| Author |
Message |
Jørn Jørgensen
Guest
|
 Posted:
Mon Mar 01, 2004 9:39 pm Post subject:
Storage solution - feasibility |
|
|
Hi,
We have a customer who for security purposes wants to set up a redundant
file storage solution. At the same time they're looking to get rid of their
tape backup.
They are about 15 users and have <50 GB of data spread across file shares,
Exchange, SQL Server databases and SharePoint (SQL databases too I guess).
What we're thinking to implement is the following:
* Full Windows Server 2003 environment
* Two geographically separate sites, linked by xDSL
* One shared DFS with FRS to replicate all data between both sites
* Use Shadow copy for 'version backup'
* Use NT Backup (or alternatively BackupExec) to perform 'periodic backups'
to disk at both locations (enough disk space at both ends to have something
like 1 three-month, 2 one-month, and 3 one-week backups (plus incremental
for the last week). Every few months the plan is to archive old data by
burning it to DVD's.
Questions are:
* Is this scenario at all feasible? Are there any serious drawbacks to not
using a tape or similar device, as long as there is always an offiste copy?
* How can we handle SQL Server and Exchange storage redundancy in this
scenario? I guess they can't be put on the DFS?
* Is it practically feasible to run NT Backup (or BackupExec) over xDSL (1
or 2 Mbit SHDSL) to the other site? This is presuming DFS can't be used for
Exchange/SQL.
* Is there a better way to do all this, and still lose the tape backup and
keep the redundancy?
Any feedback will be highly appreciated!
Thanks,
Jørn |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Jørn Jørgensen
Guest
|
| Posted:
Wed Mar 03, 2004 8:46 am Post subject:
Re: Storage solution - feasibility |
|
|
Bump
"Jørn Jørgensen" <jorn@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:ufynJv6$DHA.916@TK2MSFTNGP10.phx.gbl...
| Quote: | Hi,
We have a customer who for security purposes wants to set up a redundant
file storage solution. At the same time they're looking to get rid of
their tape backup.
They are about 15 users and have <50 GB of data spread across file shares,
Exchange, SQL Server databases and SharePoint (SQL databases too I guess).
What we're thinking to implement is the following:
* Full Windows Server 2003 environment
* Two geographically separate sites, linked by xDSL
* One shared DFS with FRS to replicate all data between both sites
* Use Shadow copy for 'version backup'
* Use NT Backup (or alternatively BackupExec) to perform 'periodic
backups' to disk at both locations (enough disk space at both ends to have
something like 1 three-month, 2 one-month, and 3 one-week backups (plus
incremental for the last week). Every few months the plan is to archive
old data by burning it to DVD's.
Questions are:
* Is this scenario at all feasible? Are there any serious drawbacks to not
using a tape or similar device, as long as there is always an offiste
copy?
* How can we handle SQL Server and Exchange storage redundancy in this
scenario? I guess they can't be put on the DFS?
* Is it practically feasible to run NT Backup (or BackupExec) over xDSL (1
or 2 Mbit SHDSL) to the other site? This is presuming DFS can't be used
for Exchange/SQL.
* Is there a better way to do all this, and still lose the tape backup and
keep the redundancy?
Any feedback will be highly appreciated!
Thanks,
Jørn
|
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Keith Hageman [MSFT]
Guest
|
| Posted:
Wed Mar 03, 2004 8:34 pm Post subject:
Re: Storage solution - feasibility |
|
|
I believe there are some significant limitations to this design as noted
below.
Responses are for Windows Server 2003 products.
NOTE: In all cases, we recommend that you test and verify ALL server
recovery scenarios in both sites to completely understand how to recover
file servers, exchange servers and SQL servers.
--
Keith Hageman
This posting is provided "AS IS" with no warranties, and confers no rights.
"Jørn Jørgensen" <jorn@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:ufynJv6$DHA.916@TK2MSFTNGP10.phx.gbl...
| Quote: | Hi,
We have a customer who for security purposes wants to set up a redundant
file storage solution. At the same time they're looking to get rid of
their
tape backup.
[KeithHa] We would refer to this as a Disaster Recovery (DR) implementation |
and you would like to replicate your data from one site to a second site.
| Quote: |
They are about 15 users and have <50 GB of data spread across file shares,
Exchange, SQL Server databases and SharePoint (SQL databases too I guess).
What we're thinking to implement is the following:
* Full Windows Server 2003 environment
* Two geographically separate sites, linked by xDSL
[KeithHa] DSL typically has assymetrical speeds. Download maybe 768K and |
upload maybe only 128K. If this is correct for your intended configuration,
you will have a bottleneck trying to upload data from site 1 to site 2 and
the same from site 2 to site 1.
| Quote: | * One shared DFS with FRS to replicate all data between both sites
[KeithHa] FRS only replicates files upon closure of files. SQL and Exchange |
applications which run 24x7, so those products files are never closed. Also,
Exchange databases are specific to the Exchange server that they are created
on. You should review the Exchange recovery methods to understand how you
would be able to use backup or replicated files in your alternate location
in the event you have a site failure.
| Quote: | * Use Shadow copy for 'version backup'
Shadow Copies of Shared Folders remove the need to do single file restore |
from tape for user mistakes. (User deletes or overwrites a file)
| Quote: | * Use NT Backup (or alternatively BackupExec) to perform 'periodic
backups'
to disk at both locations (enough disk space at both ends to have
something
like 1 three-month, 2 one-month, and 3 one-week backups (plus incremental
for the last week). Every few months the plan is to archive old data by
burning it to DVD's.
