Comprehensive data protection for all workloads
Post Reply
Saskatoon Kevin
Novice
Posts: 9
Liked: 1 time
Joined: Sep 21, 2018 4:02 pm
Full Name: Kevin Simpson
Contact:

How to protect VM using instance instead of perpetual license

Post by Saskatoon Kevin »

I have a merged license with a mix between perpetual socket and instance based workloads. We've added a few additional hosts to our environment, and we were intending to use agents to backup the vms on these guests instead of agentless processing. I do get the impression from this helpcenter article (https://helpcenter.veeam.com/docs/backu ... l?ver=95u4) that we can license VM's without an agent and without a socket license by applying an instance license to to the VM; however, I cannot figure out how to get the license onto these individual vms (I can't find an option to add license, only revoke license). Running the job with just the VM errors with not enough licenses (I've about 200 instance licenses remaining). These new hosts are a part of a new cluster under the same vcenter.
Is anybody familiar with configuring a mix between socket and instance license for VMs without agents?
veremin
Product Manager
Posts: 20270
Liked: 2252 times
Joined: Oct 26, 2012 3:28 pm
Full Name: Vladimir Eremin
Contact:

Re: How to protect VM using instance instead of perpetual license

Post by veremin »

In your case to apply instance license to VM you just need to back it up with computer backup job. How many VMs you're trying to back up with computer backup job? And what license edition you have? Thanks!
Saskatoon Kevin
Novice
Posts: 9
Liked: 1 time
Joined: Sep 21, 2018 4:02 pm
Full Name: Kevin Simpson
Contact:

Re: How to protect VM using instance instead of perpetual license

Post by Saskatoon Kevin »

Thanks, we have enterprise licensing and we're only looking at about a half dozen machines.

Would this type of backup just be the windows/linux computer type and just use server for the job mode? I'd assumed this was using an agent and would try to deploy and thought that would defeat the difference between the VM and Server based instance.
veremin
Product Manager
Posts: 20270
Liked: 2252 times
Joined: Oct 26, 2012 3:28 pm
Full Name: Vladimir Eremin
Contact:

Re: How to protect VM using instance instead of perpetual license

Post by veremin »

Correct, to achieve you goal you need to

- create protection group (for these 6 VMs)
- create agent backup job, configured in server mode

More information can be found here.

With such setup agent backup job should consume instance license.

Thanks!
Saskatoon Kevin
Novice
Posts: 9
Liked: 1 time
Joined: Sep 21, 2018 4:02 pm
Full Name: Kevin Simpson
Contact:

Re: How to protect VM using instance instead of perpetual license

Post by Saskatoon Kevin »

Thanks, this is the same way that we create machines for either clusters or stand alone vm's with physical passthrough RDM's. These are registered on our licenses as standard servers though, which to me makes sense as they are utilizing an agent. I had presumed the VM instance was leveraging vmware snapshots, but perhaps I'm mistaken?
So I guess I'm still a bit confused on what the difference between a VM instance and a server instance is (and how to create the vm instance).
veremin
Product Manager
Posts: 20270
Liked: 2252 times
Joined: Oct 26, 2012 3:28 pm
Full Name: Vladimir Eremin
Contact:

Re: How to protect VM using instance instead of perpetual license

Post by veremin »

Instance is just a license currency. You can spend it on a protecting different types of workloads: cloud VM, workstation, server, etc.

In your case backup server will register this workload as a server and consume certain number of instances for protecting it.

Hope this helps.

Thanks!
jmmarton
Veeam Software
Posts: 2092
Liked: 309 times
Joined: Nov 17, 2015 2:38 am
Full Name: Joe Marton
Location: Chicago, IL
Contact:

Re: How to protect VM using instance instead of perpetual license

Post by jmmarton » 1 person likes this post

If you only had instance licensing, then those instances could protect VMs using a hypervisor-based backup or an agent-based backup. But when you have a license file that has a mix of sockets and instances, hypervisor-based backups will only use socket licenses. Therefore if you have a few VMs you need to protect on additional hosts, your options are either to use agents or to purchase more sockets.

Joe
Gostev
Chief Product Officer
Posts: 31456
Liked: 6647 times
Joined: Jan 01, 2006 1:01 am
Location: Baar, Switzerland
Contact:

Re: How to protect VM using instance instead of perpetual license

Post by Gostev »

Right, in presence of sockets, hypervisor-based backups will only consume sockets, just as this was before Instances were introduced to replace agent-specific licenses. The only option in your case would be to cancel license merge, and use Instance license in a separate backup server.
Murigar
Enthusiast
Posts: 37
Liked: 4 times
Joined: Nov 05, 2014 4:19 pm
Contact:

Re: How to protect VM using instance instead of perpetual license

Post by Murigar »

The situation of mixing sockets and instances for VM backups is quite frustrating.
Sounds like a bad business decision to force socket license holders to convert them instance licensing.

