21st Century Backup: Whats New in Backup Technology

Lauren Whitehouse Senior Analyst, ESG

How Did We Get Here?

Data Protection Goals

Mitigate risk
Prevent business disruption and financial loss

IT continuity
Return systems, applications and data to their most recent and consistent state before the interruption

Meet SLAs
Restore business operations within pre-established timeframe

How Did We Get Here?

Day-to-day Challenges

Time Cost

Risk

Growth in the volume of data to back up and recover impacts all three

How Did We Get Here? Evolution of Backup

Server Virtualization
LAN backup with shared tape device Storage Area Networks, Fibre Channel Virtual SATA disk = lowers Deduplication machine SAN snapshot & disk-based as a feature of backup via replicationimage-level driven backup backup backup costs applications backup and snapshot

Serverbased backup

Continuous Data Protection (CDP)

LTFS

1980s

Policy-driven data protection Emulating tape on of capture Central backup determinationdisk enables of broadband Internet server enables Penetration Backup vendors storage tier rivals mix capture Cloud-based servers to in storage NAS allows seamless Deduplication and copys systems networked frequency, disk in integration of technique, Server virtualization breaks access and bandwidth resource/mediaoff-site, tapeSystem (LTFS) sharing Fileredundancy changes disk as enables long-term Open systems methods Linear Tape new data capture tape tapewith eliminates via automation & automatically share storagebackupwith Diskbackup approaches destination traditional space processes SANs administrationprotection at of makes SaaS feasible provide high-speed network optimization Simplifies works a medium 2000s single retention economics Non-traditional techniques data enables unattended backup forin conjunctiontoof disk-based the Local backup only policy determined by recovery LTO5 networkedengines/interfaces with clients storage Introduces Centralizes backup week serverscaleRTOs/RPOs making data becomes more at the storageof libraries; Deduplication deliver tapes and Lower-cost disk expands D2D and the tiers system gaining in Accelerates backup utilization objectives backup Improves resource But it Alternative captureand to recovery 2010s creates LANpopularity & access as data traffic techniques 1990s pervasive in on tape as easy CDP, recovery backup applications Disk capacity exceeds (image-level backup, tapeCDP captures multiple Contributes to data growth D2D2T backup Improves backup Data exceeds the sizeelongatesbackup/recovery performance of a single on capacity points, improving both Source-side deduplication RPO & Snapshot) gain disk Eases congestion on LAN tape cartridge provides end-to-end efficiency RTO
Open systems tape automation Networkattached Storage (NAS) Software Deduplication as a Service target devices (SaaS) Integrated recovery platforms

Standalone workstation backup to directattached SCSI tape drive

Backup to disk open systems VTL interface

Cloud storage tiers

SLA-centric backup administration

Internet

File Storage & IP Network Growth

Where Are We Now?

2011 Top IT Priorities
1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. Increase use of server virtualization Manage data growth Information security initiatives Major application deployments or upgrades Improve data backup and recovery Desktop virtualization Data center consolidation Business continuity / disaster recovery programs PC refresh

Mitigate risk Save time

Reduce costs

10. Regulatory compliance initiatives 11. Improve collaboration capabilities 12. Increase use of cloud computing
Source: ESG Research Report, 2011 IT Spending Priorities, January 2011.

Todays MegaTrends
Diminishing levels of downtime tolerance Managing data growth Virtualization Cloud

Diminishing Levels of Downtime Tolerance

Diminishing Levels of Downtime Tolerance

Indicate the amount of downtime your organization can tolerate before you experience significant revenue loss or other adverse business impact. (Percent of respondents, N=510)
Tier 1 data
40% 35% 30% 25% 20% 15% 10% 5% 0%

Tier 2 data

Tier 3 data

35%

53% of respondents cite downtime tolerance of 1-hour or less for tier-1 data

27%

24% 21%
18%

22% 17% 15% 12% 4% 4%

20%

15%
8%

13%

15%

15%

5% 5%

3% 3%

None

Less than 1 hour

1 hour to 3 hours

3 hours to 10 10 hours to 24 1 day to 3 days More than 3 hours hours days

Source: ESG Research Report, Data Protection Trends, April 2010.

