I use NTBackup for smaller sites, but I am asking about a site where I 
manage the backups for 40 servers, need centralized management, multiple 
security levels, manage tape rotations, etc.  They seem to fall in 
between NTBackup and Netbackup; hence BE, and my question.



Michael B. Smith wrote:
>
> I've tried to avoid BE for several years now, but you used to be able 
> to adjust the tape buffer size on an advanced property window. I know 
> that's not much help, but I'm sure a little time digging on the BE 
> support site would bring that to light...
>
>  
>
> Or someone else may know.
>
>  
>
> After I got into it, I found nothing that BE would do for me that 
> NTbackup couldn't. And now, Windows Server Backup (with a couple of 
> command line tools to deal with Exchange).
>
>  
>
> Now, the enterprise class packages -- Netbackup, CommVault, Legato, 
> etc. -- they are a different story.
>
>  
>
> Regards,
>
>  
>
> Michael B. Smith, MCITP:SA,EMA/MCSE/Exchange MVP
>
> My blog: http://TheEssentialExchange.com/blogs/michael
>
> Link with me at: http://www.linkedin.com/in/theessentialexchange
>
>  
>
> *From:* Klint Price - ArizonaITPro [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> *Sent:* Wednesday, October 08, 2008 10:41 AM
> *To:* NT System Admin Issues
> *Subject:* Re: Comparing NT Backup speeds
>
>  
>
> any optimizations out there for BackupExec?
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Michael B. Smith wrote:
>
> I don't think you'll find any problems with it.
>
>  
>
> The section below is showing its age. It was written before Microsoft 
> moved to E12 and DPM and VSS. But it was accurate in the 2004 timeframe.
>
>  
>
>
>     NTBackup
>
> When people ask how Microsoft does their Exchange Server backups, most 
> people are surprised to hear that Microsoft uses NTBackup. Often they 
> don't think to ask the next question---what else do you use?
>
>  
>
> NTBackup is used for the first level backup. This means that it 
> generates the backups directly from Exchange Server and then places 
> the backups onto other media. Microsoft backs up to disk for the first 
> level backup. After backing up to disk, Microsoft then does a 
> secondary dump to tape or to SAN, according to their internal backup 
> rotation. This second and/or third level backup often uses other tools 
> besides NTBackup.
>
>  
>
> Until recently, Microsoft IT (the group inside Microsoft for 
> maintaining their production servers) had a special version of 
> NTBackup that wasn't available to the outside world. That version was 
> made available as a hotfix to Windows Server 2003 (Microsoft KB 839272 
> (System performance is negatively affected when Ntbackup.exe writes to 
> a destination .bkf file)) and is included in Service Pack 1 for 
> Windows Server 2003. This change to NTBackup increases its speed 
> significantly and decreases its performance impact on the server 
> significantly.
>
>  
>
> You can find detailed information about the process that Microsoft 
> uses internally in the document named Backup Process Used with 
> Clustered Exchange Server 2003 Servers at Microsoft at 
> http://www.microsoft.com/downloads/details.aspx?FamilyId=63FA9270-563F-4627-A0A0-8A07E02CF9BF&displaylang=en
>  
> <http://www.microsoft.com/downloads/details.aspx?FamilyId=63FA9270-563F-4627-A0A0-8A07E02CF9BF&displaylang=en>
>  
> (http://tinyurl.com/bcfhh). Despite the document name, the information 
> in the document applies completely to non-clustered servers as well as 
> to clustered servers (excepting only that clustered servers use 
> clustered disk for the backup). This document describes the registry 
> changes covered in the next section (which can improve performance) 
> and provides practices for performing multiple parallel backups of 
> information stores (as covered in the following sections).
>
>  
>
> Regards,
>
>  
>
> Michael B. Smith, MCITP:SA,EMA/MCSE/Exchange MVP
>
> My blog: http://TheEssentialExchange.com/blogs/michael
>
> Link with me at: http://www.linkedin.com/in/theessentialexchange
>
>  
>
> *From:* HELP_PC [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> *Sent:* Wednesday, October 08, 2008 2:08 AM
> *To:* NT System Admin Issues
> *Subject:* R: Comparing NT Backup speeds
>
>  
>
> I made the changes and even to disk the speed is doubled !I hope no 
