Backup Challenges and Concepts for PB Scale Filesystems · Backup Challenges and Concepts for PB...

1 EMC CONFIDENTIAL—INTERNAL USE ONLY

Backup Challenges and Concepts for PB Scale Filesystems

Dr.-Ing. Stefan Radtke CTO, EMEA EMC Emerging Technology Division


Document History

Version Date Comment Author

0.1 30.07.2014 First Draft Version: asking for discussion Stefan Radtke

0.2 31.07.2014 Several Changes after discussion with Oliver Kustermann, Lucian Gravis, Andreas El-Magraby Stefan Radtke

0.3 04.08.2014 ‚Normalized‘ the comparison tables so that we have same criterias Put Backup and Restore criterias to different tables/slides Wrote summary + positioning and final comparison on SynIQ vs. Avamar

Stefan Radtke

0.3a 04.08.2014 Typo correction Stefan Radtke

0.4 08.08.2014 Some smaller additions; Summary Matrix; Call to Actions after Discussion with Thore Stefan Radtke

0.5 10.09.2014 Remove ToDo and Call to Action slides Added link to blog post on the topic

Stefan Radtke

0.6 5.11.2014 Modified NDMP capabilities: incremental forever backuck Stefan Radtke


Reference

!! A detailed blog post on this article with more in depth explanations can be found at:

http://stefanradtke.blogspot.com/2014/09/challenges-and-options-for-filesystem.html


Introduction

I.! Isilon as a Backup target •! For data that

–! has a very high change rate –! does not deduplicated well

•! Already used extensively by customers for cheap and scaleable backup media •! Is also a good solution for Networker but has not been actively promoted fo far

(except when customers asked for it) •! Is not the main focus here (technically solved, no big issues)

II.! Isilon as a Backup source •! No good solution as of today (at Petabyte scale) •! => Main focus for this discussion!!

In the context of Isilon + Backup we can distinguish two use cases:

Backup


Scope

•! In this discussion context we focus on backup solutions that scale beyond Petabyte size (we have more than ~370 customers and many more between 500 and 1PB in one FS)

•! Backup up to some hundred TB can be done using existing NDMP solutions

•! Solution that meets all requirements (next slide) for an ideal backup solution does not yet exist.

•! This discussion is about how solutions can look like and evaluate their capabilites, advantages and disadvantages.


The ideal Backup Solution (1/2) If the following criterias are all met, we would have the ideal backup solution.

Typically you can‘t have them all at the same time so you have to choose depending on the requirements. The following use cases should help with the evaluation of available options.

Requirements for BACKUP Must have

Nice to have

Supports progressive incremental forever - At petabyte scale you can‘t do periodic fulls anymore

X

Is fast - needs to avoid treewalks - except for the initial full - must provide massive throughput

X

Must be cost efficient X

Supports In-line deduplication/compression X

Allows backup to different target media X


The ideal Backup Solution (2/2) If the following criterias are all met, we would have the ideal restore solution.

Typically you can‘t have them all at the same time so you have to choose depending on the requirements. The following use cases should help with the evaluation of available options.

Requirements for RESTORE Must have

Nice to have

Predictable SLAs - Must provide predicable/constant throughput

X

Provides DR solution with very short RTO - In the range of minutes

(X) depends on businnes requirements

End user can restore their data by themselve - without requiring admin privileges

X

Can restore to different storage system -different OS version or vendor

(X) depends

Can restore to different filesystem/location X


Ok, let‘s now look at the available concepts

0. Replication and Snapshots with SyncIQ 1.! NDMP Backup/Restore 2.! Native Backup/Restore via SMB/CIFS mounts 3.! Avamar Backup Accellerator


0. Backup OneFS using SyncIQ

Comments: •! Very fast •! Versioning through snapshots but no index (integrates with VSS)

•! Can Networker manage and index snapshots ? According to 8.2 Snapshot-Management-Integration-Guide not !!

•! NW 8.2 can manage snapshots as well as local and remote replication •! NW 8.2 can mount snashots and do restore‘s •! Indexing of snapshot content is planned for a future release.

Backup using SyncIQ Yes No Comment

Supports progressive incremental forever X Snapshot based, always incremental

Is fast X Massive parallel.

Must be cost efficient X Capacity: Requires ~ same as source capacity + extra for incremental changes License: required but no additional backup SW

Supports In-line deduplication (X) Supports post-process deduplication; relatively slow



0. Restore OneFS using SyncIQ

Comments: •! Restore very fast •! Also failover is possible!

