Convert existing VM's backed up as hypervisor-based to agent-based

[HDClown]

I have a license file applied with 6 sockets and 30 instances, which replaced a prior file of 7 sockets and 20 instances.

I have a small vSphere host that had 2 VM's backed up on it as a hypervisor-based job that used the 7th socket which I know longer have, so now those VM's won't back up due to no licenses. I need to convert these to agent-based so they can use an instance license. Is there a way to convert this so that the existing backup history can be maintained? These VM's are remote over a slower connection so I'm hoping to avoid having to start with a new full backup.

[Gostev]

I highly recommend that you migrate those 6 sockets to instances instead. This can be done at no extra costs (your regular sockets renewal prices) and sockets are converted to instances 7:1 ratio (or more, if your actual VM density is higher).

The thing is, this "licensing workaround" you're trying to implement is simply not a good path for long term.

As you are already aware, our licensing policy states that in presence of a socket licenses, VM protections will consume sockets only. These creative "workarounds" of using agents for remaining VMs, while is possible now, will not work in v10 - which will more strictly enforce our licensing policy. That is, regardless how you choose to protect a VM (host-based, agent-based or application-level backup), this VM will still consume a socket license (because it is a VM, and you have socket licenses).

But answering your question, no - since agent-based backups are of different type, conversion is not possible unfortunately.

Thanks!

[HDClown]

These creative "workarounds" of using agents for remaining VMs, while possible now, will not work in v10 - which will more strictly enforce our licensing policy.

I find this a little bit disappointing. I'm not trying to use sockets and instance licenses together against the same physical hosts, they aren't even in the same cluster. I don't see why it's a big deal to allow for using sockets only on Host A and Instances only on Host B, all under the same single B&R installation.

My original scenario described is actually short term as I swing some workloads around, but I have a final state scenario where my 6 sockets would cover all of my on-prem VMware hosts but I want to use my instance licenses to do agent-based backups on VM's hosted by a VMware IaaS provider, where those VM's are in a multi-tenant cloud (vCD). Will this not work either in v10 if I am doing it all under the same B&R installation? That cloud provider offered me the option to buy (rent) the instances from them as well, and still use those licenses in my own on-prem B&R installation, but I already had instances licenses paid so I want to use the money already spent.

Prior to any of this, I've been using a mix of sockets + instances where the sockets cover VMware hosts and the instances are only being used on physical devices. Will this configuration be supported in v10?

[HDClown]

Also, as far as converting all of my sockets to instances, I was given these figures by my VAR which came from Veeam renewal specialist, MSRP prices:

• $838 - 1 year renewal for 1 socket of Availability Suite Plus @ 2020 Price (after 15% increase)

• $1500 - 10 instances for 1 year

As I have about 20 VM's on each of my hosts at this time (~60 VM total), it would be substantially more expensive to go to all instances to cover the workloads on these hosts which are currently covered by sockets. Even if I cut down to only 4 sockets (which is a possibility for next renewal when my hardware refresh is complete), It would still cost me more to use all instances instead of sockets.

[Gostev]

Prior to any of this, I've been using a mix of sockets + instances where the sockets cover VMware hosts and the instances are only being used on physical devices. Will this configuration be supported in v10?

Yes, sure - no changes are planned in these regards. It's the only way to handle mixed virtual + physical environments anyway, in situations when the customer already has socket licenses and wants to add physical server protection.

As I have about 20 VM's on each of my hosts at this time (~60 VM total), it would be substantially more expensive to go to all instances to cover the workloads on these hosts which are currently covered by sockets. Even if I cut down to only 4 sockets (which is a possibility for next renewal when my hardware refresh is complete), It would still cost me more to use all instances instead of sockets.

There are no extra costs. If you have 60 VMs total on your 6 sockets, you will get 60 instances after converting your 6 sockets. And adding those 30 instances you already have, this gets you to 90 total.

[HDClown]

There are no extra costs. If you have 60 VMs total on your 6 sockets, you will get 60 instances after converting your 6 sockets. And adding those 30 instances you already have, this gets you to 90 total.

Is this true for subsequent renewal years, or just for the first year you convert?

What about my scenario of on-prem VM''s licensed by socket but cloud hosted VMs in an VMware IaaS provider (using vCD) being licensed by instances. Is that possible?

[Gostev]

You can get up to 2 years of Subscription at your Sockets renewal prices, and add a 3rd year at 20% off list Subscription price.

Yes, it should be possible, since those VMs are not a part of your on-prem VMware infrastructure that is registered with Veeam.