Highlighted

Comparision - Backup Exec 2010 with ArcServe Backup r15

Can I have a comparision between Backup Exec 2010 and ArcServe Backup r15.

I have designed a high level solution for a global client with Backup Exec 2010 deduplication option enabled. Client is lacking confidence in Backup Exec due to bad experience in past and improper support received from Symantec Support.

They want me to take them through with ArcServe r15 [released recently] and convince as why Backup Exec 2010?

As far as ArcServe is concerned; they have paper on their site saying that CA ARCserve Backup r15 outperformed the latest version of Symantec Backup Exec during a recent competitive review!

Please advise.

1 Solution

Accepted Solutions
Accepted Solution!

We use ARCserve 12.0 in our


We use ARCserve 12.0 in our Data Center, and I am looking forward to getting it replaced. Support from CA was worse than horrific...after upgrading from 11.5 --> 12 last year (CA couldn't tell us if ARC 12.5 had support for Itaniums!), we saw our backup speeds tank catastrophically. Not a problem on a couple 100GB...a HUGE problem in our SAP environment where we are backing up multiple 4TB SQL DBs...CA took 3.5 months to get anything back to us, during which they blamed everything from our SAN infrastructure, to HP's EML we were using at that stage. It took us moving the backups off the EML to a new IBM TS3550 with no performance increase for them to realise it was their product.
That was enough for me...we run BE 2010 on the sites, and never have an issue with support.
From my side, using BE is a lot more simple than ARC as well. I did find BE's dedupe to be not as quick, and neither were their VM backups (compared to Veeam). However, it really is the complete package. Easy to work with, easy to install and configure, and easy to update too!
I would recommend getting hold of trial of each, and check out what each offers. Like teiva-boy said, BE has a number of big advantages in its arsenal...don't always believe what you read in an "independent" shoot-out.

Laters!

View solution in original post

9 Replies

That paper is done each year

That paper is done each year by the same company, a PAID-FOR research company.  Dive into the specifics of the version used (BE12.5) I think, and no tuning done...  

That said, I personally think CA"s support is worse than Symantec's BackupExec team.  That's not saying much though...

Thanks for your comments! Do

Thanks for your comments!

Do you have first-hand-knowledge on both the products by any chance?
I must convince client as why Backup Exec 2010 as compared to ArcServe r15.

Please advise.

I have very intimate

I have very intimate knowledge of BE, going back to the late 1990's.  I also have used CA from about 2002-2005, and hated just hated their support, thus I went back to BackupExec.

There are a few killer features about BE that no one can touch at the moment, like it's VMware/Hyper-V agent and the ability to backup some MS apps from within the VMDK, without a traditional agent based backup.

The Dedupe has performed better in bake-off's I've done in two customer POC's.

The integrated Archiving is cool for Exchange and Windows File servers.

The only thing lacking is integrated replication, but that is changing soon.  However, you can replicate between two media servers and CASO.  
Accepted Solution!

We use ARCserve 12.0 in our


We use ARCserve 12.0 in our Data Center, and I am looking forward to getting it replaced. Support from CA was worse than horrific...after upgrading from 11.5 --> 12 last year (CA couldn't tell us if ARC 12.5 had support for Itaniums!), we saw our backup speeds tank catastrophically. Not a problem on a couple 100GB...a HUGE problem in our SAP environment where we are backing up multiple 4TB SQL DBs...CA took 3.5 months to get anything back to us, during which they blamed everything from our SAN infrastructure, to HP's EML we were using at that stage. It took us moving the backups off the EML to a new IBM TS3550 with no performance increase for them to realise it was their product.
That was enough for me...we run BE 2010 on the sites, and never have an issue with support.
From my side, using BE is a lot more simple than ARC as well. I did find BE's dedupe to be not as quick, and neither were their VM backups (compared to Veeam). However, it really is the complete package. Easy to work with, easy to install and configure, and easy to update too!
I would recommend getting hold of trial of each, and check out what each offers. Like teiva-boy said, BE has a number of big advantages in its arsenal...don't always believe what you read in an "independent" shoot-out.

Laters!

View solution in original post

Guys - thank you very much

Guys - thank you very much for your time and detailed comments, much appreciated!!

see attached - I have

see attached - I have received both direct from Symantec!

...thanks VERY much for

...thanks VERY much for this...nice to see the other side of the fence, instead of CA's perspective all the time...

Without saying which is

Without saying which is better and based on experience of an older version of Arcserve (so my info might be out of Date.)

Arcserve used to store the catalog information identifying what has been backed up (to provide the file list for restore) inside their database - which means their database can get very large which can affect performacne and has attendent maintenance requirements - but I think does have benefits when searching for files by name to restore.

Backup Exec stores the Catalogs in the file system - which helps keep the database small and makes database maintenace and performance better (especially as you can put the catalogs on a different volume from the database. This separation, of course extends the logical database outside of the SQL database making it possible to introduce inconsistencies.

Note both methods have their pros and cons - and I am not sure if the newer versions of Arcserve actually work differently.

As a Symantec employee I would mention specific benefits but most of them have been covered in this thread already

Some real NO GO's in ArcServe r15...

  1. VMagent DOES NOT support thin VM's to be thin restored! All RAW VM's will be restored THICK This might make a restore impossible to the same (size of) SAN. Support says Thin to Thin VM restore will be researched and might be developed.
  2. Deduplication process utilizes one processor core (Opteron 2,3Ghz in my case) to the max, limiting the througput to 700K instead of 3 to 6G without dedup. Support says they are investigating the issue and request multicore support on the dedup process.

So for disaster recovery of virtual (thin provisioned) environments, Arcserve is NOT your solution!!! Deduplication process has some technical issues to be solved.

on the plus side however.... I found the Arcserve support department

  • quick
  • qualified
  • friendly
  • taking case responsibility