Re: [PLUG] cru vs. veritas backup utilities

[Chris Hedemark <chrish@trilug.org>]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1


On Thursday, February 20, 2003, at 12:34 PM, Fred K Ollinger wrote:

> Anyone have opinions on cru (bru) vs. veritas utilities?

Yes!

I am actually looking at both right now.

I think that BRU looks a lot better on the bottom line in terms of bang 
for the buck.  Also, they have a MySQL back end with published schema 
so you are free to write admin tools that really tightly integrate with 
it.  They are missing out on some high end features like NDMP, but if 
you don't really need that then it could be a contender.

I think that the amount of data you're backing up is relatively small 
and shouldn't present BRU with any problems.  You didn't mention SAN or 
anything.  In any case, while both solutions can probably do what 
you're looking for, my current impression of the two leaves me feeling 
like BRU can do it for a lot less.

Aside from the very high cost of entry with Veritas, one of my nits 
with them is that all the cool stuff it can do is a series of small 
(but EXPENSIVE) added feature.  For example, the advanced reporting 
option lists for about $15K.  This is basically an RDBMS that you can 
run perl jobs against.  With BRU, this comes with the base package (BRU 
Pro is about $1K per server).

Chris Hedemark
PGP/GnuPG Public Key at http://yonderway.com/chris/hedemark.gpg
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.1 (Darwin)

iD8DBQE+VRVIYPuF4Zq9lvYRAh85AKDY++M80n8OlcxE0gv265u4lbWsqQCggT7d
YDNTsjExX1nkQ7gHAfXER18=
=B4gb
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

_________________________________________________________________________
Philadelphia Linux Users Group        --       http://www.phillylinux.org
Announcements - http://lists.netisland.net/mailman/listinfo/plug-announce
General Discussion  --   http://lists.netisland.net/mailman/listinfo/plug