Impact of Enabling WORM on NON DEDUPE PRIMARY or SECONDARY BACKUP COPY

Good morning.  There should be no difference in the impact from a deduplicated or non-deduplicated standpoint.  A Worm copy just does not allow micro pruning or pruning of any kind until retention is met.

@Orazan :

Iam talking about consumption on storage backup library .

Don't i need to seal my DDB for deduplicated copy every time when the retention is met if WORM is enabled .

• Secondary Copy on Disk - Implications of WORM setting

Are you saying that storage consumption will be exactly same if i enable or disable CV WORM feature on deduplicated storage policy copy ?

I apologize I misunderstood.  Yes the DDB will seal every time that retention is met.  That DDB can not be aged off until the full retention is met so yes WORM of deduplicated data would have a larger footprint on storage than a WORM copy of non-deduplicated storage.  

It is more common to see WORM copies configured with longer retention so the seal of the DDB is not happening often.  If you have very short retention, I would recommend leaving it non-deduplicated so that you will not be sealing say, weekly or biweekly.

Let me know if that explains it better or if you have any other questions.

@Orazan 

I have a retention of 30 days and some of my backup data is deduplicated while some in non-deduplicated .

Questions →

1. For existing Deduplicated copy to convert as WORM enabled with retention of 30 days , how much additional storage is required . 1.5x , 2x , 2.5x, 3x ? Consider x is the amount of current storage requirement for dedupe copy without WORM.
2. Do i need to manually SEAL DDB after every 30 days or CV will automatically seal and create new DDB after every 30 days .
3. For non-dedupe copy will there be any increase in my storage utilization after enabling WORM on storage policy COPY ?