All this theoretical stuff is wonderful and demonstrates how smart you all are. But reality is what it is. When you run incremental backups daily, at some point you MUST run a full backup, either synthetic or active. At that point you must have two VBR files in your file system. Am I wrong yet?
if one VBR is 17 TB then two is 34TB. Still with me?
That plus a week of deltas, say 36-37TB for a weeks' worth of backups on a 17TB Windows server. Granted the oldest full is deleted the next time retention runs assuming you have reached your retention RP number (oh I forgot, that's no longer supported either), but you still need to allocate the space in your repo to accommodate that growth. I haven't even mentioned the resource drain or the time required to complete the synthetic or active Fulls. 17 TB takes DAYS to complete and breaks my RPO/RTO's. Other jobs are affected as resources are consumed completing the 17TB full (worker, repo, proxy, gateway..)
What is the actual HARM in continuing to support reverse incremental backups? They work great and have been supported by Veeam for years. The heavy lifting is done.
All the pro forward people here have spent a great deal of energy explaining why everyone should simply smile and take it, but I haven't seen a coherent reason why we should have to.
This doesn't have to be a religious thing, it is just about supporting your customers so that they don't become former customers.
if one VBR is 17 TB then two is 34TB. Still with me?
That plus a week of deltas, say 36-37TB for a weeks' worth of backups on a 17TB Windows server. Granted the oldest full is deleted the next time retention runs assuming you have reached your retention RP number (oh I forgot, that's no longer supported either), but you still need to allocate the space in your repo to accommodate that growth. I haven't even mentioned the resource drain or the time required to complete the synthetic or active Fulls. 17 TB takes DAYS to complete and breaks my RPO/RTO's. Other jobs are affected as resources are consumed completing the 17TB full (worker, repo, proxy, gateway..)
What is the actual HARM in continuing to support reverse incremental backups? They work great and have been supported by Veeam for years. The heavy lifting is done.
All the pro forward people here have spent a great deal of energy explaining why everyone should simply smile and take it, but I haven't seen a coherent reason why we should have to.
This doesn't have to be a religious thing, it is just about supporting your customers so that they don't become former customers.
Statistics: Posted by dpeach01 — Jun 16, 2025 12:02 pm
![Chad Lawson – Awakening: The Stillness Within (2026) [FLAC 24bit/48kHz]](http://imghd.xyz/images/2026/05/09/x5d03jw9bi367_600.jpg)