Why can we not simply assign an instance license to a VM resource? The same way we assign to a server or workstation agent.

What would be the methodology of using Enterprise Manager to separate out the VBR for Sockets then the VBR for instances.
Can this all live in a single standalone (non vm) box?

Case # 03734988
Gostev
Chief Product Officer
Posts: 31456
Liked: 6647 times
Joined: Jan 01, 2006 1:01 am
Location: Baar, Switzerland
Contact:

Re: How to protect VM using instance instead of perpetual license

Post by Gostev » 1 person likes this post

To allow mixing of sockets and instances for VM protection would require Veeam to revise and increase the pricing significantly for both, which would be much more impacting. So trust me, it was a very good business decision for Veeam (you should have seen the alternatives required to retain profitability with mixing allowed).

Also, please note that converting from sockets to instances costs literally nothing (we do that at the price of your sockets renewal, and you can buy up to 2 years of subscription at this price).

If you want to completely separate sockets and instances, these have to be completely independent installs as per Veeam licensing policy (and also for technical reasons of how VM licensing logic is implemented).
stevetNOVUS
Service Provider
Posts: 16
Liked: 2 times
Joined: Sep 24, 2015 9:41 am
Contact:

[MERGED] Mixing Perpetual Socket Licenses AND VULs

Post by stevetNOVUS »

Hi All,

I need some clarification on the following.

This is from the Veeam FAQ section of the licensing web site
Question: "Can I have both VUL (per-workload) and per-socket licenses?"

Answer: "Customers can have a centrally managed environment that uses both VUL and socket licenses. However, not all products can be combined (a full list of mergeable VUL and socket products can be found here). For example, if you protect VMware vSphere or Microsoft Hyper-V VMs with perpetual per-socket licenses, you must protect all vSphere and Hyper-V VMs with sockets in that environment. VUL licenses can still be used for any other non-VM workload type."

So, our current configuration is
A single VBR server running 9.5 Update4 licensed with 8x Perpetual Sockets Enterprise Plus Edition
1x vCenter controlling 4x ESXi Servers (VMs protected with VBR 9.5 8x Perpetual Socket licenses)
1x vCenter server controlling 3x ESXi Servers (NOT being protected by VBR at the moment)
1x vCenter server controlling 2x ESXi Servers (NOT being protected by VBR at the moment)
6x Physical Windows Servers (NOT being protected by VBR at the moment)

We would like the following
A single VRB server running Veeam 10 licensec with a mix of perpetual sockets and VULs as follows
1x vCenter controlling 4x ESXi Servers (VMs protected with VBR 10.0 8x Perpetual Socket licenses)
1x vCenter server controlling 3x ESXi Servers (VMs protected with VBR 10.0 VUL licenses)
1x vCenter server controlling 2x ESXi Servers (VMs protected with VBR 10.0 VUL licenses)
6x Physical Windows Servers (Agent based protection with VBR 10.0 VUL licenses)

Is this possible?
I think it is, but the Licensing FAQ Answer has left me in some doubt

Many thanks in advance for any feedback
Steve
wishr
Veteran
Posts: 3077
Liked: 453 times
Joined: Aug 07, 2018 3:11 pm
Full Name: Fedor Maslov
Contact:

Re: Mixing Perpetual Socket Licenses AND VULs

Post by wishr »

Hi StevetNOVUS,

Currently, you cannot mix socket-based and instance-based licenses to protect VMs in a single backup environment. I'm merging your topic with an existing discussion - please take a look.

Thanks
stevetNOVUS
Service Provider
Posts: 16
Liked: 2 times
Joined: Sep 24, 2015 9:41 am
Contact:

Re: How to protect VM using instance instead of perpetual license

Post by stevetNOVUS »

Hi wishr,
Looking at the dates of this post, the original comments would be for veeam 9.5, is this still true for Veeam 10?
Cheers
Steve
Gostev
Chief Product Officer
Posts: 31456
Liked: 6647 times
Joined: Jan 01, 2006 1:01 am
Location: Baar, Switzerland
Contact:

Re: How to protect VM using instance instead of perpetual license

Post by Gostev »

Yes. Regardless of versions, you need to pick a single way of protecting your VMs: either with the socket-based license, or with the VM-based license. The latter is recommended, because it provides full license portability in case some VMs will later be migrated to physical servers or to cloud machines - whereas socket-based licenses can serve on-prem hypervisor sockets only.
stevetNOVUS
Service Provider
Posts: 16
Liked: 2 times
Joined: Sep 24, 2015 9:41 am
Contact:

Re: How to protect VM using instance instead of perpetual license

Post by stevetNOVUS »

Hi Guys,
Thank you for the update. I'm pretty sure we will be moving to instance based licensing
Cheers, Steve
Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Google [Bot] and 195 guests