Accelerating Backup & Recovery

Production Servers

VTL Snapshot & Replication Backup Server Secondary Storage

Dedupe Appliances

Data Center

Physical Tape Library

WAN

DR Site Cloud

Optimizing Backup
80% of companies have optimized the back end of the backup process by leveraging disk in D2D, D2D2T & D2D2C configurations Optimizing the front end of the process is now the focus

Image-level backup Snapshot capture

More recovery points and full system recovery help improve RPOs/RTOs

Optimizing the Front End

Native array-based snapshots Image-level backup Native system-/hypervisor-based snapshots

New Capture Methods Drive Disk Use

Greater adoption of replication & CDP

52% of survey respondents use snapshot today vs. 47% in

2008
31% use CDP today vs. 13% of respondents in 2008

Snapshot & CDP more likely to replace traditional backup

23% electing snapshot to replace file-level backup

14% of organizations electing CDP to replace file-level backup

18% replacing backup with a combination of snapshot & CDP

Source: ESG Research Report, Data Protection Trends, April 2010.

Array-Based Snapshot Integration with Backups

Reduces complexity no scripting

Application-specific recovery
Single management console Catalog integration rapid search/recovery Integrated policy engine for lifecycle management

Managing Data Growth

Managing the Data Deluge

What is your immediate organizations approximate total volume of data stored on corporate servers and storage systems? (Percent of respondents)
Midmarket (100 to 999 employees, N=199)
60%

Enterprise (1,000 or more employees, N=258)

Total (N=457)

54%
50%

Nearly 50% of enterprises cite >100 TB of data volume

38% 32% 36% 36%

49%

40%

31%

30%

20%

16% 9%

10%

0%

10 TB or less

11 TB to 100 TB

More than 100 TB

Managing the Data Deluge

At approximately what rate do you believe your total volume of data is growing annually? (Percent of respondents)
100 or fewer servers (N=247) 45% 40% 35% 30% 25% 20% 15% More than 100 servers (N=246)

42%

30% with >100 servers have >40% growth/year 28% 23% 24%

30%

20%

10%
5% 0%

9%

9% 9% 6%

1% to 10% annually 11% to 20% annually 21% to 30% annually 31% to 40% annually

More than 40% annually

Storage Spending Priorities

In which data storage areas will your organization make the most significant investments over the next 12-18 months? (Percent of respondents, five responses accepted, N=289)
Backup and recovery solutions Data replication solution for off-site disaster recovery Purchase new SAN storage systems Improved storage management software tools Storage virtualization Data reduction technologies Purchase more power-efficient storage hardware Tiered storage Use cloud storage services as way to source storage capacity Tape replacement Purchase new NAS storage systems Advanced file storage / file system technology for rapidly- Storage encryption solution Converged data and storage networking Unified storage systems Increase use of flash-based SSDs
0% 5%

36%
24% 23% 21% 21% 18% 18% 17% 17% 15% 15% 14% 12% 9% 9% 8%
10% 15% 20% 25% 30% 35% 40%

Deduplication Creates Efficiencies in D2D Backup

Financial benefits Business benefits

Reduce disk costs; delay

capital expenditures
Lower bandwidth costs Reduce power & cooling costs

Increase retention periods

Improve recovery objectives

Improve backup consolidation from ROBOs Improve DR

Tape replacement savings

Operational benefits
Reduce operational overhead

in backup
Reduces time and resource needs for recovery
Production Data Deduplication In Backup Process Backup Disk

Dedupe Approaches
Software-Based
Content-aware; dedupe can be

Hardware-Based
Multiple backup vendor

policy-based
Can be more cost-effective Flexibility in disk selection

environments
No impact on application performance Optimized replication Scalability of some solutions may cause disruptive upgrades or dedupe islands

End-to-end bandwidth
efficiency; remote site backup Global dedupe Simplified management single console, policy engine Can extend to tape

Before Seeking Out Solutions

Understand your needs

Capacity and throughput requirements/planning Full backup size; incremental backup size Number of full/incremental backups per week Change rate of data

Projected growth rate

Retention policies Full backup window Offsite copy window

Performance requirements Requirements for offsite copies Budget

Virtualization

Businesses Embrace Virtualization

Is your organization currently utilizing a server virtualization solution? (Percent of respondents, N=304)
We have not yet deployed server virtualization and we have no current plans to do so,

9%
Yes, we are currently using server virtualization,

We have not yet deployed server virtualization but we plan to do so,

61%

30%

Top Virtualization Priorities

Which of the following would you consider to be your organizations top server virtualization initiatives for 2011? (Percent of respondents, N=161, 5 responses accepted)
Consolidate more physical servers onto virtualization platforms Expand number of applications running on virtual machines Make use of virtual machine replication for disaster recovery Improve backup and recovery of virtual machines Increase security of virtual server environment Improve tools and processes for managing virtual Increase consolidation ratios (i.e., number of virtual Implement virtual machine mobility / HA (high availability) 23% 22% 20% 19% 16% 7%
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50%

