Veeam in conjunction with V5000 - First Validation - Quantum Forum V2024-03-28T08:35:19Zhttps://forumv.co/forum/topics/veeam-in-conjunction-with-v5000-first-validation?commentId=6549635%3AComment%3A216795&feed=yes&xn_auth=noLooks like there's a limit to…tag:forumv.co,2022-08-18:6549635:Comment:2198282022-08-18T17:31:30.441ZSteve Wrighthttps://forumv.co/profile/SteveWright
<p>Looks like there's a limit to reply depth on this forum so I'm replying to an earlier message, but ...</p>
<p>We can do instant recovery without a vpower NFS. We just confirmed that with the BU repository unselecting the VpowerNFS check box instant recovery worked just fine with a V5000. Though I'm sure you'll want to test this on your system to confirm.</p>
<p>BTW we are testing on Veeam 12 which isn't actually released yet. We didn't test on Veeam 11 (it's 12 we have in our lab for…</p>
<p>Looks like there's a limit to reply depth on this forum so I'm replying to an earlier message, but ...</p>
<p>We can do instant recovery without a vpower NFS. We just confirmed that with the BU repository unselecting the VpowerNFS check box instant recovery worked just fine with a V5000. Though I'm sure you'll want to test this on your system to confirm.</p>
<p>BTW we are testing on Veeam 12 which isn't actually released yet. We didn't test on Veeam 11 (it's 12 we have in our lab for testing/validation).</p> Ufffh...This sounds amazing!…tag:forumv.co,2022-08-18:6549635:Comment:2192922022-08-18T05:50:15.321ZNico Kretschmarhttps://forumv.co/profile/NicoKretschmar
<p>Ufffh...This sounds amazing!</p>
<p>And right in time, as I am working to deploy a new DXI instance to a real remote site.</p>
<p>When I am get you correctly, I need only to make sure, the repository for the DXI has been set <strong>without</strong> a mount server. And with that, Veeam will still present the Instant recovery from the DXI based repository.</p>
<p>Ufffh...This sounds amazing!</p>
<p>And right in time, as I am working to deploy a new DXI instance to a real remote site.</p>
<p>When I am get you correctly, I need only to make sure, the repository for the DXI has been set <strong>without</strong> a mount server. And with that, Veeam will still present the Instant recovery from the DXI based repository.</p> when we do instant recovery…tag:forumv.co,2022-08-17:6549635:Comment:2190732022-08-17T23:07:04.580ZSteve Wrighthttps://forumv.co/profile/SteveWright
<p style="margin: 0px;"></p>
<p>when we do instant recovery the DXi serves up the data independently of the Veeam server. The Veeam server will only record changes to data and apply IF the VM is migrated to production</p>
<p></p>
<p style="margin: 0px;"></p>
<p>when we do instant recovery the DXi serves up the data independently of the Veeam server. The Veeam server will only record changes to data and apply IF the VM is migrated to production</p>
<p></p> Just one thing ... the DXi su…tag:forumv.co,2022-08-17:6549635:Comment:2188622022-08-17T16:16:13.280ZSteve Wrighthttps://forumv.co/profile/SteveWright
<p>Just one thing ...…</p>
<p>Just one thing ... <span style="color: #242424; font-family: 'Segoe UI', system-ui, 'Apple Color Emoji', 'Segoe UI Emoji', sans-serif; font-size: 14px; font-style: normal; font-variant-ligatures: normal; font-variant-caps: normal; font-weight: 400; letter-spacing: normal; orphans: 2; text-align: start; text-indent: 0px; text-transform: none; white-space: normal; widows: 2; word-spacing: 0px; -webkit-text-stroke-width: 0px; background-color: #ffffff; text-decoration-style: initial; text-decoration-color: initial; display: inline !important; float: none;">the DXi supports instant recovery from a deduplicated share already (direct). It works well.</span></p>
<p></p> Hi Steve,
no worries at all.…tag:forumv.co,2022-08-17:6549635:Comment:2183002022-08-17T06:22:57.917ZNico Kretschmarhttps://forumv.co/profile/NicoKretschmar
<p>Hi Steve,</p>
<p>no worries at all. Next validation step is on my side. Of course, my clear aim is to consolidate any competitor's deduplication appliance AND the current primary backup targets, running on Windows. Not for big size sites, but the DXI is seen as the clear option to work in micro or midi sites as THE backup target.</p>
<p>Additionally, AND if we got a deal with Quantum about an onprem Active Scale, we are extremely excited to use it as performance tier within an ScaleOut…</p>
<p>Hi Steve,</p>
<p>no worries at all. Next validation step is on my side. Of course, my clear aim is to consolidate any competitor's deduplication appliance AND the current primary backup targets, running on Windows. Not for big size sites, but the DXI is seen as the clear option to work in micro or midi sites as THE backup target.</p>
<p>Additionally, AND if we got a deal with Quantum about an onprem Active Scale, we are extremely excited to use it as performance tier within an ScaleOut repository.</p>
