Hi Daniel, As usual, it all depends... :-)
If you plan to keep LOCAL snapshot backups and you plan to leverage hard-based snapshots, then many hardware-based snapshots support "space-efficient" snapshot LUNs, where it only requires space for the changes blocks. And so, you need to look at the hardware that the Exchange database and log files are and find out if the VSS Hardware Provider for that hardware supports "space-efficient" LUNs and how to configure them. Here is an article that explains a little bit more of this to you. (We wrote it about 5 years ago, and refers to TSM for Copy Services, which has been renamed to FlashCopy Manager, but the concepts are the same.) http://www.ibm.com/developerworks/tivoli/library/t-tsm-vss/index.html?ca=dat There are a number of things to think about in the VSS world, especially if you plan to leverage LOCAL hardware snapshots and "space efficient" volumes. The FCM User's Guide goes into a lot detail about the IBM hardware devices in regards to this. If this seems a little overwhelming, get your IBM reps involved so they can provide some more information/education on this. Thank you, Del ---------------------------------------------------- "ADSM: Dist Stor Manager" <ADSM-L@vm.marist.edu> wrote on 01/15/2014 11:05:29 AM: > From: "Weidacher, Daniel" <daniel.weidac...@infonova.com> > To: ADSM-L@vm.marist.edu, > Date: 01/15/2014 11:06 AM > Subject: Re: FCM Exchange 2010 DAG LOCAL Backup > Sent by: "ADSM: Dist Stor Manager" <ADSM-L@vm.marist.edu> > > Thank you, that really explains a lot to me :) > However, I will have to use FCM 3.2, since 4.1 requires Powershell > 3.0 and our Exchange Admin does not want to install it on our > servers, even if theoretically it is compatible with Exchange 2010 > SP3 on Server 2008. > > So I for every Database I want to protect, I need three volumes. > - one for the Database itself (DAG passive copy) > - one for the transaction logs > - one "VSS Shadow Volume" to store the snapshots of DB and logs. > And since the snapshots are on volume level, the snapshot will be as > big as the volume, not the database/logs itself. If I have a 200GB > Database volume with 25GB logsize each day, I would make the log LUN > 75GB so if the Backup fails on Friday night and the logs are not > truncated, I would have time until Monday to fix the issue. That > makes 200GB+(6x75GB)=650GB at least for one week. Plus I need to > take into account database growing. > Is this logic correct? How would you do it? >
