Netgear Launches ReadyRECOVER Appliances for Data Backup and Recoveryby Ganesh T S on July 14, 2014 8:30 AM EST
- Posted in
- IT Computing
Netgear announced the launch of ReadyRECOVER appliances today to simplify data backup and recovery tasks for SMBs and enterprises. ReadyRECOVER appliances, at the hardware level, are the same as ReadyDATA units (Netgear's high-end ZFS-based NAS / SAN systems targeting large SMBs and enterprises). The additional features have been introduced in partnership with StorageCraft, a company specializing in disaster recovery solutions.
The ReadyRECOVER scheme involves servers and PCs being backed up to the ReadyDATA device using StorageCraft's ShadowProtect software. Netgear claims that ReadyDATA's ZFS features (deduplication), as well as ShadowProtect's block-level diff-based backup strategy help in achieving full system backups every 15 minutes. The block-level diff strategy results in maximum efficiency with minimal impact on storage resources. It also allows for more frequent backups to offsite disaster recovery nodes.
ReadyRECOVER also verifies backups (block-level change reports) against the original source data before committing them. Every backup is a full restore point (obviously, the first one is a complete backup of the system). These aspects provide ReadyRECOVER with a host of advantages over traditional backup solutions (lesser time for backup processing as well as restore, more frequent full backups etc.)
The purchase process involves selection of software licenses (depending on the number and types of clients being backed up), a ReadyDATA appliance (ReadyDATA 5200 rackmount or ReadyDATA 516 desktop form factor), storage media (SATA / SAS / NL-SAS / SSD) and hardware support contracts. Netgear claims that they are much more cost-effective compared to competing solutions with similar features from Symantec and Unitrends.
Post Your CommentPlease log in or sign up to comment.
View All Comments
CamdogXIII - Monday, July 14, 2014 - linkThose units better have a lot of RAM if they are using ZFS Dedupe (roughly 5GB for every 1TB stored)
DanNeely - Monday, July 14, 2014 - linkThese're enterprise products, I think we can safely assume no expense has been spared in finding ways to drive the sticker price up.
DanNeely - Monday, July 14, 2014 - link16GB of ram on both the 6 bay tower, and 12 bay rackmount boxes. Can't tell if they're upgradable to use more ram. The I3/Xeon processors powering them are capable of more unless hobbled by only 2 ram slots. The real soaking appears to be from software licensing costs though: ~$100/300/1000 per desktop/vm/physical server backed up.
CamdogXIII - Monday, July 14, 2014 - linkIt's always the licensing that gets you! Crazy expensive just for permission to use a product.
piroroadkill - Monday, July 14, 2014 - linkJesus! Really? That's a hell of a RAM requirement.
r3loaded - Monday, July 14, 2014 - linkIt is if you want to dedup with ZFS. Personally, I don't feel it's usually worth it unless you're dealing with a ton of very similar data. It usually makes more sense to buy more storage than to buy mroe RAM.
DanNeely - Monday, July 14, 2014 - linkIt is. IIRC WHSv1 was only able to make it work on low end hardware by limiting it to their backup tool instead of the FS and having the client PCs do all the heavy work of computing zillions of hashes.
Since the main gain from dedupe on a many machine backup box is from eliminating numerous copies of OS/application binaries, I wonder if going from block to file level dedupe would keep a large portion of the benefit at substantially lower resource requirements. Probably a theoretical question more than anything else, since I suspect the level of change involved means that even if it did pay off it'd need to be a new FS instead of a ZFS enhancement.
phoenix_rizzen - Monday, July 14, 2014 - linkIt's not nearly that high; it all depends on on unique your data is. The more unique your data, the more space needed in the DDT (one entry per unique block), and thus the more RAM you need. If your data is mostly duplicates, the DDT will be fairly small, and you won't need a lot of RAM. The "rule-of-thumb" has been 1 GB of RAM per TB of unique data in your pool for a long time now.
Obviously, if your data is so unique that you need oodles of RAM to support dedupe ... you shouldn't be running dedupe. :)
We have several backups servers running ZFS and dedupe. Home-built systems using SuperMicro chassis and motherboards, and LSI HBAs. A hell of a lot less expensive than the turnkey options like the NetGEAR thing.
The largest one has 128 GB of RAM and 120 TB of of storage in the pool. Dedupe ratio of 1.82, compress ratio of 1.35, for a combined disk space savings of 2.38x. This is the off-site replication box that all the others send snapshots to.
The next largest has 64 GB of RAM and 45 TB of storage. Dedupe ratio of 2.68, compression ratio of 1.64, for a combined disk savings of 4.26x.
In comparison, we have another backups box with 64 GB of RAM and 45 TB of storage without dedupe. Compression ratio is only 1.51.
And our last box has 64 GB of RAM and 75 TB of storage without dedupe. Compression ratio is only 1.14.
None of them run out of RAM or ARC/L2ARC. And, between the 2 main backups system keep over 250 remote servers (over half at the other end of an ADSL or E10 link) backed up every night. As we run diskless Linux workstations in the schools, this effectively backs up over 5000 desktops every night.
The only time we had issues was when we ran them with only 16-24 GB of RAM. Once we got above 32 GB, all our dedupe-related issues went away. The only reason the off-site replication box has 128 GB in it is to future-proof it as we add more storage shelves each summer.
CamdogXIII - Monday, July 14, 2014 - linkI don't personally have any real-world experience with ZFS's Dedupe specifically for how many warnings and cautionary tales I've seen. Might have to look into it again as we have a couple ZFS devices at work.
I found this was an interesting read regarding Dedup requirements: http://constantin.glez.de/blog/2011/07/zfs-dedupe-...
Obviously you have some bad ass storage hardware that makes me jealous :-)
phoenix_rizzen - Tuesday, July 15, 2014 - linkNothing too fancy, it's all off-the-shelf parts. And amazingly inexpensive for what we get (our first storage box 7-odd years ago using 24 harddrives was just shy of $20,000 CDN; our latest multi-node setup with 45 drives came in under $15,000 CDN.)
SuperMicro SC826 2U chassis (24x 2.5" drive bays) for the head unit, using SuperMicro H8DGi-F6 motherboard, AMD Opteron CPUs, and LSI 9211-8e SAS/SATA controllers. 2x SSDs for the OS and SLOG, connected to the onboard SAS controller. 2x SSDs for L2ARC.
SuperMicro SC846EL2-JBOD (45x 3.5" drive bays) for the storage shelves. Currently, 1 shelf per SAS controller, as we're expanding it as needed every other year or so, instead of building it out as a massive storage setup from the get-go. The biggest box has 2 shelves now. One of the other boxes has only 1 shelf.
The other two, older, storage boxes are just SuperMicro SC846 (24x 3.5" drive bays). Each with 2x SSDs for the OS and L2ARC. Same motherboard, CPU, RAM, and controllers (9211-8i).