- Failover only reverses the sync direction. - No IP-addresses or other configuration data like shares, exports, quotas are taken over automatically. Can be scripted. - The data since last snapshot will be lost.

•! Failover of some configation data planned for future releases

Restore using SyncIQ Yes No Comment

Predictable SLAs X Massive throuput

End user can restore their data by themselve X VSS integration or copy manually from .snapshot directory

Can restore to different storage system (X) Not using SynIQ but manual copy is possible

Can restore to different filesystem/location X With SynIQ policy if target is OneFS or manual copy otherwise

Provides DR solution with very short RTO X Yes, can failover sync direction


1. Backup using NDMP with Networker

NDMP

Isilon: •! Not-Cost effective because we need to store Nx full versions of the NDMP dump •! Post-dedup will almost never finish

DD: •! The initial dedup-rate must be > 1:2 to justify cost over Isilon •! Typical high dedup-rate through versioning may not be achived with Nx NDMP dumps

Tape: •! Still customers want it for long term archive •! Management can get quite complex •! Recovery times not predicatble; will take weeks at Petabyte scale

Networker NDMP Backup Yes No Comment

Supports progressive incremental forever (X) Now supported (new)! But think what that means for restore ! To backup 1 PB at 10GB/s line speed takes more than 12 days to complete !

Is fast X Supports snapshot based backup with OneFS 7.1.1 and NW 8.2

Cost efficient See comments

To Tape: yes; DD:depents; Other disk: no

Supports In-line deduplication/compression X Tape supports compression



1. Restore using NDMP with Networker

NDMP




Netwroker NDMP RESTORE Yes No Comment

Predictable SLAs See comment

Tape: no DD and Isilon: yes (but will take long)

End user can restore their data by themselve X Admin privileges required ?

Can restore to different storage system X


Provides DR solution with very short RTO X


2. Networker Backup via NFS/SMB mounts

Isilon: •! Does it make sense at all ? Advantage over SynIQ is only that files are indexed •! NW client can directly backup to AFTD

DD: •! Can use boost from NW to DD !! •! NW client can directly backup to boost devices

Tape:

AFTD

CIFS/NFS

Networker Server

boost

Reference: Use Isilon's new change-list feature to accellerate your backups

Networker Backup SMB/NFS mounts

Yes No Comment

Supports progressive incremental forever See comments Tape: no; Isilon: no (Networker synthetic fulls in theory but not realistic) Data Domain: yes, with Virtual Syntetic Fulls

Is fast See comments Must be scripted to use Isilon changelist API (We do similar things with TSM and good experiences!); Networker supports filelist backup with save –I <filename> option. Can support boost ! Open questions: what about expiry, what about VSF; Needs some research and testing.

Cost efficient Questionable DD: need 1x Size of source data (rule of thumb: 50% initial, 50% for incrementals) Isilon: need NxSize because periodic fulls. Doesn‘t make sense until Networker can do efficient syntetic fulls

Supports In-line deduplication See comments DD: yes; Isilon: post-process (slow) Tape: no

Supports In-line compression DD: yes; Isilon: no; Tape: no



2. Networker Restore via SMB/NFS mounts

NDMP




Networker RESTORE Yes No Comment

Predictable SLAs DD: yes Isilon: yes Tape: no

End user can restore their data by themselve X





3. Backup using Avamar Backup Accellerator

NDMP

Avamar -> DD: •! Requires 1x Size of data that need protection/backup •! Requires still an Avamar Server (VM)

•! BUSINESS EDITION SERVER (HW)

•! Is it technically feasible for > 1 PB •! Is it financially competitive ?

Boost

Avamar BUSINESS EDITION (HW) -! Manages metha data

-! - index -! scheduling

Reference: Optimized Isilon Backup and Recpvery…

Avamar NDMP

accellerator

Notes. •! Avamar Accellerator is NOT

the same thing than the Islilon Backup Accellerator (which has a FC connection)

•! Avamamar Accellerator can be physical or as VM

•! Physical Node has only 1 GB adapters.

