BackupAssist= Peoples Views

[Jay_Jay]

Hi All,

 

Looking to implement a new backup system and have been trialling the above software, it seems to do the job, have been happy with it so far and like the way it backups up Hyper-V. Costs are extremely good as well !

Does anyone else use this backup software and have you come across any issues and are you happy with it ?

 

Thanks

[plexer]

There are many happy users myself included.

 

Ben

[bodminman]

Not used it recently but in a previous life I did and it was great!

[Jay_Jay]

Thanks for the feedback, decided to go with CA Arcserve for a backup system, Backup Assist was good but wanted more of a centralised backup system.

[bodminman]

Thanks for the feedback, decided to go with CA Arcserve for a backup system, Backup Assist was good but wanted more of a centralised backup system.

 

Thanks for letting us know.

 

Good luck with CA.

[OverWorked]

I've been trialling ARCserve, Yosemite and BackupAssist for a small office environment this week.

 

I've decided to go with BackupAssist. Nice and simple and it works and is low-cost. Creates a Grandfather, Father, Son rotation easily, and backs up to NAS. Backs up Hyper-V as well.

 

At the time of writing, I have about 30 mins experience of BackupAssist, but am already impressed enough.

 

Yosemite was good, but a bit too powerful for the needs here.

 

CA ARCserve - very complicated, but good for centralised backup of multiple servers.

[Michael]

Due to the lack of options with 2008 R2's Windows Server Backup, Backup Assist gives you the options Microsoft should of provided in the first place!

 

The reporting to e-mail is also very useful whether I'm at a site or not - I know how the backup performed.

[dgsmith]

Funny I should see this thread being updated - I also happen to be trialling backup assist on onr of our servers! Looks reasonably promising as plan to move a server over to Svr08R2 later this month. Prices seem fairly reasonable too.

[mwbutler]

BA works very well. Have it on 3 servers and any issues I've ever ran into, their large knowledge base has usually had the info I need. Only downside is their company is based in the US or Australia so phone support is limited due to time zones.

[deano]

You should try Microsoft's Data Protection Manager. Its a brilliant product that is currently available as 2010 but the 2012 version is out for beta. The software can utilise disk and tape backup but disks have to be from an iSCSI source. Pricing is very competitive also, if i remember correctly the last renewal cost in my FTE Agreement from Microsoft cost £70 for the product with SQL and then £25 for an Enterprise Licence and £5 for a Standard Licence. Enterprise Licences will cover your boxes with SQL, such as SharePoint, Exchange, SQL etc. The standard licence is for anything else, Server 2008, Server 2003, Win 7 etc

 

There are some solutions you can implement to achieve your goal with DPM, such as a virtual tape library or use Microsoft's iSCSI Software Target. The virtual tape library is great if you wish to use a NAS storage or USB drive for long term storage. If you wish to just use disk backup, i recommend the iSCSI target if you have a spare server or NAS box. It will need Server 2008 R2 installed but will allow the server to fake an iSCSI connection.

[OverWorked]

It will need Server 2008 R2 installed but will allow the server to fake an iSCSI connection.

 

Do you mean it's possible in 2008 R2 to create an iSCSI connection to a non-iSCSI capable NAS? I didn't know that was possible.

 

I have an old Buffalo Terastation NAS which not supporting iSCSI limits my options.

[Michael]

So it sounds like 2008 R2 uses some form of software emulation for iSCSI from what deano's saying. I'm not sure how good this sounds. It kind of reminds of software RAID. It works but it uses a lot more system resources, due to the emulation.

[deano]

Unfortunately the nas box would not be capable as it runs a Linux operating system. What I mean is exactly what Michael says, the iscisi software target is an emulator for the connection but the software requires server 2008 r2 for installation on the nas/fileserver. I have tested this on three separate installs with disk sizes up to 1.5 tb and noticed no heavy resource usage, although I was just watching task manager and had not setup any performance monitors. The software just allows the creation of a VHD on the nas/fileserver for use by dpm.