We started a cutover last summer, also from Ultrabac, starting with DPM 2012 (now on SP1 and CU1).
Since we weren't using VSS technology in our prior file-based backups (UB has the option but we didn't own it), NOR were we using disk-based backups (straight to tape every time), those items alone were a huge improvement. It is a System Center product, and from my experience, it has all of its own gotchas, learning curve, and can require a lot of babysitting time. The majority of the issues I've run across so far have been early product bugs (with the Sharepoint backups, since fixed), servers needing various updates for VSS prior to getting the agent, learning how to install on a non-domain machine, and issues with our tape libraries. DPM wants to take complete control over the libraries, so for example, if something happens and a tape is stuck in the drive, I can't even eject it without the library complaining that the software is preventing the action. It results in a full power cycle of both the DPM server and the tape library, to resolve the problem (and that can be very time consuming). If you're not using tape libraries, I hear things are much simpler. On the up-side, restores are super-easy, especially if you are backing up and restoring mostly other MS products. We can also get much smaller backup intervals on disk than we could in the past. Searching through backed up files is also nicer--I don't have to ask end users for quite as much information about what I'm looking for as I used to. There is a lot of integration with PoSH for those who like to script things, and many of the files referenced that you might need to edit are text-readable. Other than issues with the libraries, I've learned over time that unless DPM is out of disk space for a job (which it constantly consumes), if you get ANY other error, you more than likely have an issue with the server on the other end, not the backup server. Could be the agent, or could be something like no disk space, hardware, etc--it can be a bit of an early warning system for other issues. One other thing of note is that the online documentation is still "evolving"--I'm finding that much of what is in DPM 2010 still applies, and it just hasn't been updated to include 2012. For Kurt, FYI, we did have some issues with conflicts w/UB. Specifically, if you have something using VSS backups, like SQL, it can be a problem to have both installed. During migration/cutover, we had a few SQL servers that wouldn't even boot with both agents installed--had to go to LKG, pull out UB and the locked file driver, and start again. I never tried installing both DPM and UB on the same server that was doing the backups as we had new hardware for the servers and the first tape libraries moved are iSCSI connected. Haven't seen the OS full issue you've mentioned either--are you maybe running the SQL install and DB for DPM on the same partition? -Bonnie -----Original Message----- From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Kurt Buff Sent: Friday, June 14, 2013 10:25 AM To: [email protected] Subject: Re: [NTSysADM] DPM 2012 We are working on implementing it, and running into difficulties. To be fair, we're installing it on a machine that also has UltraBac on it, but that is not (so far as we know) causing our problems. One of the problems is that on the machine being backed up, you can't do a BMR backup if any of the partitions aren't NTFS, and we have several machines that have OEM partitions on them that are FAT32. Not sure what we're going to do about that. The other problem we've noticed and are trying to work through is that for some reason, two nights ago, the OS partition on the backup server filled with snapshots, and was non-responsive, and we had to force shutdown with the BRB. After it came up, the partition was not full - 90g free on a 143g partition - but the event log was littered with warnings and errors regarding NTFS and volsnap. Be aware that DPM wants complete control over the partitions it uses - to the point that you will not even format the partition to give it a drive letter. I don't have a problem with that, but it was unexpected. I'm not the one installing/configuring it, so can't comment further, except to say that we need to get off UB as quickly as possible - it's been a failure for us, and their support hasn't met our needs. Kurt On Fri, Jun 14, 2013 at 9:47 AM, Heaton, Joseph@Wildlife <[email protected]> wrote: > Anyone using this and are happy with it? > > > > Joe Heaton > > Enterprise Server Support > > CA Department of Fish and Wildlife > > 1807 13th Street, Suite 201 > > Sacramento, CA 95811 > > Desk: (916) 323-1284 > >