Alternatively, create your backup on local disk for local recovery of |
machines and replicate the backup file(s) to the alternate site.
| Quote: |
Questions are:
* Is this scenario at all feasible? Are there any serious drawbacks to not
using a tape or similar device, as long as there is always an offiste
copy? |
[KeithHa] You don't mention handling the DSL link failure between sites.
Have you considered that point-of-failure?
| Quote: | * How can we handle SQL Server and Exchange storage redundancy in this
scenario? I guess they can't be put on the DFS?
* Is it practically feasible to run NT Backup (or BackupExec) over xDSL (1
or 2 Mbit SHDSL) to the other site? This is presuming DFS can't be used
for
Exchange/SQL.
[KeithHa] Upload transfer rate comment above applies to this question as |
well.
| Quote: | * Is there a better way to do all this, and still lose the tape backup and
keep the redundancy?
Any feedback will be highly appreciated!
Thanks,
Jørn
|
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Jørn Jørgensen
Guest
|
| Posted:
Wed Mar 03, 2004 11:19 pm Post subject:
Re: Storage solution - feasibility |
|
|
Thank you very much for a very helpful answer!
Regards,
Jørn
"Keith Hageman [MSFT]" <keithha@online.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:uF6pZUTAEHA.2480@TK2MSFTNGP11.phx.gbl...
| Quote: | I believe there are some significant limitations to this design as noted
below.
Responses are for Windows Server 2003 products.
NOTE: In all cases, we recommend that you test and verify ALL server
recovery scenarios in both sites to completely understand how to recover
file servers, exchange servers and SQL servers.
--
Keith Hageman
This posting is provided "AS IS" with no warranties, and confers no
rights.
"Jørn Jørgensen" <jorn@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:ufynJv6$DHA.916@TK2MSFTNGP10.phx.gbl...
Hi,
We have a customer who for security purposes wants to set up a redundant
file storage solution. At the same time they're looking to get rid of
their
tape backup.
[KeithHa] We would refer to this as a Disaster Recovery (DR)
implementation
and you would like to replicate your data from one site to a second site.
They are about 15 users and have <50 GB of data spread across file
shares,
Exchange, SQL Server databases and SharePoint (SQL databases too I
guess).
What we're thinking to implement is the following:
* Full Windows Server 2003 environment
* Two geographically separate sites, linked by xDSL
[KeithHa] DSL typically has assymetrical speeds. Download maybe 768K and
upload maybe only 128K. If this is correct for your intended
configuration,
you will have a bottleneck trying to upload data from site 1 to site 2 and
the same from site 2 to site 1.
* One shared DFS with FRS to replicate all data between both sites
[KeithHa] FRS only replicates files upon closure of files. SQL and
Exchange
applications which run 24x7, so those products files are never closed.
Also,
Exchange databases are specific to the Exchange server that they are
created
on. You should review the Exchange recovery methods to understand how you
would be able to use backup or replicated files in your alternate location
in the event you have a site failure.
* Use Shadow copy for 'version backup'
Shadow Copies of Shared Folders remove the need to do single file restore
from tape for user mistakes. (User deletes or overwrites a file)
* Use NT Backup (or alternatively BackupExec) to perform 'periodic
backups'
to disk at both locations (enough disk space at both ends to have
something
like 1 three-month, 2 one-month, and 3 one-week backups (plus incremental
for the last week). Every few months the plan is to archive old data by
burning it to DVD's.
Alternatively, create your backup on local disk for local recovery of
machines and replicate the backup file(s) to the alternate site.
Questions are:
* Is this scenario at all feasible? Are there any serious drawbacks to
not
using a tape or similar device, as long as there is always an offiste
copy?
[KeithHa] You don't mention handling the DSL link failure between sites.
Have you considered that point-of-failure?
* How can we handle SQL Server and Exchange storage redundancy in this
scenario? I guess they can't be put on the DFS?
* Is it practically feasible to run NT Backup (or BackupExec) over xDSL
(1
or 2 Mbit SHDSL) to the other site? This is presuming DFS can't be used
for
Exchange/SQL.
[KeithHa] Upload transfer rate comment above applies to this question as
well.
* Is there a better way to do all this, and still lose the tape backup
and
keep the redundancy?
Any feedback will be highly appreciated!
Thanks,
Jørn
|
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
|
|
FAQ
Memberlist
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in