<?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>What is deduplication? (updated 6-08)</title>
		<description>Discuss What is deduplication? (updated 6-08)</description>
		<link>http://www.backupcentral.com/mr-backup-blog-mainmenu-47/13-mr-backup-blog/58-de-dupe-primer.html</link>
		<lastBuildDate>Fri, 10 Feb 2012 10:49:05 +0000</lastBuildDate>
		<generator>JComments</generator>
		<atom:link href="http://www.backupcentral.com/component/jcomments/feed/com_content/58/10.html" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
		<item>
			<title>But is offsite to TAPE really</title>
			<link>http://www.backupcentral.com/mr-backup-blog-mainmenu-47/13-mr-backup-blog/58-de-dupe-primer.html#comment-77</link>
			<description><![CDATA[De-dupe comes in many flavors, shapes and sizes. Don't discount the concept based on one implementation that didn't do what you wanted it to. Somebody else may really like how it works. The source de-dupe products (such as EMC/Avamar, Symantec Puredisk, Asigra) were designed to provide onsite AND offsite backups without creating tape. You back up using de-dupe backup software to a de-dupe backup server. Offsite copy is provided under one of two scenarios: backup a remote office server to a central datacenter, or replicate the de-dupe backup server to another location. In the first scenario, your first (and only) copy is on disk, but it's in the central datacenter, not the remote office -- so it's already offsite. In the second scenario, you use the builtin capabilitis of the de-dupe backup software to replicate the de-duped backups to another location. Now you have an onsite and an offsite backup and you haven't touched a tape. NOW, if you don't like that idea, and you want to create an onsite backup using de-dupe, and create a real tape to hand to your offsite vaulting vendor, then I'd recommend investigating target de-dupe systems, such as an intelligent disk target or virtual tape library. See my later blog entry called "Two different types of de-duplication" to see what I'm talking about.]]></description>
			<dc:creator>cpreston</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Mon, 30 Jul 2007 15:05:20 +0000</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.backupcentral.com/mr-backup-blog-mainmenu-47/13-mr-backup-blog/58-de-dupe-primer.html#comment-77</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>Offsite to tape still a big is</title>
			<link>http://www.backupcentral.com/mr-backup-blog-mainmenu-47/13-mr-backup-blog/58-de-dupe-primer.html#comment-75</link>
			<description><![CDATA[ I manage backups in a datacenter and we are looking at the de-dupe technology right now. A big concern we have is around the creating of offsite tapes. We have customers that have regulatory and compliance reasons for creating offsite tapes and storing them. We just reviewed EMC's Avamar and they really do not have a good answer for creating offsite tape copies. The Avamar Utility station does not control the tape library and still requires another backup application to be involved to create the tape and then to recover from the external tape. We thought this to be very strange and something that we would have to seriously factor into our decision. Oh, the claims of de-dupe for Windows are around 688:1!!]]></description>
			<dc:creator>hayesjoe</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Sat, 28 Jul 2007 08:54:53 +0000</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.backupcentral.com/mr-backup-blog-mainmenu-47/13-mr-backup-blog/58-de-dupe-primer.html#comment-75</guid>
		</item>
	</channel>
</rss>

