Windows Server Backup -> iscsi target?

[Kenazo]

We have a 3mbs link between our home office and our satellite in a second city about 100 miles away.

We're thinking of using Windows Server Backup (on a 2008 R2 machine) to backup our data to an iSCSI nas sitting in the 2nd location (first time backup would be done locally, incremental after that).

My question is - can a baremetal restore be done off of an iSCSI target using 2008 R2? 99 times out of a 100 this backup will be more to provide archive copies of files, but in that 1 time out of 100 that we need to restore the entire thing, should it work?

Thanks

 

[imagoon]

iSCSI is like "sata" while in theory you could attach to a remote target using it, you are not going to get the results you want. Windows will treat the iSCSI target as a local disk. A network hickup would be the same as unplugging the SAS / SATA cable (uncleanly.) Delayed Write Failed messages rock for data integrity </sarcasm>

iSCSI requires a stable environment to function, the internet / WAN links are not that.

You could do a bare metal restore if you used an iSCSI initiator hardware card. You can't use it like that with a software initiator.

If you use 2008R2 use DFS-R to a second 2008R2 server. It is designed to do exactly what *I think* you are trying to do.

 

[ViviTheMage]

virtualize it and go with snapshots, haha ... there is no cheap/easy way to do it 'right' imo.

 

[theevilsharpie]

My question is - can a baremetal restore be done off of an iSCSI target using 2008 R2?

Only if you have a hardware iSCSI initiator. Even then, I wouldn't recommend it since the iSCSI volume holding the backups is also a volume that you could inadvertantly format and insall Windows on.

Windows will let you use an SMB share for bare metals restores. However, bare metal recovery using anything more complex requires a 3rd party solution.

 

[Kenazo]

OK, new idea:

1. Windows 2008 R2 server backs up to an iSCSI NAS that is physically connected to the server.

2. Have a second NAS in our remote location that the first one replicates to http://www.qnap.com/pro_application.asp?ap_id=615

This way Windows Server Backup is still going to what it thinks is a local drive (necessary to have it save incremental backups) but we still get offsite replication without worrying about shooting iscsi over a 3mbps wireless link.

More doable?

Am I getting too ghetto?

 

[ViviTheMage]

That would work ... how much $$ are you budgeting? Why not just rsync off the second NAS (local) and then the second NAS that is remote? It's cheaper, and more versatile hardware.

 

[Kenazo]

Hoping to keep the solution under $2,000 (preferably lower, though not necessary). Automation is more important than cost. We have this off site location and a dedicated 3 mbps link so we want to do away with our tapes. (plus the LTO2 tapes are too small so we'd need to replace our tape system anyway)

 

[ViviTheMage]

Personally, i'd just build 2 linux box's (raid 10 each one) and throw rsync on it.

Your windows server would see it as local isci disk ... something like freenas/openfiler would work well with a nice GUI for your storage.

 

[imagoon]

Before you look at the Linux suggestions... have you ever used Linux? Do you have the ability support it?

Rsync also just does a 'toned down' version of what DFS-R does. If you have the windows 2008R2 servers already why design a 'complete custom' solution?

edit:

Also I am confused, if LTO2 is to small for you, I am not sure how you intend to do all this for sub $2000 unless you decide to go 'custom Linux' and white box. If you have the time to support it great (IE making your company pay with labor hours.) I personally am a big fan of canned solutions that I can pawn support off on the vendors. The qnaps might be a direction I would look at because they are "all in one." I have no idea how fast or reliable they are since I have never dealt with them.

 

[ViviTheMage]

I definitely agree with imagoon, but if 2k is all he has ... might be impossible to get a canned solution.

You're right DFS-R is win...I rarely need to look at independent solutions, netapp does everything so nicely .