UrBackup Review plus Configuration Options
-
So how does UrBackup work, well it's agent based. Meaning on each client you install an agent which communicates to the server. This is identical to how Shadow Protect works, so no gain / loss here. The gain here is that you can have as many clients as you have systems in your organization. So be it a single server or 1500 servers and 3000 user systems. This is a big item, as licensing for solutions such as Shadow Protect is per system (generally). Which means your cost goes through the roof at some point.
Which you might just throw out the idea of have file level backups. But what if you had no backup solution choices at all, you had to purchase something, well I guess there is a very shiny penny your about to spend. (sorry)
Anyways, file level backups can be extremely critical for many businesses, so just throwing them out entirely isn't an option. And while paying a fortune to cover your critical systems is often settled upon, it isn't desired. Another benefit is you can backup your user systems at no additional upfront cost. So for a very simple reason you need file level restore, file servers. It is why people enable and use VSS on windows systems, then they go to Shadow Protect type solutions to cover the block level. Or the "oh %^* moments".
Which many hypervisors such as XenServer or KVM do block level backups natively and for free. Of course your storage space needs to be considered here, and storage, even as cheap as Spinning rust is, still cost money. So there is that to consider.
But still no reason to not have multiple backups, the more backups you have, the better your recovery chances are. Just remember to offset your desires with real-world risks.
Anyways, back on track.
If your business grows in number of servers that it must run for day to day functions, be they VM's or physical (I hope they're VMs by this point) you'll likely want some kind of backup mechanism. Hypervisor level solutions work great, but work at the block level (Xen Orchestra for example). Because just like UrBackup or Shadow Protect you can restore to dissimilar hardware, or insert a recovery ISO (cd dvd w/e) and restore at the block level. But with these since they are agent based, you get the file level granularity you often need.
Another benefit of file level backup solutions is that you often get a recovery medium (block level restore medium). So you pop in the recovery iso (or dvd) and boot from that medium, browse to your backup location, and restore the whole block device.
This of course could be redundant, but lets say you get hit with ransom-ware. It may be your only option. Great to have, even if you don't need it, yet another + for UrBackup as this too is available for free.
-
So the options in UrBackup include some really critical things, such as how many backups to keep, what kind of backups to create (image type, file type, or some combination) and of course how many of each type of backup to keep, how often to run, and of course where to store the backups.
On Windows this is a critical thing to note (most other systems as well, but here more so than others IMO). Windows will (by default I believe) share out the administrative share C$. Which immediately makes that a target for ransom-ware. Now since UrBackup uses a service account (local service account by default) it still needs to be considered, which provides almost no protection, the share of your server could be scanned for. So this must be considered closely if the use of windows as a backup target.
A best practice is to avoid being stupid, and do not share out your backup directory. Using the Windows Administrative share as a backup directory is obviously a dumb thing to do.
Besides this, the solution seems solid, has the benefits that many businesses need (file level, block level, and separate recovery media), and is free.
So anyone else considering their renewal window for their currently paid solution, and wondering... is it worth it?
-
@DustinB3403 Curious how your use of XenServer will be affected by this?
-
I actually just started test UrBackup last week myself, kind of in the same boat. Works pretty good, not nearly as pretty as the paid competitors but for standalone physical boxes it makes for a nice free incremental backup tool. Biggest downside I see is there is no dedupe or compression facility whatsoever and therefore you have to rely on the storage target's filesytem level capabilities for that. But still, beggar's can't be choosers.
-
@FATeknollogee Our use of XenServer won't change, nor would the use of Xen Orchestra.
The hypervisor is independent of UrBackup (and whatever is running it). What might change is the use of our File Level backup solution.
Of course the lack of deduplication and compression is something to consider, but these are a bit trivial in comparison. Especially when there are options for deduplication with every modern operating system.
Windows Server 2012 supports dedup, as well as does the Btfrs and ZFS file systems. Of which you could create a VM, attach iscsi storage to it, and off to the races with you.
Or just locally inside of the VM, which could also then be backed up with a solution like XO at the block level. This way you'd have deduped file level with block level over it all.
Which would be pretty neat. . .
-
Oh I know I didn't put this in any post above, but you can restore files on the fly.
So should a user call you and say "Hey I deleted xyz, can you restore it" You can, just go to the webconsole, browse to the file path, and click restore.
On the user system, a prompt appears asking if you actually want to restore the file, click yes. The file restoration will begin, which in my testing (very small files) was instantly.
-
As I use Hyper-V and Veeam, I have file level restores available form the VM backup images.
With both VMWare and Hyper-V this is already possible in the normal backup solutions (Veeam/Unitrends). No need to go to yet another backup mechanism.
-
@JaredBusch said in UrBackup Review plus Configuration Options:
As I use Hyper-V and Veeam, I have file level restores available form the VM backup images.
