David Egnoski (4/21/2011)
Our network folks are using Compellent Storage Center for their file backups and DR. They are pushing to have us abandon Redgate for SQL backups and go with a Compellent option. As a SQL DBA I'm uncomfortable with this change. Has anyone moved all SQL backups to this product that would be willing to comment on the process and outcome?
I am a certified Compellent SAN administrator as well as my company's DBA.
We were faced with a similar choice when we migrated from direct attached storage to our SAN. After considerable research, debate, and experimentation, we decided to:
1. Implement Compellent replays (their name for snapshots). Think of replays as a type of database backup but not like a SQL Server or RedGate backup. We also implemented them to facilitate efficient data migration between storage tiers, another subject.
2. Use Compellent's Replay Manager software package (which is fully transaction aware) for all database snapshots.
3. Continue to execute our regularly scheduled database backups using SQL Server in the simple recovery mode (our preference) as "insurance" and to retain the ability to store off SAN backups, which we regularly migrate to a file server.
4. Use Compellent's simple replays for efficient data migration of SQL Server produced database backups stored on the SAN.
At first we didn't trust the whole SAN replay/snapshot concept because we'd had no experience with it. But, we've had ample opportunities to use it for database restorations and it has never failed. It is also very fast, much faster than normal database restorations, especially if you have large databases.
Ask me any question. I'll be glad to respond.
LC