Video Screencast Help
Symantec to Separate Into Two Focused, Industry-Leading Technology Companies. Learn more.

Slow incremental backups

Created: 27 Sep 2012 • Updated: 27 Sep 2012 | 2 comments

Hi,

 

Our incremental backups are not really any faster than our full backups. Going by this previous thread it looks like a common issue? https://www-secure.symantec.com/connect/forums/deduplication-incremental-backup-taking-more-16-hours Our incremental backup time needs to be shortened so they can finish over night and not run into the next day.

 

Currently I have one job which backups all our servers. So theoretically it will do one at a time at full speed. Would it be better to have one job per server and have them all running at the same time? So theoretically the jobs will run slower, but as they are all running at once might finish earlier??

 

This is on a Backup Exec 3600 R2 appliance and I'm happy with the full backup speeds. I just don't see much point in incremental if it's going to take the same time as a full backup?

Comments 2 CommentsJump to latest comment

ZeRoC00L's picture

Please note that there is a specific forum for the 3600 Backup Appliance:

https://www-secure.symantec.com/connect/backup-and-recovery/forums/backup-exec-3600-appliance

Running multiple jobs at the same time can decrease the total time to run, but in worst case it can also increase. It depends on your environment, it's best to try some different settings and see what's best for you.

If this response answers your concern, please mark it as a "solution"

pkh's picture

Incremental backups can conceivably be longer than a full backup because each resource has to be examined to determine whether it needs to be backed up or not.  With a full backup, all the resouces are backed up.

If your backup window is long enough, do a full backup.  This will make a restore easier since you onlly have one backup to restore.