With both VMWare and Hyper-V this is already possible in the normal backup solutions (Veeam/Unitrends). No need to go to yet another backup mechanism.
@JaredBusch your argument here is to use Veeam, or Unitrends, all I'm saying is you could use UrBackUp as an alternative to either of those (or Shadow Protect).
So what is your point? You're still using file level backups (with block type restore capabilities). Same here.
Just a different solution.
-
@DustinB3403 said in UrBackup Review plus Configuration Options:
@JaredBusch said in UrBackup Review plus Configuration Options:
As I use Hyper-V and Veeam, I have file level restores available form the VM backup images.
With both VMWare and Hyper-V this is already possible in the normal backup solutions (Veeam/Unitrends). No need to go to yet another backup mechanism.
@JaredBusch your argument here is to use Veeam, or Unitrends, all I'm saying is you could use UrBackUp as an alternative to either of those (or Shadow Protect).
So what is your point? You're still using file level backups (with block type restore capabilities). Same here.
Just a different solution.
No, I am only using Veeam/Unitrends to back up the VM. Those products are capable of opening the VM to restore single files.
-
@JaredBusch said in UrBackup Review plus Configuration Options:
@DustinB3403 said in UrBackup Review plus Configuration Options:
@JaredBusch said in UrBackup Review plus Configuration Options:
As I use Hyper-V and Veeam, I have file level restores available form the VM backup images.
With both VMWare and Hyper-V this is already possible in the normal backup solutions (Veeam/Unitrends). No need to go to yet another backup mechanism.
@JaredBusch your argument here is to use Veeam, or Unitrends, all I'm saying is you could use UrBackUp as an alternative to either of those (or Shadow Protect).
So what is your point? You're still using file level backups (with block type restore capabilities). Same here.
Just a different solution.
No, I am only using Veeam/Unitrends to back up the VM. Those products are capable of opening the VM to restore single files.
Ahh, so that is a very good thing for those solutions. 1 package to take care of block and file level restores.
-
@DustinB3403 said in UrBackup Review plus Configuration Options:
@JaredBusch said in UrBackup Review plus Configuration Options:
@DustinB3403 said in UrBackup Review plus Configuration Options:
@JaredBusch said in UrBackup Review plus Configuration Options:
As I use Hyper-V and Veeam, I have file level restores available form the VM backup images.
With both VMWare and Hyper-V this is already possible in the normal backup solutions (Veeam/Unitrends). No need to go to yet another backup mechanism.
@JaredBusch your argument here is to use Veeam, or Unitrends, all I'm saying is you could use UrBackUp as an alternative to either of those (or Shadow Protect).
So what is your point? You're still using file level backups (with block type restore capabilities). Same here.
Just a different solution.
No, I am only using Veeam/Unitrends to back up the VM. Those products are capable of opening the VM to restore single files.
Ahh, so that is a very good thing for those solutions. 1 package to take care of block and file level restores.
And this is the second reason I refuse to run XS in production.
-
@JaredBusch said in UrBackup Review plus Configuration Options:
@DustinB3403 said in UrBackup Review plus Configuration Options:
@JaredBusch said in UrBackup Review plus Configuration Options:
@DustinB3403 said in UrBackup Review plus Configuration Options:
@JaredBusch said in UrBackup Review plus Configuration Options:
As I use Hyper-V and Veeam, I have file level restores available form the VM backup images.
With both VMWare and Hyper-V this is already possible in the normal backup solutions (Veeam/Unitrends). No need to go to yet another backup mechanism.
@JaredBusch your argument here is to use Veeam, or Unitrends, all I'm saying is you could use UrBackUp as an alternative to either of those (or Shadow Protect).
So what is your point? You're still using file level backups (with block type restore capabilities). Same here.
Just a different solution.
No, I am only using Veeam/Unitrends to back up the VM. Those products are capable of opening the VM to restore single files.
Ahh, so that is a very good thing for those solutions. 1 package to take care of block and file level restores.
And this is the second reason I refuse to run XS in production.
But why, Unitrends support XenServer. Unless you are saying that the solution for Unitrends on XS differs from Unitrends for Hyper-V.
Are you?
-
@JaredBusch said in UrBackup Review plus Configuration Options:
And this is the second reason I refuse to run XS in production.
If Veeam would/could just support XS, we'd all be in heaven!!
-
@DustinB3403 said in UrBackup Review plus Configuration Options:
@JaredBusch said in UrBackup Review plus Configuration Options:
@DustinB3403 said in UrBackup Review plus Configuration Options:
@JaredBusch said in UrBackup Review plus Configuration Options:
@DustinB3403 said in UrBackup Review plus Configuration Options:
@JaredBusch said in UrBackup Review plus Configuration Options:
As I use Hyper-V and Veeam, I have file level restores available form the VM backup images.
