DPM 2010 is licensed per agent I believe. It does full image backups of
Hyper-V. I have DPM 2007 deployed at a personal client and it works well.
The Standard agent only backs up files / folders while the more advanced
(enterprise I think?) agent is required for doing anything that would be
snapshotted, like Hyper-V, SQL, Exchange, etc. There's also a desktop
agent if you want to back up your workstations.
Primary restriction with DPM is it's very disk-centric - tape is kind of
an afterthought. If you have a tape infrastructure be aware that you'll
pretty much be giving it up. Also, it manages disk itself - you'll have to
assign some sort of disk to it (physical, RAID lun, etc) which it will
then use as a DPM storage pool. It's very good at managing itself but it's
something to be aware of.
----
Jack Kramer
Computer Systems Specialist
University Relations, Michigan State University
w: 517-884-1231 / c: 248-635-4955
On 1/31/11 2:52 PM, "Al Puzzuoli" <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
>The subject basically says it all. I need to decide whether to upgrade
>our backup Exec licenses, or move to another solution. On one hand,
>Backup Exec seems overly complicated, overly priced, and too
>tape-centric. On the other, maybe I should just stick with the devil I
>know.
>I only need to worry about 2 physical servers, and several, probably no
>more than 5 or 6 Hyper-V VMs.
>BackupAssist http://www.backupassist.com is relatively inexpensive,
>simple and Hyper-V aware. Another option I am looking at is Microsoft
>System Center: Data Protection Manager; However, I need to do more
>research into how it is priced and licensed before seriously considering
>it.
>Any thoughts?
>
>Thanks,
>
>--Al
|
