High Bandwidth Backup?
Printed From: Web Wiz Forums
Category: General Discussion
Forum Name: General Discussion
Forum Description: General discussion and chat on any topic.
URL: https://forums.webwiz.net/forum_posts.asp?TID=16477
Printed Date: 31 March 2026 at 3:19am
Software Version: Web Wiz Forums 12.08 - https://www.webwizforums.com
Topic: High Bandwidth Backup?
Posted By: davidshq
Subject: High Bandwidth Backup?
Date Posted: 08 September 2005 at 4:53pm
|
I'm a little new to this whole Network Administrator role and I know
this is mainly for web based discussions, but it seems that questions
get answered even more generally...So I have the following. How are people backing up terabytes of data without bogging down their CPU with a backup program or their network with the data? We have Veritas 10 and were going to place Veritas 10 on one server (backup) and then hook up the tape drive to the server holding terabytes of data (bigserver). That way the processing of the backup would be handled not by bigserver, but on the other hand the data could be sent directly from bigserver to the tape driver without utilizing lots of network bandwidth. David. ------------- - http://www.davemackey.net/" rel="nofollow - Dave Mackey - Virtual Home. |
Replies:
Posted By: Gullanian
Date Posted: 09 September 2005 at 8:21am
|
Is it the sort of thing you can leave running overnight when everyone in asleep? Maybe you could allocate a certain percentage of the CPU to use in the backup? |
Posted By: davidshq
Date Posted: 09 September 2005 at 9:43am
|
With, the data is over a terabyte now and will only continue to
increase. If the machine isn't dedicated to the backup process, I have
my doubts we'd ever complete a backup for the machine. Its a web server
so there is very little opportunity to use CPU which is not being
consumed by visitors. David. ------------- - http://www.davemackey.net/" rel="nofollow - Dave Mackey - Virtual Home. |
Posted By: michael
Date Posted: 09 September 2005 at 10:20am
|
Generally if you have this large a database, you would have a cluster anyway, so you can run your full backup on one server and while the servers demand is higher, users are going to be re-directed to the other one. In case of a 24/7 environment, it can become a crunch but otherwise you can run a full backup on weekends when the load is near zero and run incremental backups every day with transaction log backups every 10 minutes or so, that way it should not hold your utilization too high. ------------- http://baumannphoto.com" rel="nofollow - Blog | http://mpgtracker.com" rel="nofollow - MPG Tracker |
Posted By: the boss
Date Posted: 10 September 2005 at 5:28pm
micheal is right.. u should be running a cluster of mirrored servers.. similar data isdistributed across servral server.. eases down the hardwork..and provides redundancy...btw.. i dont think you can be serving terabytes of data on a single web server.. which is very busy by visitors too.. it will crash in no time..unless it has 32 Opteron CPU's and 34Gig of ram ..------------- http://www.web2messenger.com/theboss"> 
|
Posted By: dpyers
Date Posted: 10 September 2005 at 7:51pm
|
Time to think about raid striping
------------- 
Lead me not into temptation... I know the short cut, follow me. |
Posted By: davidshq
Date Posted: 10 September 2005 at 7:54pm
|
Well, we ended up creating a dedicate subnet for backup. Now the
information will be transferred over a gigabit network, but a separate
one from the internal network, allowing functioning to continue at
full-speed (there is a lot of internal communication) but also allowing
backups. David. ------------- - http://www.davemackey.net/" rel="nofollow - Dave Mackey - Virtual Home. |
Posted By: davidshq
Date Posted: 10 September 2005 at 8:02pm
|
We actually do use RAIDs already. But we still need backups. You can
always lose two drives at the same time in a RAID 1/10 and end up in
trouble.
------------- - http://www.davemackey.net/" rel="nofollow - Dave Mackey - Virtual Home. |