By Steve Endow
How do you ensure your Hyper-V virtual machines are backed up? You do back them up, right?
I recently dedicated a day to improving my “data center infrastructure,” specifically focusing on my Hyper-V backups. For years, I relied on batch files and VBS scripts to save my VMs and then copied the VHDs to a file server. This system worked well for a while.
However, after replacing my Windows file server with a Synology NAS, I stopped compressing my VHD files and started offsite backups. My VHD files are copied to the Synology, and then the Synology backs them up to external drives that I rotate weekly. This change led to my 2TB external drives filling up quickly because I wasn’t compressing the VHD files, forcing me to find a more efficient system.
While copying VHD files works for basic backups, it has its drawbacks. The most obvious is the lack of compression. Even with ample storage, keeping terabytes of uncompressed backups isn’t ideal. In my case, the limiting factor was the capacity of my external drives used for weekly rotations. Additionally, managing multiple backup versions on these external drives became cumbersome.
I explored using Windows Backup on each VM, but it only supports a single full backup when backing up to a network share (my NAS). It doesn’t offer differential backups or retain multiple backups on a share, making it unsuitable for my needs.
Next, I searched for Hyper-V backup software. After reviewing search results and forum posts, I found many options, but two stood out: Veeam Backup & Replication and Altaro Hyper-V Backup.
I did some initial testing with both products, both offering free limited and full trial versions. Both seem effective but differ significantly in features and target audiences.
Veeam appears geared towards “higher-end” features and enterprise requirements, providing comprehensive configuration options. Conversely, Altaro offers a robust feature set with a simpler design, enabling quick backup setup with minimal configuration.
Veeam’s installation package is much larger (over 800 MB with a 139 MB service pack) and more involved than Altaro’s (144 MB). It requires .NET 4, SQL Server Express, and other components. Altaro’s installation is faster and simpler. Veeam’s larger installation size and complexity likely stem from its advanced features, some of which are beyond my understanding. The question is whether those features and the potential overhead are worthwhile for my needs.
My comparison of the two products isn’t about determining which is “better.” Instead, it’s about whether they can meet my current and future requirements, their ease of use and management, and their cost.
Based on list prices, Veeam is slightly more expensive than Altaro, but it offers additional features and flexibility, such as configuring multiple backups and destinations. However, the price difference is negligible for me.
Initially, I felt Altaro might be more suitable. While Veeam’s advanced features and configurability are attractive, they are not essential for my business. They would be nice to have but not critical, potentially adding unnecessary overhead.
That being said, I would appreciate slightly more configurability in Altaro. Additionally, although not a dealbreaker, Veeam’s backup files and folder structure are exceptionally well-organized, while Altaro’s seem disorganized and confusing.
I suspect this difference arises from how each product manages backup logs and histories. Veeam utilizes SQL Server Express, allowing it to store metadata in SQL and maintain a clean backup file and folder structure. In contrast, Altaro seems to store backup metadata on the backup drive itself, resulting in the presence of .dat files and GUIDs, making it appear disorganized. After performing some restores, I should have a clearer understanding of each approach’s advantages.
I’ve just begun evaluating these products and will spend the next two weeks comparing them to determine the better fit.
UPDATE: 3/10/2015: After testing Veeam and Altaro, I purchased Veeam.
Surprisingly, the most significant difference was performance. Veeam was considerably faster, especially with differential backups requiring comparisons. Furthermore, Veeam’s deduping logic when backing up multiple VMs is impressive. If you have 20 GB of identical files across five VMs, it doesn’t create five separate backups, maximizing disk space usage.
As expected, Veeam offers greater control over backup destinations, archive destinations, and schedules, making it more flexible and configurable.
When comparing final prices, Veeam’s slight increase was negligible.
I now have almost all my VMs backed up to my main NAS and rotating external drives, and it has worked flawlessly. I am thoroughly impressed and wish I had made this purchase years ago.
UPDATE: 1/16/2015: I’ve been using Veeam for months now, and it has been working so seamlessly that I’ve barely had to think about it, let alone my Hyper-V backups. I only interacted with it when I purchased a new NAS, requiring me to move my backup files and direct Veeam to the new NAS share.
I did encounter a minor limitation with Veeam. It has a feature for archiving backups to a second backup destination, allowing for one copy on the main repository and another offsite or on rotated backup drives. The issue was that Veeam expects all backup destinations to be constantly online. Consequently, if my external archive drives were powered off, Veeam would persistently send error messages, warning me about their unavailability.
After several days of working with Veeam support, the technician concluded that there was no way to modify how Veeam checks for backup destinations. It was surprising that my small environment posed a configuration challenge for the software. Still, I suspect that my setup, using typically powered-off external USB archive drives, is not the norm for Veeam, which is more enterprise-focused.
Overall, it’s a fantastic solution, and I’ve recommended it to others seeking effortless VM backups. For those with more demanding VM management requirements, the features offered in Veeam’s Enterprise version, such as Instant Recovery, are very impressive.
Steve Endow is a Microsoft MVP for Dynamics GP and a Dynamics GP Certified IT Professional in Los Angeles. He is the owner of Precipio Services, which provides Dynamics GP integrations, customizations, and automation solutions.
You can also find him on Google+ and Twitter.
http://www.precipioservices.com