50% 47% 43% 34%

31%

Move more applications from test/development to

Purchase next-generation physical server infrastructure to Evaluate alternative hypervisor solutions/vendors

Non-Traditional Capture in Virtualized Environments

Primary Method of Backing Up Virtual Machines

Method

By number of production servers

Less than 25 (N=15) 25 to 100 (N=70) More than 100
(N=99)

Backup agents in virtual machines Storage systems data protection features Backup agent installed in host OS Custom scripts Agentless backup (image-level backup) Leverage snapshot capabilities native to the hypervisor in conjunction with backup software Leverage snapshot capabilities in the backup software
Source: ESG Research Report, Data Protection Trends, April 2010.

31% 38% 8% 0% 8% 0% 15%

26% 21% 15% 12% 8% 9% 9%

31% 18% 16% 11% 10% 10% 4%

Virtual Machine Backup/Recovery Challenges

Resource contention Non-virtualized servers benefit from dedicated and underutilized resources Virtualized servers share available physical resources, improving utilization Simultaneous resource-intensive processes on a physical host could impact the pool of virtual workloads sharing common resources, causing performance issues VM disk image files are active Must be quiesced before backup Growth in data volume VM image files increase the amount of data backed up and transferred over the network due to proliferation and redundancy

File-/Application-Level Backup
Backup agent installed in VM

Backup Mode Backup Process

Files and application objects Typically requires an VM-resident agent to locate and back up files/applications. File-level or application object only Re-install OS, applications on replacement hardware, and then recover data Familiar method like physical environment backup Facilitates single-step file-level recovery and transaction-consistent recovery for applications Potential for resource contention of hosts shared resources No BMR-like recovery of whole VM Requires agent in guest OS

Recovery Mode Recovery Process Advantages

Disadvantages

VM-Level Backup via Proxy (VMware)

Backup agent Installed on backup proxy virtual or physical

Backup Mode Backup Process Recovery Mode

VM disk image Uses hypervisor API to capture point-intime snapshot of VM Whole VM (like BMR) Single-step individual file and/or application object recovery depends on capabilities of backup application Recover VM image to a proxy, and then recover one or more files Non-disruptive to the virtual machineresident applications Wont overwhelm the hosts CPU Eliminates backup window Eliminates need for an agent in every VM Full VM recovery enabled Requires a virtual or physical proxy server on the network Requires networked storage

Snapshot

Recovery Process Advantages

Mount

Disadvantages

Image Backup
Backup agent installed in VM OR

Backup Mode Backup Process

Recovery Mode

Recovery Process Advantages

Backup agent installed in host OS

VM disk image Uses hypervisor API to capture point-intime snapshot of VM May or may not require a backup agent on the host or guest OS to facilitate backup Whole VM (like BMR) Single-step individual file and/or application object recovery depends on capabilities of backup application Recover a VM image to a virtual or physical machine; recover one or more files Non-disruptive to the virtual machineresident applications Wont overwhelm the hosts CPU Eliminates backup window Eliminates need for an agent in every VM Full VM recovery enabled

Disadvantages

SAN Snapshot Backup

Backup Mode Backup Process VM disk image or VM datastore SAN-based snapshot May use an agent on physical system to provide visibility May or may not be application consistent Whole VM Single-step file &/or application object recovery depends on software capabilities Select desired recovery point stored on disk and restore VM Non-disruptive to the virtual machineresident applications Eliminates backup window No need for proxy server Full VM recovery enabled Can streamline remote replication Can be unreliable if not configured properly

Recovery Mode

Recovery Process Advantages

Disadvantages

Optimization of VM Backup/Recovery
Reduce the load on VMs Accelerated backup via VM-level capture Transfer less data

BLIB

Deduplication
Read/write directly from/to VM storage

VM-level backup with file-level restore Rapid recovery via volume-level restore Auto-discovery of unprotected VMs & auto-assignment of policies

Physical and Virtual Machine Protection

What is your organizations current approach to protecting its virtual and physical servers? What do you believe would be your organizations preference for protecting its virtual and physical servers? (Percent of respondents, N=186)
Current approach
80% 70% 60% 50% 40% 30% 20%

Preferred approach

74% 55% 44% 22% 1%

Use separate backup applications Use a single backup application for for virtual and physical server virtual and physical server environments environments

