One repository server serving multiple proxies

[pkelly_sts]

(I couldn't think of suitable search terms to narrow down a search for existing answer due to so many hits for included terms so apologies if the answer is there somewhere already)

I have two sites that I want to back-up to a DR site now (but am waiting patiently for v7!). One site ("Large") has 100mb P2P link to DR site, the other ("Small") has a 10mb MPLS link.

Each of the two sites currently has a "standalone" install of B&R, i.e. we don't currently have a centralised B&R install. The DR site also has a 3rd install of B&R that will ultimately protect a few VMs that also run there locally.

What I would like to do is restrict each site to only allow a single backup at a time from that site to the DR site, but I want to allow the proxy at the DR site to "receive" a single job from each site concurrently, i.e. 2 jobs incoming, as they both come in over separate lines.

Where can I configure this? At the "Large" site I can configure the "Max concurrent tasks" on the proxy based at the DR site, but if I add that DR server as a proxy for the "Small" site, and configure a similar setting, will they conflict with each other?

I wish I could wait until v7 but I have to run a DR test in August and will need the local backups seeded in the meantime to create the replicas on which I'm basing the DR plan.

As always, happy to receive pointers to existing info if it's there...

Regards,

Paul

[veremin]

Hi, Paul.

From my perspective, the best option you have is to set DR VB&R installation to be responsible for all remote jobs and, meanwhile, leave the other two as local backup solution. Not only will this scenario provide much better management options, but also it will guarantee that should any disaster happen (e.g. ,production site goes down), restoration activity can be performed by this server smoothly.

Moreover, such design will allow you to control efficiently number of concurrent tasks, etc.

Also, it might be worth deploying Enterprise Manager in order to have necessary visibility across three servers.

Thanks.

[pkelly_sts]

I considered that solution, but from what I understand of the licensing model, the DR B&R server would effectively require double the licensing? i.e. the site-local B&R servers require enough CPU licenses to cover the local hosts for local backups, & the DR site would ALSO require licenses to cover those (effectively) remote hosts for backups would it not? I know replication doesn't require destination hosts to be licensed but in our case all hosts are technically licensed anyway.

The licenses we have are:
HQ - 5 hosts, 10 x Ent licenses
Small site - 3 hosts, 6 x Ent licenses
DR site - 3 hosts, 6 x Ent licenses

I considered just installing a single B&R server at the DR site, combinging all licenses into one, then spreading out proxies & repositories where required but I found a reason not to and can't for the life of me think what it was right now :-/

I also intalled Enterprise Manager at DR site expecting to add all 3 B&R servers to it but when I added the first 2 & played with it it was complaining that the 6 cpu license I added (i.e. the DR site license) wasn't enough to cover all the hosts. Assumed I couldn't add multiple licenses (one from each site) but thinking about it maybe it's not like the B&R licensing and will actually allow installing of multiple licenses?

Paul

[chrisdearden]

As long as all of your licences are in current support , you can merge them at the licence management portal - you can then install that into enterprise manager.

[veremin]

I also tend to think that merging licences and passing resulted file later to EM would be the best idea. The description of manual merging procedure can be found here.

Thanks.

[pkelly_sts]

Hmm, interesting. Does that mean that you can legitimately continue to use the non-merged licenses for each of the B&R servers as well or should you stop using the individual license "packages"?

On the same vein, would it be considered acceptable to merge the licenses as suggested, but also install that merged license onto /each/ of the 3 B&R servers we have? Ultimately all of the hosts/cpus are licensed anyway, but I do understand that this potentially wouldn't be acceptable.

[foggy]

Enterprise Manager will push out the license to all connected backup servers, so it will override individual licenses.

[pkelly_sts]

Ohhh, hang on a minute. So, if I were to merge all licenses into one, install that into Enterprise manager, then *enterprise manager* manages the B&R licenses from there onwards so, as long as the *total* number of sockets visible to Enterprise manager matches the total number of socket licenses it has installed, then you can pretty much deploy as many B&R servers as you like?

If so, then that changes things significantly!

I didn't realise that EM was effectively also a licensing manager!

[foggy]

I didn't realise that EM was effectively also a licensing manager!

Yes, it actually is.

[pkelly_sts]

Right, looks like I'm revisiting our backup architecture again then!

VERY many thanks for the prompt responses!