Discussions specific to the VMware vSphere hypervisor
Post Reply
jjules
Novice
Posts: 8
Liked: never
Joined: Jun 07, 2011 10:06 am
Full Name: jjules
Contact:

Requirement for storage-based snapshots

Post by jjules » Jun 23, 2015 10:57 am

Hi all,
we would like to take advantage of the new NetApp integration for storage-based snapshots and we understand a physical server running the proxy role with a FC HBA adapter is required.
However, a Veeam rep visited us and said that a simple VM running the proxy role would be also good (provided all of the FC datastores are visible to this VM).
Can you confirm this?
Thanks.

foggy
Veeam Software
Posts: 18239
Liked: 1556 times
Joined: Jul 11, 2011 10:22 am
Full Name: Alexander Fogelson
Contact:

Re: Requirement for storage-based snapshots

Post by foggy » Jun 23, 2015 11:16 am

Generally, virtual server can serve as a proxy for storage snapshots, provided everything is configured correctly, however not in case of FC.

jjules
Novice
Posts: 8
Liked: never
Joined: Jun 07, 2011 10:06 am
Full Name: jjules
Contact:

Re: Requirement for storage-based snapshots

Post by jjules » Jun 23, 2015 12:28 pm

Yes, that's the section I was referring to.
He said that was correct but a VM can also be a proxy for storage-based snapshots (in a FC environment).
Thanks.

dellock6
Veeam Software
Posts: 5732
Liked: 1622 times
Joined: Jul 26, 2009 3:39 pm
Full Name: Luca Dell'Oca
Location: Varese, Italy
Contact:

Re: Requirement for storage-based snapshots

Post by dellock6 » Jun 23, 2015 1:00 pm

Sorry to disagree with a colleague, but no.
Think about this: a veeam proxy, in order to work in DirectSAN/Storage Snapshot mode, needs to be connected to the storage fabric in the same way as an ESXi server is. So, with FC, also the proxy needs to have an FC connection. I don't see how a virtual machine can have an FC connection, and if the answer is "NPIV", well I'd stay far away from that solution, is not something you want to do. Go physical.
Luca Dell'Oca
Principal EMEA Cloud Architect @ Veeam Software

@dellock6
https://www.virtualtothecore.com/
vExpert 2011 -> 2019
Veeam VMCE #1

Vitaliy S.
Product Manager
Posts: 22965
Liked: 1555 times
Joined: Mar 30, 2009 9:13 am
Full Name: Vitaliy Safarov
Contact:

Re: Requirement for storage-based snapshots

Post by Vitaliy S. » Jun 23, 2015 1:07 pm

Luca, as far as I remember you can use passthrough for the FC adapter, but I agree that it makes little sense to do that for a VM.

Jjules, is there any particular use case on why you would like to have this configuration?

dellock6
Veeam Software
Posts: 5732
Liked: 1622 times
Joined: Jul 26, 2009 3:39 pm
Full Name: Luca Dell'Oca
Location: Varese, Italy
Contact:

Re: Requirement for storage-based snapshots

Post by dellock6 » Jun 23, 2015 1:10 pm

NPIV is exactly the pass-through, but it makes NO sense. You want to do direct connections to the storage to avoid any additional layer created by the hypervisor, so why you would go again back into it??? ;)
Luca Dell'Oca
Principal EMEA Cloud Architect @ Veeam Software

@dellock6
https://www.virtualtothecore.com/
vExpert 2011 -> 2019
Veeam VMCE #1

jjules
Novice
Posts: 8
Liked: never
Joined: Jun 07, 2011 10:06 am
Full Name: jjules
Contact:

Re: Requirement for storage-based snapshots

Post by jjules » Jun 23, 2015 1:26 pm

Thanks for your comments.
He didn't mention NPIV but I too assume it would be the only way to achieve this... physical is okay to us, it would be the most consistent way to access the NetApp SAN storage.

rennerstefan
Service Provider
Posts: 160
Liked: 32 times
Joined: Jan 22, 2015 2:39 pm
Full Name: Stefan Renner
Contact:

Re: Requirement for storage-based snapshots

Post by rennerstefan » Jun 24, 2015 6:24 pm

Agree with my colleagues. Using VMware NPIV to bring your data from the SnapShot backup with BfSS to your virtual proxy and then again out to a repository don't make sence in terms of data flow. In your case the best way is, as already mentioned, using a phyisical proxy for direct FC SAN access.
Stefan Renner
Solution Architect, Bechtle

VMware vExpert, VCP
NetApp United Member, NCIE & NCDA, Cisco Champion
Microsoft MCP, Veeam VMCA

ncolt
Enthusiast
Posts: 32
Liked: 4 times
Joined: Apr 13, 2012 3:51 pm
Full Name: Neil Colthorpe
Contact:

Re: Requirement for storage-based snapshots

Post by ncolt » Jun 25, 2015 12:10 pm

Hi, we had exactly the same questions which were answered by this thread.

With regards to securing the datastores now connected to the Windows proxy, am I right in saying you just have to worry about not initializing the datastores in Disk Management as Veeam will already have set "automount disable"?

foggy
Veeam Software
Posts: 18239
Liked: 1556 times
Joined: Jul 11, 2011 10:22 am
Full Name: Alexander Fogelson
Contact:

Re: Requirement for storage-based snapshots

Post by foggy » Jun 25, 2015 12:15 pm

Veeam B&R actually sets SAN policy to "Offline All" to prevent disks initialization.

ncolt
Enthusiast
Posts: 32
Liked: 4 times
Joined: Apr 13, 2012 3:51 pm
Full Name: Neil Colthorpe
Contact:

Re: Requirement for storage-based snapshots

Post by ncolt » Jun 25, 2015 12:27 pm

My 2012 R2 Veeam repository says "offline shared", should I set it to "offline all" then?

ncolt
Enthusiast
Posts: 32
Liked: 4 times
Joined: Apr 13, 2012 3:51 pm
Full Name: Neil Colthorpe
Contact:

Re: Requirement for storage-based snapshots

Post by ncolt » Jun 25, 2015 12:29 pm

I guess when i configure it as a proxy as well it will change that to offline all?

Vitaliy S.
Product Manager
Posts: 22965
Liked: 1555 times
Joined: Mar 30, 2009 9:13 am
Full Name: Vitaliy Safarov
Contact:

Re: Requirement for storage-based snapshots

Post by Vitaliy S. » Jun 25, 2015 1:05 pm

When you install proxy server role, everything should be done for you.

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Google [Bot] and 8 guests