[V13] Question regarding Veeam B&R 13.x

[Mildur]

Haha, some test I did a few months ago

Best,
Fabian

[Didi7]

Ok, this week we finally upgraded our VSA-/VIA-based production environment to v13.1.1.18 and some questions arise know ...

Let's start with the first ones. We read that VIA-based Proxies no longer need a second disk. We started using VSA and VIA from the beginning, so all Proxies now still have 2x 120GB HDD space.

What is the size of new VIA-based Proxies? Is it still 120GB HDD space?

And with all Veeam VIA based Proxies on v13.1.1.18 now ... is it possible to simply delete the second disk of each Proxy and boot the system or is this not a good idea and do we have to re-install each VIA Proxy in order to get rid of the second not used disk?

P.S.: Currently we have 24 VIA-based Proxies

(I think it's needless to say, that we won't touch our 13 VIA-based WAN-accelerators and 11 VIA-based Hardened Repositories of course )

[Didi7]

Today we added 2 additional WAN Accelerators to the environment and we noticed that the list of servers, when choosing one machine, is not alphabetically ordered. If you have a lot of machines, like we have (52) then it gets hard to navigate

Same applies to Network Throttling Rules and the order of Objects in BackupCopy-jobs and maybe more (that's all related to the full GUI management environment).

Maybe that can be fixed as well in one of the next releases or patches!

Regards,
Didi7

[Mildur]

Hi Didi7,

Please tell us first which UI you are referring to.
Is it the Windows-based console or the Web UI?

If I remember correctly, we fixed this in the Windows-based console once.

Best,
Fabian

[Didi7]

Hi Fabian,

we are referring to the Windows-based UI v13.1.1.18, which got a tiny update a couple of days ago.

We correct the list as follows ...

* New Network Throttling entries not alphabetically added, instead at the end
* Creating a new WAN Accelerator and choosing from the list of servers => not alphabetically ordered

Looks fixed now ...

* The list of 'Objects to process' in a BackupCopy job looks fixed now. Ordering them the way you would like them and even see the right ordering in the summary screen was no guarantee it is really fixed, when you open it again. For the time being it looks fixed now.

Should we find more issues, we will report here.

Thank you.

[Mildur]

Hi Didi7,

Thanks for confirming that it is now sorted alphabetically.

Regarding reporting findings in the Windows console: it is unlikely that the Windows console will receive further improvements, as our focus is now 100% on the Web UI.

You can still report small usability items like this, but I would not expect them to be implemented unless they are considered technical bugs. But technical Bugs should be reported through a support case rather than via the forum. We won't be able to investigate here.

Best,
Fabian