•! Currently recommend VM because of 10 GBE

•! Avamar keeps track of time stamps and controls snapshot creation

•! Avamar Server can be replaced by Networker Server (8.5) in the future

•! Compared to SynIQ it has several advantages like versioning, index,…

•! Per Avamar accellerator ~500 MB/s •! Can use multiple Accellerator Nodes

parallelization on subdirectory level (manual configuration)

Meta data only

Avamar NDMP Backup Yes No Comment

Supports progressive incremental forever X No restrictions; Avamar is breaking up the NDMP stream real time

Is fast X Uses CLAPI for fast incrementals forever

Cost efficient X Requires ~1x raw size of backup data (50% initial + 50% incrementals)

Supports In-line deduplication X

Supports In-line compression X

Allows backup to different target media X Target = Data Domain


3. Restore from Avamar Backup Accellerator

NDMP

Avamar -> DD: •! Requires 1x Size of data that need protection/backup •! Requires still an Avamar Server (VM)

•! BUSINESS EDITION SERVER (HW)

•! Is it technically feasible for > 1 PB •! Is it financially competitive ?

Boost

Avamar BUSINESS EDITION (HW) -! Manages metha data

-! - index -! scheduling

Reference: Optimized Isilon Backup and Recpvery…

Avamar NDMP

accellerator

Notes. •! Avamar Accellerator is NOT

the same thing than the Islilon Backup Accellerator (which has a FC connection)

•! Avamamar Accellerator can be physical or as VM

•! Physical Node has only 1 GB adapters.

•! Currently recommend VM because of 10 GBE

•! Avamar keeps track of time stamps and controls snapshot creation

•! Avamar Server can be replaced by Networker Server (8.5) in the future

•! Compared to SynIQ it has several advantages like versioning, index,…

•! Per Avamar accellerator ~500 MB/s •! Can use multiple Accellerator Nodes

parallelization on subdirectory level (manual configuration)

Meta data only

Avamar RESTORE Yes No Comment

Predictable SLAs X

End user can restore their data by themselve X





Summary Matrix

Criteria Isilon SynIQ

NW NDMP

NW Native

*)

Avamar BA-Accel

Supports progressive incremental forever Yes (Yes)+) No++) Yes

Is fast Very fast fast ? fast

Cost efficient Yes With tape only

? Yes

Backup to different media (Medienbruch) No Yes Yes (Yes) ->DD

Predictable SLAs for Restore Yes No ? Yes

Disaster recovery with minimal RTO (minutes) Yes No No No

Comparing only „must have“ attributes (simplified view):

*) Native backup via CIFS/SMB mounts works fine with TSM; For networker some validation work is required to understand a potential incremental forever behavior with NW+DD (VSF).

+) With NW 8.2 and OneFS 7.1.1 incremental forever with NDMP is supported. However, realistic restore procedures would not allow using it beyond a couple of incremetals.

++) With Native CIFS/NFS backups Networker Syntetic Fulls can be used but it‘s very questionably that this will work beyond some dozent TB


Summary

•! Both need approximately the raw capacity of ~ 1x source data + incremental space •! Both support incremental forever •! SynIQ will be much faster •! Avamar has some other advantages like diffent technology, full indexed versioning. •! Comparison of both see next slide

SyncIQ and the Avamar Backup Accellerator Solutions are currently most cost effective.

Networker NDMP backup to DD is most probalby not cost effective

•! Strength of DD through deduplication through versioning does not play out here since we need periodic fulls with NDMP

•! Required raw capacity on DD much more expensive than Isilon with SynIQ •! Networker + NDMP might be more cost effective with Tapes but bad/no restore/SLAs

Networker native backup via CIFS/SMB mounts using Changelist API

•! Not yet integrated; Required some scripting solutions like we to it with TSM •! Potentially valid solution but requires evaluation + testing


Conclusion

•! Use SynIQ with a secondary Isilon cluster if •! the backup must be very fast •! no ‚other‘ target media is required •! DR solution with low RTOs is required

•! Use the Avamar Backup Accelerator for customers who: •! Have a Data Domain already •! Don‘t have a second cluster for SynIQ •! Need long term versioning and index •! Just need to backup a fraction of the overall filesystem

•! Use Networker with NDMP to Tape •! If the filesystem is much smaller than PB scale •! Backup window allows periodic full backups •! Customer can live with very slow and unpredictable restore times

Backup Challenges and Concepts for PB Scale Filesystems · Backup Challenges and Concepts for PB...

Documents

Transcript of Backup Challenges and Concepts for PB Scale Filesystems · Backup Challenges and Concepts for PB...