What are you using for backup Nutanix?

  • 2 October 2017
  • 34 replies
  • 6667 views


Show first post

34 replies

Badge
In my case, I was looking at HYCU because we currently use Rapid Recovery for all of our physical servers. As we are virtualizing those server on Nutanix I'm looking at a virtual aware backup that works well with Nutanix AHV so we aren't backing up VM's with the old style client method. I'll continue to use RR with our physical servers.
Badge +8
I think there is a fair bit of fud in your post jtempleton. For transparency, I work at Commvault (Now: Customer Support) so take this with the usual vendor bias and skepticism. I have been working with Nutanix since 2015 and having so many solutions to pick from is a tesitment to the success of their platform and awesomeness of the community that has resulted.

You are incorrect on the integration point in your post. Most solutions now are integrating with Nutanix's data protection API. Commvault was the first to provide agentless backups (we believed :D) and no, it does not require physical hardware (grab a trial version and see for yourself). Likewise I think our friends at Veeam also provide direct integration now without the use of agents. I even think Veritas has announced or has support using agentless methods.

Sure, we're going to recommend physical when you achieve massive scale - but so will Veeam and other vendors if you need deduplication for any significant size of backup. The difference is that we do not need specialized dedupe hardware appliances at scale as we perform this using software only, where many would prefer you purchased a data domain, StoreOnce or other specialized accellerated appliance to handle larger datasets.

We're switching on the new API framework in our next service pack (3 days away) which will also bring CBT for AHV and Nutanix's much improved API model that does away with the older framework that we worked with Nutanix on since 2015. The old framework was tied to protection domains, so I'm excited to break free of that model and take advantage of all the new goodies.

Hycu does seem like an elegant solution, and I do like the approach, but no need to spread the fud. All of these solutions have completely different value propositions. Lets leave the good people here to try each solution on their own merits and keep the fud to a minimum.
Badge +2
Damian thank you for the comments. I really do appreacite when IT professional come to discuss what is good in their product and leave the dicussion making to the masses. Postivity always produces better results :)

TY
Badge +1
Personally, jtempleton - i find your commentary very insightful - i am a product manager for dell emc lookign for unbiased information about anyone and anything in the market looking to protect nutanix environments.

theres no one size fits all for data protection, each customer brings their own unique needs, challenges at a certain cost point. i certainly appreciated the detail you provide as it helps set the context.

Healthy competition = better products for IT professionals, lets not all forget that. As we all push the bar higher, the consumer always gets better capabilities for all players.
Badge +8
Fair enough and thank-you. The extra detail makes sense and puts things into perspective.

Happy to answer any questions that anyone has, and .. just remembered that I need to upgrade my community edition labs to the latest version 🙂
So VEEAM has recommended to users to use physical proxies for large installation? How big is "large" in that instance? We are using Commvault on a 34 node cluster and about to throw VEEAM on a 17 node cluster. So we are going to get some real world comparisons whether we like it not, haha.
Userlevel 1
Badge +2
Hi all,
we are try to solve a problem related to VMs attached to Volume Groups (VG):
Our Nutanix infrastructure at the moment is composed of 2 clusters based on AOS/AHY and cross-replicated using the native protection domains as DR.
Excluding other standard VM services, we can say that the first cluster contain the OpenStack infrastructure (Database(s), Keystone, Horizon, etc.) and with the Nutanix OpenStack drivers we use the second cluster to generate the OpenStack VMs.

Right now we haven´t still found a software solution that have VG support and we discovered this problem using Cohesity. For the moment negative answer support of vProtect and Veeam and we are waiting for other answers.

Any suggestion?
Hi all,
we are try to solve a problem related to VMs attached to Volume Groups (VG):
Our Nutanix infrastructure at the moment is composed of 2 clusters based on AOS/AHY and cross-replicated using the native protection domains as DR.
Excluding other standard VM services, we can say that the first cluster contain the OpenStack infrastructure (Database(s), Keystone, Horizon, etc.) and with the Nutanix OpenStack drivers we use the second cluster to generate the OpenStack VMs.

Right now we haven´t still found a software solution that have VG support and we discovered this problem using Cohesity. For the moment negative answer support of vProtect and Veeam and we are waiting for other answers.

Any suggestion?


https://www.hycu.com/blog/how-hycu-uses-nutanix-volume-group-apis-for-consistent-data-protection/

Has anyone used IBM TSM for their backup and restore solution?

Reply