10%
0%

4%

Dont know

Cloud Services

Cloud Services
Cloud computing climbs from 22 out of 24 in 2010 to 12 out of 24 in 2011

Top IT Spending Priorities Ranking Comparison

Increase use of server virtualization Manage data growth Information security initiatives Major application deployments/upgrades Improve data backup and recovery Desktop virtualization

(N=611)

2011
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11

(N=511)

2010
1 4 2 5 3 10 6 7 8 9 12

SaaS climbs from 24 out of 24 in 2010 to 14 out of 24 in 2011

Data center consolidation Business continuity/disaster recovery programs Large-scale desktop/laptop PC refresh Regulatory compliance initiatives Improve collaboration capabilities

Increase use of cloud computing computing services 12 Increase use of cloud services Applications delivered via SaaS model model Applications delivered via SaaS
Increase use of IT outsourcing Mobile workforce deployment Major database deployments/upgrades Deploying applications on mobile devices Reduce data center power/cooling requirements Deploy unified communications/VOIP Enterprise content management/document management Deploy integrated computing platform Implement IT governance framework New data center construction Business intelligence/data warehouse initiatives

12 22
13

22
16

14

14
15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24

24

24
17 20 11 21 15 13 14 19 18 23

Current & Future SaaS Use

Of all the applications used by your organization, approximately what percentage is currently delivered via the SaaS model? How do you expect this to change over the next 36 months? (Percent of respondents, N=208)
Percent of applications that are delivered via SaaS today Percent of applications that will be delivered via SaaS 36 months from now
50% 45% 40% 35% 30% 25% 20% 15% 10% 5% 0%

44%

26% 25% 19% 14% 16% 6%

13%
5%

13% 4%

11% 1% 3%

Less than 10% 10% to 20% of 21% to 30% of 31% to 40% of 41% to 50% of More than 50% of applications applications applications applications applications of applications

Dont know

Cloud Repositories for Offsite Backup Storage

Total volume of backup data currently stored on each storage media type today & expected in 2012? (Percent of respondents, N=560)
Percent of backup data on each media type 2010 Percent of backup data on each media type 2012 -9%
40% 35% 30% 25% 20% 15% 10% 5% 0%

37%

34%
+13% 19% 21%

-33%
17% 13% 9% +18% 11% -14% 12% 11% 6% +39 % 10%

On-site internal On-site external On-site tape (i.e., server storage disk-based storage accessible tape) system

Off-site disk

Off-site tape

Off-site thirdparty service provider storage (i.e., SaaS, cloud storage)

Challenges with On-Premises Data Protection

Infrastructure capital expenses Ongoing operational expenses related to staff, environmentals, media costs/transport/off-site storage Effectively protecting edge data Issues with creating/moving/storing off-site copies for DR and/or long-term retention

Keeping pace with technology upgrades and change events

Meeting compliance requirements and SLAs

Factors Influencing Backup to Cloud

Which of the following factors were most responsible for your organizations decision to utilize an online backup service? (Percent of respondents, N=75, multiple responses accepted) Ability to store data remotely for disaster recovery Better management/reporting capabilities Improved service levels Predictable costs (i.e., simpler budgeting) Improved support for remote office/branch office locations 32% 29% 28% 27% 25% 24% 17% 37%

More cost-effective than in-house solutions and processes Service allows us to take advantage of advanced technology
Offload regulatory compliance requirements to a service provider Ability to eliminate on-site backup hardware and software Facilitates chargeback to internal business units
0% 5% 10% 15%

17%
16%
20% 25% 30% 35% 40%

Cloud Services Models for Backup

SaaS outsource backup completely

Bandwidth determines data set sizes

Best use cases: ROBOs, endpoint devices

Cloud storage off-site and/or long-term retention in cloud repository

Potential tape replacement strategy

Cloud storage & compute create cloud failover point

P2V/V2V disaster recovery

Summary
Data growth and innovation is driving greater use of disk in data protection

Innovation shift from back-end to front-end optimization in backup

IT organizations using combinations of disk, tape & cloud tiers for data protection

Greater use of cloud computing & SaaS will result in backup being out-tasked to service providers hosting the data

Virtualization is a change event creating opportunities for next-generation data protection

Single solution for physical and virtual backup is preferred

Thank you.
Lauren Whitehouse
Email: Blog: Twitter: laurenw@esg-global.com www.dataprotectionperspectives.com @lauwhitehouse

Audience Response
Question?

21st Century Backup: Whats New in Backup Technology

Lauren Whitehouse Senior Analyst, ESG