<p>The true only missing feature from Veeam is the PowerNFS / MountServer support for all Linux based appliances, being the source of an Instant Recovery (Running a VM from a backup source directly). But thats somehow on the Veeam roadmap, however not scheduled.</p>
<p>Regards,</p>
<p>Nico</p> Hi Nico,
I don't think this i…tag:forumv.co,2022-08-17:6549635:Comment:2182982022-08-17T06:08:22.669ZSteve Wrighthttps://forumv.co/profile/SteveWright
<p>Hi Nico,</p>
<p>I don't think this is a very complete response but I didn't have much time today. so I'm passing on what I got but didn't have time to delve into it further. I apologize for that. I'll try again if I can. But does this help:</p>
<p>DXi could be a secondary copy location for the primary backups. That way you have a deduplicated copy of the backup on V5000 and could replicate efficiently offsite further increasing protection!</p>
<p>In my lab environment I do not have primary…</p>
<p>Hi Nico,</p>
<p>I don't think this is a very complete response but I didn't have much time today. so I'm passing on what I got but didn't have time to delve into it further. I apologize for that. I'll try again if I can. But does this help:</p>
<p>DXi could be a secondary copy location for the primary backups. That way you have a deduplicated copy of the backup on V5000 and could replicate efficiently offsite further increasing protection!</p>
<p>In my lab environment I do not have primary storage that has integration with Veeam (for direct snapshot) so i cant really test this scenario in-house. But this could be a great option.</p>
<p></p>
<p></p> Hi Steve,
basically, it confi…tag:forumv.co,2022-08-16:6549635:Comment:2173822022-08-16T10:28:58.523ZNico Kretschmarhttps://forumv.co/profile/NicoKretschmar
<p>Hi Steve,</p>
<p>basically, it confirms, it should work in a hotadd mode. I need to say, my test environment runs in our data center, where we are usually work with a storage integration, so with our Veeam backup server and its proxies, which are all physically, we fetch the backups directly from the primary storage snapshots.</p>
<p>As this is hard to tweak, and also not representing our real use case for the DXI V5000, I will pick a remote site and deploy an appliance there, to have better…</p>
<p>Hi Steve,</p>
<p>basically, it confirms, it should work in a hotadd mode. I need to say, my test environment runs in our data center, where we are usually work with a storage integration, so with our Veeam backup server and its proxies, which are all physically, we fetch the backups directly from the primary storage snapshots.</p>
<p>As this is hard to tweak, and also not representing our real use case for the DXI V5000, I will pick a remote site and deploy an appliance there, to have better real life conditions for another test run.</p>
<p>Btw, I noticed also in the file system (/var/log/Veeam) some well known log files... ;-)</p>
<p>I will keep you posted on the result of the remote site testing.</p>
<p>Regards,</p>
<p>Nico</p> Hi Nico!
Great to hear from y…tag:forumv.co,2022-08-15:6549635:Comment:2167952022-08-15T22:26:23.323ZSteve Wrighthttps://forumv.co/profile/SteveWright
<p>Hi Nico!</p>
<p>Great to hear from you again. Sorry I didn’t answer your questions the first time, but let me try again. I’m not a Veeam expert unfortunately but fortunately we do have some on staff.</p>
<ul>
<li>Difference in throughput between restore and backup processes</li>
</ul>
<ul>
<li>Missing ability to install the VMware Proxy for Standard Linux systems</li>
</ul>
<ul>
<li><em>I believe, we are misaligned. It is not about the process how to integrate the local resources into a…</em></li>
</ul>
<p>Hi Nico!</p>
<p>Great to hear from you again. Sorry I didn’t answer your questions the first time, but let me try again. I’m not a Veeam expert unfortunately but fortunately we do have some on staff.</p>
<ul>
<li>Difference in throughput between restore and backup processes</li>
</ul>
<ul>
<li>Missing ability to install the VMware Proxy for Standard Linux systems</li>
</ul>
<ul>
<li><em>I believe, we are misaligned. It is not about the process how to integrate the local resources into a Veeam repository, but how the instance is treating VMware source instances. Normally, there are ways, like SAN (Direct Storage Access), HotAdd (Virtual Appliance), or as a fallback Network (Net block device). I was hoping, that we can use one of the first two, but I think, we need to be fine with the third, which has a natural limit of 10GBit (NIC's link speed of all involved systems, like Hypervisors to access the storage and the Appliance VM)</em></li>
</ul>
<p>So I think these are best addressed together.</p>
