly appreciated.

Thank you

[petedr]

Hey kghammond,

rparker mentioned esXpress which is my companies product so I thought I would explain alittle more of what it can offer. I could give some real world examples but that is probably better coming from real end users, not a vendor.

esXpress runs in the virtual space using a Virtual Backup Appliance (VBA). These are small virtual machines that run on the esx host and perform the VM backups (Full and Delta backups). There is also a small scheduling piece that currently runs in the console. What some customers do and we also recommend it is to put the VBAs in a resource group to control host resources.

esXpress can send backups over the network to a FTP server, it also supports ssh and smb. It can also send backups directly to a vmfs partition, local or on a SAN, or possibly your iSCSI is you present it as a vmfs.

I see you mentioned using IIS for your windows FTP server. I would recommend looking at FileZilla regardless of what backup solution you choose to use. A lot of our customers have had ftp issues with ISS which were resolved when switching to FileZilla.

Pete@esxpress

[RParker]

OK, so you have a stand alone server with Windows / FTP. you want to backup across the network to FTP. Right?

esXpress can do this. As far as overhead, first of all, esXpress does NOT need any VCB or proxy to run, so that is 1 piece of overhead you won't need. VCB needs to be another machine which talks to ESX / VI and allows you to backup the VM's. With esXpress you run very small (30 meg or less) VM's (1CPU / 256Meg RAM) that directly communicate with ESX / VI (no other software required, no special hardware, no special machine setup). Then you use very simple setup to get esXpress install. A single VBA and 1 single esXpress RPM (which instructions tell you how to setup).

With Ranger, VCB, and Netbackup/Symantec products they all use a centralized VCB program in order to "talk" to the ESX servers. So you need pretty much a stand alone machine for that. Those products can backup via the network, but you need a source and a destination, now you can use your Windows / FTP server (but you are looking at 2 machines so far). With VCB based backup solutions, you have to start some external program to initiate the backup. Not to mention just try and setup VCB once... It's not very easy, especially with 3rd party backups like Netbackup, Tivoli, etc. So now you have 2 licenses (1 for the Windows VCB box, 1 for Windows / FTP box, 1 license for Netbackup, Tivoli, etc.. or 1 license for Ranger) and after you are done you have many components, and if just one breaks, your backups will not work.

esXpress. 1 license. Windows / FTP (you still need your backup destination, but you said this is what you decided). esXpress is self contained, meaning once it's install on your host, you are done. Nothing else is needed. NADA, ZIP, NIL. You are now ready to backup. You don't need to open a remote session or anything you can backup either by simply tagging a VM with a name like if you have an ESX server called ESXhost1 and 2 VM's, VMLinux1 and VMWindows1. Ok, this is really really hard, you rename the VMLinux1 to VMLinux1[xNOW] (meaning to backup now). Wow that was hard wasn't it? The backup starts all by itself, and as long as you follow instructions on setting up the backup to your FTP target correctly, the backup will finish, and you can optionally send yourself an email when it's done. WHEW! That was rough... after the backup is started (and once the esXpress has recognized it has something to do) it will rename the VM back to the original name.

Ok, so you don't want users and people renaming VM's? NO Problem! You can putty/SSH to your ESX host and simply go into the esXpress program, find the VM on the list, and hit the enter key to backup that VM now. In the time it took me to type this sentence, you can login, start the backup and log off, yes it really is that fast and easy to backup with esXpress.

OH, you dont' want to backup from the ESX console either? NO Problem! There is a gui you can use, which you can backup (the same one you use to configure esXpress) which is a VM. Easy. Same thing you find the VM, tell it to backup (either regularly or just once) and since these are cron jobs on ESX/Linux esXpress doesn't even have to be running.. to start the nightly backups...

You can use the VCB, Ranger, and those other products, but you will find for what you need FTP is perfectly suited for esXpress. That's exaclty how they designed it. Now for the price, now this is estimated by our licenses which we have netbackup, and I got a quote for Ranger.

Ranger is ~~ $1000.00 for our server

Netbackup ~~ $5000.00 for the master server, and $400.00 per client (machine you want to backup)

esXpress ~~ $300.00 (or $600.00) for a host. The difference being that one is basic license the other is pro (more advanced features). Even at Pro level its MUCH cheaper than the others.

It does more, for less, with minimal setup. But don't believe me, I think everyone should setup a VCB / Ranger / 3rd party solution once so they can see what's involved,and you tell me which is easier to administer, setup and use.... You will quickly find out that esXpress is the easiest backup solution anywhere. I HATE doing backups, but with esXpress I ALMOST enjoy the experience.. just simply because it REALLY is simple to use.

[kghammond]

Rparker, your posts are sounding more like a bunch of vendor fluff than actual answers to my questions.

When did I say in my posts that i don't want to backup from the console, and when did I say I was worried about people renaming VM's and when did I say we are planning to use VCB? You are making me less and less interested in even trying esXpress as opposed to vmbk or visbu. I have read the new Ranger can use VCB, but Ranger worked before VCB and I have not checked to see if it will work without VCB.

I am mostly concerned with which solution will have a small footprint either on the service console or on a VM. Which solution will be more efficient in network utilization and performance and which solutions can be scheduled and maintained with a marginal amount of effort.

You have not answered any of these questions, yet you keep posting all this esXpres vendor fluff. Please stop unless you have somthing to contribute to my quesions.

Thank you,

Kevin

[kghammond]

One additional note, we have tape backups in place already for all our historcal needs. This backup solution only needs to keep the most recent vmdk files for each of our VM's and they can overwrite them upon successful backups of the more recent image. We will not be putting these vmdk's on tape so there is no need for NetBackup, Tivoli or any other backup product. We just want to take a snapshot and export that image to a vmdk on a SATA drive hosted on a server across the network.

We are looking for the pros and cons from real world experience with products that can do this. We will start doing our own testing later this week and we were hoping to get a little guidance as to what products to put an emphasis on testing.

Thanks again,

Kevin

[kix1979]

Kevin,

Firstly to get things out of the way, I do work for Vizioncore, but I will try to stay generalistic as possible and talk about what we do when appropriate...

So which method of backup is going to have the least impact to your hosts?

VCB or VCB with a 3rd Party tool. This requires shared storage for the ESX hosts, aka Fibre-channel or iSCSI. By using VCB with or without a 3rd party tool you offload the backup process from the ESX hosts and onto a proxy server that will host the files for backup, which can be exported images (VMX/VMDK/logs) or mount of the file system to backup the files within the VMDK files. This means the impact to performance is on the proxy host and the shared storage, not the ESX hosts that you want running systems not doing backups.

So if you are going to not use VCB, then you are going to do a network based backup. In general most people have found that FTP gives them the best bang for the buck performance. ESX already has what is needed to FTP off files and it is pretty simple so FTP seems to be the winner thus far, again when not using VCB. As for vRanger Pro from Vizioncore, we do work either way with or without VCB, and yes we use FTP or SSH for our data transfers. I personally find simplicity is best in general and not getting into lots of different transport protocols. It always makes me remember KISS, and so true those letters are these days.

So beyond that, any of the platforms should be able to backup to a single or multiple destinations. It just depends on how you configure it. Some can automatically use one and then move to the next as it fills up. Others need 'help' such as using DFS or some other method to present the storage as a single pool.

Hope some of this helps,

Kix