ReFS fast cloning and spaceless fulls even works with encryption as it's transparent to Veeam, where encryption would hinder your ability to dedup with NTFS.Ī downside that comes to mind in NTFS vs ReFS is there is no possibility for global deduplication with ReFS, And with 'Fast Cloning' the resources required to create the synthetic fulls or merge incrementals into the full backup are minimized with ReFS because it is pointing to the previous file instead of processing and writing out a whole new file. The best part is that previously when Veeam rolled up a new synthetic fulls it would have to create a whole new file which meant you'd need free space equal to the size of a full backup, with ReFS the new file is only the size of the changes since the last full. We've seen massive improvements in speed and storage utilization for the backup copies after we've migrated over to ReFS, and are in the process of moving more. CrazyLefty wrote:Thanks! Do you notice any difference in the transformation processes, as it rolls up the dailies into weekly/monthly/yearly between ReFS and NTFS? In particular the time it takes to complete those operations?There is absolutely a major improvement in the transformation process.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |