512e Drives Not Supported?

Availability for the Always-On Enterprise

Re: 512e Drives Not Supported?

Veeam Logoby brainerdmobil » Tue Feb 21, 2017 3:54 pm

mikame wrote:just a side note, please consider the latest problems with Synology devices that involves Intel Atom C2xxx series bug. On top of that many Synology DS1815+ devices have had PSU problems too, that is a different device that you mentioned. I googled QNAP and problems, seems these lower end NAS devices are not that repliable, at leats that's the conclusion I came, so I'll avoid those from now on.

Thanks. I saw that as well during my research and ended up going with the RS3617RPxs. That model uses a Xeon CPU and has redundant power supplies.
brainerdmobil
Novice
 
Posts: 9
Liked: never
Joined: Mon Feb 13, 2017 4:41 pm
Full Name: Mike

Re: 512e Drives Not Supported?

Veeam Logoby brainerdmobil » Tue Feb 21, 2017 4:05 pm

blithespirit wrote:Synology NAS has two options for iSCSI, normal block from disk RAID or iSCSI over volumes, over volumes offers more speed and advanced features. It's much faster, if you choose to use a Synology then use this. In an 8 disk NAS you should have 4 Ethernet ports, bond them to one virtual IP

Are you talking about LACP? I understand how to configure this at the NAS and network switch, but I'm not sure how this is configured in VMWare. How do I aggregate multiple NIC's and pass them through to the guest OS? I've been researching this configuration, but everything I find talks about adding an iSCSI data-store to the host. It's my understanding that the preferred method is attaching iSCSI directly to the Veeam VM via iSCSI initiator, but then I cant pass an aggregated link. Any help with this configuration would be greatly appreciated!
brainerdmobil
Novice
 
Posts: 9
Liked: never
Joined: Mon Feb 13, 2017 4:41 pm
Full Name: Mike

Re: 512e Drives Not Supported?

Veeam Logoby Gostev » Mon Mar 06, 2017 3:56 pm

YouGotServered wrote:On another note, one of my co-workers suggested that using iSCSI in regards to a VEEAM repository was hurting performance in that it was essentially doubling network traffic - the data goes from the backup source, to the backup server, which then shoots it off to the iSCSI device, whereas apparently if you just tell VEEAM to send it straight to a network location / NFS share, the data goes straight from the source to the device, thus halving the network utilization.

You could always mount iSCSI LUN directly to the backup proxy, and then the data will also go straight from the source to the storage device.
Gostev
Veeam Software
 
Posts: 21047
Liked: 2266 times
Joined: Sun Jan 01, 2006 1:01 am
Full Name: Anton Gostev

Previous

Return to Veeam Backup & Replication



Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Bing [Bot], Google [Bot], NCCUIT, ss-12 and 27 guests