<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
	<channel>
		<title>Deduplication maturity (updated 06-08)</title>
		<description>Discuss Deduplication maturity (updated 06-08)</description>
		<link>http://www.backupcentral.com/mr-backup-blog-mainmenu-47/13-mr-backup-blog/148-dedupe-maturity.html</link>
		<lastBuildDate>Fri, 10 Feb 2012 11:29:43 +0000</lastBuildDate>
		<generator>JComments</generator>
		<atom:link href="http://www.backupcentral.com/component/jcomments/feed/com_content/148/10.html" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
		<item>
			<title>It is ONE of the tests</title>
			<link>http://www.backupcentral.com/mr-backup-blog-mainmenu-47/13-mr-backup-blog/148-dedupe-maturity.html#comment-335</link>
			<description><![CDATA[You are right in that the speed of the target is rarely the reason backups are slowed down, AND very few systems can create a single backup stream even close to 100 MB/s. BUT some CAN -- and that's why we test this metric. In addition, we I say single stream I'm referring to both backup, restore AND copy speed. One area where backup apps can easily create a 100+ MB/s stream is when copying a backup from disk to tape, something you may do a lot. You need to make sure that your dedupe system can keep up. What if you tested it and it's single stream throughput was only 10 MB/s? Wouldn't you be glad you tested it? You should also test aggregate backup AND restore performance, ease of installation, replaced drive rebuild time, ease of use of user interface, and other things.]]></description>
			<dc:creator>W. Curtis Preston</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Sun, 17 Aug 2008 17:52:46 +0000</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.backupcentral.com/mr-backup-blog-mainmenu-47/13-mr-backup-blog/148-dedupe-maturity.html#comment-335</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>Is it a valid test?</title>
			<link>http://www.backupcentral.com/mr-backup-blog-mainmenu-47/13-mr-backup-blog/148-dedupe-maturity.html#comment-334</link>
			<description><![CDATA[The ability to ingest fast streams is important yes, but I have raraely seen this to be a limitation of the backup target (whether it be VTL/Tape etc), it is normally the backup hosts hardware architecture that is the problem. I have not seen a host server that can supply a single stream of data fastere than a VTL or current geeneration tape dirve can handle. So is it really a valid test to measure the ingest speed of a single stream? Shouldn't we first measure the performance of the streaem being delivered by the host?]]></description>
			<dc:creator>BackMeUp</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Fri, 15 Aug 2008 02:56:02 +0000</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.backupcentral.com/mr-backup-blog-mainmenu-47/13-mr-backup-blog/148-dedupe-maturity.html#comment-334</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>I mostly agree</title>
			<link>http://www.backupcentral.com/mr-backup-blog-mainmenu-47/13-mr-backup-blog/148-dedupe-maturity.html#comment-317</link>
			<description><![CDATA[You must test single stream performance. I have seen faster numbers than you're seeing, though, and I just saw that Data Domain is now advertising 200 MB/s single stream performance. If you've got very fast individual streams (without multiplexing) then I completely agree that you should test this (both backup and restore).]]></description>
			<dc:creator>W. Curtis Preston</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Tue, 22 Jul 2008 16:54:48 +0000</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.backupcentral.com/mr-backup-blog-mainmenu-47/13-mr-backup-blog/148-dedupe-maturity.html#comment-317</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>Single StreamSpeed and dedupe</title>
			<link>http://www.backupcentral.com/mr-backup-blog-mainmenu-47/13-mr-backup-blog/148-dedupe-maturity.html#comment-263</link>
