Data Protection Software

 View Only
Expand all | Collapse all

Local Storage Capacity requirement for Spectrum Protect and Spectrum Protect Plus?

  • 1.  Local Storage Capacity requirement for Spectrum Protect and Spectrum Protect Plus?

    Posted Tue November 02, 2021 02:33 PM
    Edited by ibm magic Tue November 02, 2021 03:08 PM
    Our plan is to store all backups to AWS S3 as much as possible, thus, to save the storage footprint in our Data Center. We are considering to migrate SP to SPP.

    Based on what I have learned and researched, with SPP, basically it requires the same amount of how much full backups need, and then deduct savings by deduplication. Then, additional incremental backups can be stored in S3. So, if I have 500TB total of backups, and assuming I can save 1/3  by using deduplication, then I just need about 333TB local capacity. If I check out blueprint, this is approximate size I am getting. 

    However, with SP, all I need for the local capacity just depend on how much landing path I need, in which case, a few TB would be good enough. 

    So, my question is, why is there such difference?


    ------------------------------
    vkk
    ------------------------------


  • 2.  RE: Local Storage Capacity requirement for Spectrum Protect and Spectrum Protect Plus?

    Posted Sun November 07, 2021 07:58 PM
    SPP is basically keeping a full copy on-site.  It has to do with how the deduplication database is managed.

    You would get similar space needs in SPE if you used a container pool for landing, and then cloud tiering.

    Please also note that your bucket/blob storage will have substantial overhead.  This is because as data cycles through, you end up with empty chunks.  Eventually, you have to defrag this space.  On-Prem, the limitation is processor and I/O time.  Off-Prem, the limitation is bandwidth, and the cost to recall the chunks.  Basically, the extents get downloaded back into the cache, then re-sent as new buckets/containers/blobs.  Then the old ones are deleted.  Typically, off-prem reclaim threshold cost balances out around 95%.  Dropping to 90% or less usually costs more in recall fees than it does in additional storage fees.  I find that the net here is that we store about twice as much in buckets as we do in persistent storage.  And, in general, 14-30 days retention is typically 3-5x the size of one full.

    ------------------------------
    Josh-Daniel Davis
    Highland Village TX
    6824293040
    ------------------------------

    Original Message


  • 3.  RE: Local Storage Capacity requirement for Spectrum Protect and Spectrum Protect Plus?

    Posted Mon November 08, 2021 02:27 AM
    This is interesting.

    SPP requires reclamations, and so are SP.
    AWS as a cloud vendor charge for the data that are not only stored in a S3 bucket, but also how much data is sent out from the cloud.
    If clients moving forward from SPP to SP due to storage reuse, and instant recovery, than this can be done in SP using "progressive block level incremental forever", with "instant recovery" to any place.
    This by letting the SP server provision the backup volumes through the normal SP Client API, to the servers/nodes, as a snapshot that the operating system can revert to.
    In this way one can protect big amount of data, and still recover the data within minimum amount of time.

    https://www-356.ibm.com/partnerworld/gsd/solutiondetails.do?&solution=56927&lc=en

    Tomas Dalebjörk
    spictera

    ------------------------------
    Tomas Dalebjörk
    ------------------------------

    Original Message


  • 4.  RE: Local Storage Capacity requirement for Spectrum Protect and Spectrum Protect Plus?

    Posted Fri November 12, 2021 07:37 AM
    Hi,
    may I ask you why you want to migrate from SP to SPP ?

    Max

    ------------------------------
    massimo cantella
    enginfo spa
    napoli
    ------------------------------

    Original Message