<p> You should be able to use “hotadd” transport mode. That’s all dependent upon the Veeam B&R ESX/datastore availability and the DXi doesn’t matter. A Veeam proxy can’t be installed on the DXi, but your configuration of Veeam + ESX and datastore access should allow for hotadd. </p>
<p>Apparently it’s best to have a VM proxy on the ESX server that has access to all relevant datastores. Then that has to be configured within Veeam. That’s a common configuration.</p>
<p>So the VM Proxy can directly mount the datastore that contains the VM (VM to be backed up) vritual disks and send data directly to the DXi.g</p>
<p>Does this help?</p> Hi Steve,
I appreciate you re…tag:forumv.co,2022-08-15:6549635:Comment:2163152022-08-15T11:35:12.584ZNico Kretschmarhttps://forumv.co/profile/NicoKretschmar
<p>Hi Steve,</p>
<p>I appreciate you response!</p>
<p>As a tentative summary and each's bullet points status</p>
<ul>
<li>10 GBit vNIC is shown as 1GBit interface in the GUI<ul>
<li>known issue. Cosmetically only.</li>
</ul>
</li>
<li>Difference in throughput between restore and backup processes<ul>
<li>Not directly addressed, potentially linked to a pending memory adjustment</li>
<li><strong>Here I would like to get more assistance to configure an appropriate environment (VM and appliance…</strong></li>
</ul>
</li>
</ul>
<p>Hi Steve,</p>
<p>I appreciate you response!</p>
<p>As a tentative summary and each's bullet points status</p>
<ul>
<li>10 GBit vNIC is shown as 1GBit interface in the GUI<ul>
<li>known issue. Cosmetically only.</li>
</ul>
</li>
<li>Difference in throughput between restore and backup processes<ul>
<li>Not directly addressed, potentially linked to a pending memory adjustment</li>
<li><strong>Here I would like to get more assistance to configure an appropriate environment (VM and appliance settings)</strong></li>
</ul>
</li>
<li>Missing ability to install the VMware Proxy for Standard Linux systems<ul>
<li><em>I believe, we are misaligned. It is not about the process how to integrate the local resources into a Veeam repository, but how the instance is treating VMware source instances. Normally, there are ways, like SAN (Direct Storage Access), HotAdd (Virtual Appliance), or as a fallback Network (Net block device). I was hoping, that we can use one of the first two, but I think, we need to be fine with the third, which has a natural limit of 10GBit (NIC's link speed of all involved systems, like Hypervisors to access the storage and the Appliance VM)</em></li>
</ul>
</li>
<li>Performance to an S3 compatible object storage (MinIO on Windows)<ul>
<li>This turned out to be a clear performance issue on the target side. I managed to use another MinIO instance, and got much better results.</li>
<li>Can be considered to be solved.</li>
</ul>
</li>
</ul>
<p>So, in a nutshell, may you please review the Italic and Bold portion above and feedback?</p>
<p>Thanks and regards,</p>
<p>Nico</p>
<p></p> Hi Nico,
Been talking to some…tag:forumv.co,2022-08-09:6549635:Comment:2090952022-08-09T21:49:41.146ZSteve Wrighthttps://forumv.co/profile/SteveWright
<p>Hi Nico,</p>
<p>Been talking to some people about this, and this is what I got back:</p>
<p>The modern versions of Veeam cannot install as we are “integrated” with Veeam. </p>
<p>Veeam (on standard linux systems) will install a resident data mover and open a port/listener for jobs. We do not do this. Our VDMS integration loads a temporary data mover to accomplish the same thing. The reason Veeam does this on standard linux systems is to support “immutability”. The DXi does the same thing…</p>
<p>Hi Nico,</p>
<p>Been talking to some people about this, and this is what I got back:</p>
<p>The modern versions of Veeam cannot install as we are “integrated” with Veeam. </p>
<p>Veeam (on standard linux systems) will install a resident data mover and open a port/listener for jobs. We do not do this. Our VDMS integration loads a temporary data mover to accomplish the same thing. The reason Veeam does this on standard linux systems is to support “immutability”. The DXi does the same thing via secure snapshot (one of our included features). The message during repository configuration should not be alarming.</p>
<p>The S3 scaleout backup repository should support good performance when migrating to S3 with the DXi as the gateway (this avoids an unnecessary hop to a Veeam server for a gateway). The network path should be analyzed to ensure that the data is being transferred directly from the DXi to the S3 cloud storage and not otherwise. This can be done by monitoring the Veeam server network to ensure the data is not landing there prior to transfer to S3. But as I understand your S3 target is on prem, so not WAN to worry about.</p>
<p>Also -- I've been thinking about our VDMS option. It takes quite a bit of memory. Does your VM have considerably more memory than the minimum?</p>
<p>thanks!</p>