			<description><![CDATA[Hi Curtis, speaking with a lot of customers about dedupe and looking to all products available, I think it is for bigger customers very important to have a focus on the possible single stream speed. Keeping it together it seems, that every VTL deduplication, which can work only in-bound offers a relatively slow SingleStreamSpeed (MB/s per VTape). The best real rate I heard until now is something round 25 MB/sec --- but this system works with a hugh # of FC-Disk Drives - so it cannot be cheap). Most systems - at least those with a limted # of SATA-Disks seem to have much lower MB/s rates per stream. I know first customers, who reach up to 100 MB/sec per Stream (without tape multiplexing) at their large DB-Backups (from an expensive Highend FC Primary Storage) to PTape. But everybody, who have some high single stream speeds will be really disappointed, if they try a VTL, which results for exapmle in 4 times longer Backup times for their large DBs. For this needs a system with out-band dedupe may be the right option. But then the 24 hour dedupe-rate or the 7 days dedupe-rate for the postprocess dedupe comes into the play: the postprocess dedupe should complete before the next windows with full backups. And there is a need of some more disk space for intermediate storing. This seems to be a little bit uncalculable with the Falconstor Design, as there are seperate Disks-LUNs used for the itermediate VTL-Storage and the final dedupe-storage. Any other experience about that?]]></description>
			<dc:creator>Dieter Unterseher</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Thu, 29 May 2008 10:15:29 +0000</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.backupcentral.com/mr-backup-blog-mainmenu-47/13-mr-backup-blog/148-dedupe-maturity.html#comment-263</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>Nope</title>
			<link>http://www.backupcentral.com/mr-backup-blog-mainmenu-47/13-mr-backup-blog/148-dedupe-maturity.html#comment-181</link>
			<description><![CDATA[Dxi is their own technology.]]></description>
			<dc:creator>W. Curtis Preston</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Fri, 11 Jan 2008 12:14:07 +0000</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.backupcentral.com/mr-backup-blog-mainmenu-47/13-mr-backup-blog/148-dedupe-maturity.html#comment-181</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>Grain of salt</title>
			<link>http://www.backupcentral.com/mr-backup-blog-mainmenu-47/13-mr-backup-blog/148-dedupe-maturity.html#comment-177</link>
			<description><![CDATA[Note to readers: Although the comment reads like "storagedoctor" and I know each other, I do not know his/her real identity, nor do I know if he/she works for an end user company or a Data Domain competitor. The verbiage of the comment would suggest the latter, so take his/her comments with a grain of salt. My response to the actual comment is this: While I haven't seen them do 220, I have seen them do close. My original intent therefore was to say &#34;around 6 TB.&#34; (I've changed it now to say 5-6 TB.) My point is that, while the throughput of some of these systems is not 1000s of megabytes per second, it's still enough to meet a lot of people's requirements. I know a lot of customers that back up far fewer than 6 TB a night. As with all things dedupe, your mileage may vary. Therefore you should test anything you buy.]]></description>
			<dc:creator>W. Curtis Preston</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Wed, 19 Dec 2007 23:29:50 +0000</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.backupcentral.com/mr-backup-blog-mainmenu-47/13-mr-backup-blog/148-dedupe-maturity.html#comment-177</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>Quantum</title>
			<link>http://www.backupcentral.com/mr-backup-blog-mainmenu-47/13-mr-backup-blog/148-dedupe-maturity.html#comment-178</link>
			<description><![CDATA[Quantum is mentioned in the table but not in the body of the article. Are they re-marketing someone else's technology?]]></description>
			<dc:creator>tbiehler</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Tue, 18 Dec 2007 09:44:33 +0000</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.backupcentral.com/mr-backup-blog-mainmenu-47/13-mr-backup-blog/148-dedupe-maturity.html#comment-178</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>Data Domain claims</title>
			<link>http://www.backupcentral.com/mr-backup-blog-mainmenu-47/13-mr-backup-blog/148-dedupe-maturity.html#comment-176</link>
			<description><![CDATA[Hi Curtis, Long time, no talk.. Just curious about your claims that DD is a good solution for 6TB/night requirement. That would require they are able to move their data @ their rated spec of 220MB/sec, which we have never seen in the field. I just learned of a customer in Boston who just unplugged their box because it was slower than their previous tape backkup !!]]></description>
			<dc:creator>storagedoctor</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Fri, 14 Dec 2007 05:53:44 +0000</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.backupcentral.com/mr-backup-blog-mainmenu-47/13-mr-backup-blog/148-dedupe-maturity.html#comment-176</guid>
		</item>
	</channel>
</rss>