With both VMWare and Hyper-V this is already possible in the normal backup solutions (Veeam/Unitrends). No need to go to yet another backup mechanism.
@JaredBusch your argument here is to use Veeam, or Unitrends, all I'm saying is you could use UrBackUp as an alternative to either of those (or Shadow Protect).
So what is your point? You're still using file level backups (with block type restore capabilities). Same here.
Just a different solution.
No, I am only using Veeam/Unitrends to back up the VM. Those products are capable of opening the VM to restore single files.
Ahh, so that is a very good thing for those solutions. 1 package to take care of block and file level restores.
And this is the second reason I refuse to run XS in production.
But why, Unitrends support XenServer. Unless you are saying that the solution for Unitrends on XS differs from Unitrends for Hyper-V.
Are you?
No, but was that not just added in the last year or so?
-
@JaredBusch said in UrBackup Review plus Configuration Options:
@DustinB3403 said in UrBackup Review plus Configuration Options:
@JaredBusch said in UrBackup Review plus Configuration Options:
@DustinB3403 said in UrBackup Review plus Configuration Options:
@JaredBusch said in UrBackup Review plus Configuration Options:
@DustinB3403 said in UrBackup Review plus Configuration Options:
@JaredBusch said in UrBackup Review plus Configuration Options:
As I use Hyper-V and Veeam, I have file level restores available form the VM backup images.
With both VMWare and Hyper-V this is already possible in the normal backup solutions (Veeam/Unitrends). No need to go to yet another backup mechanism.
@JaredBusch your argument here is to use Veeam, or Unitrends, all I'm saying is you could use UrBackUp as an alternative to either of those (or Shadow Protect).
So what is your point? You're still using file level backups (with block type restore capabilities). Same here.
Just a different solution.
No, I am only using Veeam/Unitrends to back up the VM. Those products are capable of opening the VM to restore single files.
Ahh, so that is a very good thing for those solutions. 1 package to take care of block and file level restores.
And this is the second reason I refuse to run XS in production.
But why, Unitrends support XenServer. Unless you are saying that the solution for Unitrends on XS differs from Unitrends for Hyper-V.
Are you?
No, but was that not just added in the last year or so?
I'm not certain when Unitrends for XS was released, I just recall seeing it.
-
@JaredBusch said in UrBackup Review plus Configuration Options:
And this is the second reason I refuse to run XS in production.
Not to threadjack, but http://www.quadricsoftware.com/products/alike-dr/ supports Hyper-V and XS
-
@crustachio said in UrBackup Review plus Configuration Options:
Biggest downside I see is there is no dedupe or compression facility whatsoever and therefore you have to rely on the storage target's filesytem level capabilities for that. But still, beggar's can't be choosers.
Looks like FreeBSD and ZFS are supported.
-
AGPL license, that's very good.
-
@DustinB3403 said in UrBackup Review plus Configuration Options:
@JaredBusch said in UrBackup Review plus Configuration Options:
@DustinB3403 said in UrBackup Review plus Configuration Options:
@JaredBusch said in UrBackup Review plus Configuration Options:
@DustinB3403 said in UrBackup Review plus Configuration Options:
@JaredBusch said in UrBackup Review plus Configuration Options:
@DustinB3403 said in UrBackup Review plus Configuration Options:
@JaredBusch said in UrBackup Review plus Configuration Options:
As I use Hyper-V and Veeam, I have file level restores available form the VM backup images.
With both VMWare and Hyper-V this is already possible in the normal backup solutions (Veeam/Unitrends). No need to go to yet another backup mechanism.
@JaredBusch your argument here is to use Veeam, or Unitrends, all I'm saying is you could use UrBackUp as an alternative to either of those (or Shadow Protect).
So what is your point? You're still using file level backups (with block type restore capabilities). Same here.
Just a different solution.
No, I am only using Veeam/Unitrends to back up the VM. Those products are capable of opening the VM to restore single files.
Ahh, so that is a very good thing for those solutions. 1 package to take care of block and file level restores.
And this is the second reason I refuse to run XS in production.
But why, Unitrends support XenServer. Unless you are saying that the solution for Unitrends on XS differs from Unitrends for Hyper-V.
Are you?
No, but was that not just added in the last year or so?
I'm not certain when Unitrends for XS was released, I just recall seeing it.
Unitrends bought PHD Virtual. So the support for XS goes back a really long time, just not under the Unitrends brand. Unitrends XS is not at all a new product.
-
@FATeknollogee said in UrBackup Review plus Configuration Options:
@JaredBusch said in UrBackup Review plus Configuration Options:
And this is the second reason I refuse to run XS in production.
If Veeam would/could just support XS, we'd all be in heaven!!
Veeam supports it, but not through the old product that people call Veeam. Veeam's two new agent based product lines don't talk to the hypervisor and obviously support both XS and KVM (and everything else) in that case.
