NAS Gets the Nod over iSCSI as one SMB's Preferred Backup Protocol
Some of the most read blogs on DCIG's website in 2009 covered how small and midsize businesses (SMBs) were implementing disk-based backup in their environments. So it should come as no surprise that individuals like Ken Clipperton, the Director of Information Technology at Midland Lutherans College (MLC), is also in the midst of implementing disk-based backup at MLC. What is unexpected are some of the decisions that he needs to make as he implements it at MLC.
In previous blogs, I examined what problems Ken was trying to solve by implementing a disk-based backup solution and what led him to select the Iomega StorCenter ix4-200d over competing NAS solutions. However now that Ken is moving the ix4-200d into production, he is facing two important decisions.
One of them is deciding what type of backup target that he should offer to his end users. The ix4-200d supports iSCSI, NAS (CIFS and NFS) or both so he can present either a block-based or file-based backup target to his users. However each one has its pros and cons.
iSCSI enables his users to do backups more quickly since there is less network overhead associated with iSCSI than CIFS and NFS. However using iSCSI is somewhat problematic.
First, he has to pre-allocate each user a certain amount of storage. This eats into his available pool of storage capacity plus iSCSI arguable takes more to configure and manage.
Second, to access an iSCSI target, each user's PC has to have iSCSI installed on it. Since his users use a myriad of Windows operating systems (XP, Vista, Windows 7), this may require them to download and install the Microsoft iSCSI driver on their PCs and configure it to discover the iSCSI target presented by the ix4-200d. This makes it more complicated for users and may create support problems for his IT staff.
Finally, Ken has found in his preliminary testing that the Retrospect Express client that is included with the ix4-200d does not work particularly well when using iSCSI as a backup target.
It is for these reasons that he is leaning towards using a NAS interface as a backup target. Though it may result in slower backups, it does provide a number of distinctive benefits over iSCSI when used for backup.
While the Retrospect Express client is free, easy to deploy and quickly discovers the file share presented by the ix4-200d during setup, he is somewhat concerned about its system overhead on Windows PCs. During his testing of Retrospect Express, he has found that it consumes 114 MB of RAM. This is more resources than he expected it would consume as it takes up even more memory than Microsoft Outlook which reserves 98 MB of RAM. This does not mean he will abandon Retrospect Express in favor of other backup software but it may preclude him from deploying it as widely as he had first anticipated.
Disk-based backup is becoming a priority among all size organizations as a solution to their backup problems and SMBs are pursuing it just as actively as anyone else. However as this example with MLC points out, the challenges that SMBs face can be just as complex as those encountered by enterprise organizations.
Solutions like the Iomege StorCenter ix4-200d certainly do make the implementation of disk-based backup fast and easy to implement. However SMBs still have to make decisions as to which interface they will use for disk-based backup and if the default backup software that ships with these solutions is appropriate for their environment. In the case of Ken, a NAS interface appears to be the right backup target for his users while he still tries to decide whether or not he should universally recommend Retrospect Express software to his end-users.
In previous blogs, I examined what problems Ken was trying to solve by implementing a disk-based backup solution and what led him to select the Iomega StorCenter ix4-200d over competing NAS solutions. However now that Ken is moving the ix4-200d into production, he is facing two important decisions.
One of them is deciding what type of backup target that he should offer to his end users. The ix4-200d supports iSCSI, NAS (CIFS and NFS) or both so he can present either a block-based or file-based backup target to his users. However each one has its pros and cons.
iSCSI enables his users to do backups more quickly since there is less network overhead associated with iSCSI than CIFS and NFS. However using iSCSI is somewhat problematic.
First, he has to pre-allocate each user a certain amount of storage. This eats into his available pool of storage capacity plus iSCSI arguable takes more to configure and manage.
Second, to access an iSCSI target, each user's PC has to have iSCSI installed on it. Since his users use a myriad of Windows operating systems (XP, Vista, Windows 7), this may require them to download and install the Microsoft iSCSI driver on their PCs and configure it to discover the iSCSI target presented by the ix4-200d. This makes it more complicated for users and may create support problems for his IT staff.
Finally, Ken has found in his preliminary testing that the Retrospect Express client that is included with the ix4-200d does not work particularly well when using iSCSI as a backup target.
It is for these reasons that he is leaning towards using a NAS interface as a backup target. Though it may result in slower backups, it does provide a number of distinctive benefits over iSCSI when used for backup.
- File shares work better with the Retrospect Express backup software than iSCSI.
- File shares take less time to setup and manage. He set up one file share as a backup target for students to use and another share that faculty and staff can use as a backup target.
- He can leverage the ix4-200d's quota and security management features. Since the ix4-200d integrates with Active Directory, he can limit each student to a maximum of 20 GBs of storage capacity and the faculty and staff to a maximum of 50 GBs. Further, he can deny students access to the file share where faculty and staff data is backed up.
While the Retrospect Express client is free, easy to deploy and quickly discovers the file share presented by the ix4-200d during setup, he is somewhat concerned about its system overhead on Windows PCs. During his testing of Retrospect Express, he has found that it consumes 114 MB of RAM. This is more resources than he expected it would consume as it takes up even more memory than Microsoft Outlook which reserves 98 MB of RAM. This does not mean he will abandon Retrospect Express in favor of other backup software but it may preclude him from deploying it as widely as he had first anticipated.
Disk-based backup is becoming a priority among all size organizations as a solution to their backup problems and SMBs are pursuing it just as actively as anyone else. However as this example with MLC points out, the challenges that SMBs face can be just as complex as those encountered by enterprise organizations.
Solutions like the Iomege StorCenter ix4-200d certainly do make the implementation of disk-based backup fast and easy to implement. However SMBs still have to make decisions as to which interface they will use for disk-based backup and if the default backup software that ships with these solutions is appropriate for their environment. In the case of Ken, a NAS interface appears to be the right backup target for his users while he still tries to decide whether or not he should universally recommend Retrospect Express software to his end-users.
Leave a comment