> issue or contras because it looks too easy !
>
>  
>
> *GuidoElia*
>
> *HELPPC*
>
>  
>
>  
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> *Da:* Michael B. Smith [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> *Inviato:* martedì 7 ottobre 2008 22.55
> *A:* NT System Admin Issues
> *Oggetto:* RE: Comparing NT Backup speeds
>
>
>       *Registry Changes for Optimizing NTBackup*
>
> The first optimization to make for NTBackup performance is to change 
> some registry keys that affect buffering. These changes can have a 
> very positive impact on performance when writing to tape, and a 
> smaller impact when writing to disk. They are as follows (in batch 
> file syntax):
>
>  
>
> reg add "HKCU\Software\Microsoft\Ntbackup\Backup Engine"
>         /v "Logical Disk Buffer Size" /t REG_SZ /d 64 /f
>
> reg add "HKCU\Software\Microsoft\Ntbackup\Backup Engine"
>         /v "Max Buffer Size" /t REG_SZ /d 1024 /f
>
> reg add "HKCU\Software\Microsoft\Ntbackup\Backup Engine"
>         /v "Max Num Tape Buffers" /t REG_SZ /d 16 /f
>
>  
>
> These registry changes double the default values. Do note that they 
> affect HKEY_CURRENT_USER, and not HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE as you might 
> expect. Therefore, you should execute NTBackup under the desired user 
> to create the registry key before you attempt to set the above 
> registry values.
>
>  
>
>  
>
> Regards,
>
>  
>
> Michael B. Smith, MCITP:SA,EMA/MCSE/Exchange MVP
>
> My blog: http://TheEssentialExchange.com/blogs/michael
>
> Link with me at: http://www.linkedin.com/in/theessentialexchange
>
>  
>
> *From:* Joseph L. Casale [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> *Sent:* Tuesday, October 07, 2008 11:59 AM
> *To:* NT System Admin Issues
> *Subject:* RE: Comparing NT Backup speeds
>
>  
>
> Michael,
> What are these tweaks you speak of?
> jlc
>
>  
>
> *From:* Michael B. Smith [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> *Sent:* Tuesday, October 07, 2008 6:26 AM
> *To:* NT System Admin Issues
> *Subject:* RE: Comparing NT Backup speeds
>
>  
>
> Well a local device will usually be faster than a remote device.
>
>  
>
> Ntbackup, with the registry tweaks, gives me about 1 GB per minute 
> locally. But I don't have a dat-72 to compare to. My home GB LAN with 
> a cheap crappy switch copies about 50 MB/min. So I'm thinking that two 
> hours seems more likely than 9 hours.
>
>  
>
> Regards,
>
>  
>
> Michael B. Smith, MCITP:SA,EMA/MCSE/Exchange MVP
>
> My blog: http://TheEssentialExchange.com/blogs/michael
>
> Link with me at: http://www.linkedin.com/in/theessentialexchange
>
>  
>
> *From:* HELP_PC [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> *Sent:* Tuesday, October 07, 2008 7:28 AM
> *To:* NT System Admin Issues
> *Subject:* R: Comparing NT Backup speeds
>
>  
>
> Yes the DAT device is local.
>
> Not applied registry tweaks
>
>  
>
> *GuidoElia*
>
> *HELPPC*
>
>  
>
>  
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> *Da:* Michael B. Smith [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> *Inviato:* martedì 7 ottobre 2008 13.05
> *A:* NT System Admin Issues
> *Oggetto:* RE: Comparing NT Backup speeds
>
> Have you applied the "standard" registry tweaks to increase the 
> ntbackup buffer size?
>
>  
>
> Is the dat-72 locally attached?
>
>  
>
> Regards,
>
>  
>
> Michael B. Smith, MCITP:SA,EMA/MCSE/Exchange MVP
>
> My blog: http://TheEssentialExchange.com/blogs/michael
>
> Link with me at: http://www.linkedin.com/in/theessentialexchange
>
>  
>
> *From:* HELP_PC [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> *Sent:* Tuesday, October 07, 2008 1:59 AM
> *To:* NT System Admin Issues
> *Subject:* Comparing NT Backup speeds
>
>  
>
>  
>
> In a network 10/100/1000 copper a NT backup of the complete server to 
> a Qnap device RAID-1 takes about 9 hours with verify (about 50GB) 
> versus DAT-72 with separate card that takes half the time .
>
> Should be considered normal ?
>
> TIA
>
>  
>
> *GuidoElia*
> *HELPPC*
>
>  
>
>  
>
>  
>
>  
>
>  
>
>  
>
>  
>
>  
>
>  
>
>  
>
>  
>
>  
>
>  
>
>  
>
>  
>
>  
>
>  
>
>  
>
>  
>
>  
>
>  
>
>  
>
>  
>
>  
>
>  
>
>  
>
>  
>
>  
>
>  


~ Finally, powerful endpoint security that ISN'T a resource hog! ~
~ <http://www.sunbeltsoftware.com/Business/VIPRE-Enterprise/>  ~

Reply via email to