Hyper-V module constraints/benefits

[TornadoWire1]

Hello

I am looking into whether it would be beneficial adding the Hyper-V agent for my virtual environment. The convenience of Hyper-V snapshots looks very appealing, however it is my understanding that it will not necessarilly include all of the data inside the additional logical drives. I want the back jobs to be as lean as possible without doubling up on content or slowing down the disaster recovery process.

Can anyone point me in the direction of some best practice documents for virtual environments please?

Kind Regards

Simon Emms

[Striker_303]

check this:

http://eval.symantec.com/mktginfo/enterprise/other_resources/b-backup_exec_2010_r2_agent_for_ms_hyper_v_FAQ.en-us.pdf

Best practices for Backup Exec 2010 Agent for Microsoft Hyper-V

http://www.symantec.com/docs/HOWTO21770

[teiva-boy · Accepted solution]

From a licensing standpoint, if you virtualize 3 or more guests, you are saving money.

From a recovery standpoint, you can recover either the VHD, or files within it.  Faster recovery.

But you are also entitled to unlimited remote agents as needed for traditional backups.  This is per physical Hyper-V host that you purchase licenses for.

I see the hyper-V agent to be the most flexible and logical way to go.  Anything else is a waste of time and resources.  But don't get me started on the fact that BE doesn't dedupe VHD's...  Or does it now with R3?

[TornadoWire1]

Many thanks for both of your replies. From the FAQ and your points above I now have enough confidence in the Hyper-V module to go down that route as it appears to be the most flexible and cost effective.

Kind Regards

Simon Emms