cancel
Showing results for 
Search instead for 
Did you mean: 
Highlighted

BE 2010 R2 and Exchange 2010

Hi folks.

I had recently rebuilt our back up server and moved the OS to Server 2008R2. I have a tape library attached (TS3100) and a 1.6 TB disk array for backing up Exchange 2010 to disk and then to tape. I also have the Exchange plug-in and it seems like things are good to go. My versions are:

  • Backup Server: W2K8R2 with BE 2010  V 13.0 Rev. 2896 (64 Bit)
  • Exchange Server: W2k8R2 with Exchange 2010 STD

I am confused about which is the best way to proceed for an Exchange backup. On the one hand, GRT is a great idea and would make sense. On the other, is it the best way to go? I would think that it is. Some caveats are:

  • The Exchange server runs on a blade so additional passive copies may not be possible.
  • The Exchange logs are not on a separate partition.

We have plenty of disk space and tapes for full backups which is what is preferred. I would like to take advantage of GRT but some pros and cons would be great to know about.

Thanks for any and all advice.

James

1 Solution

Accepted Solutions
Highlighted
Accepted Solution!

Hi there,   GRT would be the

Hi there,

 

GRT would be the best bet. It doesn't matter where your logs are. BE backs up the Information Store, and knows there are logs to be committed. Once the IS is backed up, the logs are comitted to the Information Store bringing the backup up-to-date.

GRT backups are faster, especially if going to an array. GRT restores are also a lot easier. 1 con for doing a restore is that the default location is C:\Temp, and to do a restore of ANY individual item, BE needs to temporarily stage the entire Information Store to disk first. If you don't have enough disk space, the restore fails. You can change this in: Tools --> Options --> Exchange.

Also, don't use AOFO with database backups...it isn't recommended. Let BE do what it normally does using the agent to back up the IS. I'd also recommend separating the data and Exchange backups from each other.

So I'd recommend using it...

View solution in original post

3 Replies

Why not use the GRT

Why not use the GRT technology ?

If you don't want to use it, and still require to do individual mailbox items restore you will have to backup exchange twice. Once to update the Exchange Information Stores, and second the individual mail items, which can be very slow as every item need to be 'opened'.

Highlighted
Accepted Solution!

Hi there,   GRT would be the

Hi there,

 

GRT would be the best bet. It doesn't matter where your logs are. BE backs up the Information Store, and knows there are logs to be committed. Once the IS is backed up, the logs are comitted to the Information Store bringing the backup up-to-date.

GRT backups are faster, especially if going to an array. GRT restores are also a lot easier. 1 con for doing a restore is that the default location is C:\Temp, and to do a restore of ANY individual item, BE needs to temporarily stage the entire Information Store to disk first. If you don't have enough disk space, the restore fails. You can change this in: Tools --> Options --> Exchange.

Also, don't use AOFO with database backups...it isn't recommended. Let BE do what it normally does using the agent to back up the IS. I'd also recommend separating the data and Exchange backups from each other.

So I'd recommend using it...

View solution in original post

Highlighted

Okay that looks good. I am

Okay that looks good. I am having some difficulty understanding how to actually set up the Exchange backups so I will open a new thread for a different discussion.

Thanks.

James