1. OCAU Merchandise now available! Check out our 20th Anniversary Mugs, Classic Logo Shirts and much more! Discussion here.
    Dismiss Notice

OCAU VMware Virtualisation Group!

Discussion in 'Business & Enterprise Computing' started by NIP007, Apr 16, 2008.

  1. Falkor

    Falkor Member

    Joined:
    Jun 27, 2001
    Messages:
    4,054
    Location:
    Sydney
    You should look at Veamm or vRanger if you want something cheaper than Symantec.

    They are both widely used and excellent backup solutions for VMWare, they work similar to VMDR as in they backup straight to disk. They store their data as straight VMDK as well IIRC rather than VMDR's horrible store.
     
  2. NSanity

    NSanity Member

    Joined:
    Mar 11, 2002
    Messages:
    17,984
    Location:
    Canberra
  3. Nyarghnia

    Nyarghnia (Taking a Break)

    Joined:
    Aug 5, 2008
    Messages:
    1,274
    Yeah i'm getting quotes for it now, haven't received them yet.

    -NyarghNia
     
  4. Jimoin

    Jimoin Member

    Joined:
    Jul 26, 2002
    Messages:
    579
    Location:
    Melbourne
    Who told you that VMDR was ever going to be a part of your DR/Backup solution?

    We're going to be using Veeam Backup & Recovery.

    I know you are familiar with shadowprotect, and come version 5 it will basically work the same as that.

    At the moment Veeam does a reverse incremental, i.e. the last snapshot is a virtual full, it's the largest file and makes nightlys to tape effectively a full, which is a pain in the ass.

    Come version 5, you'll have the option of normal incrementals or reverse incrementals in the backup job, or, as we'll be doing - run 2 jobs to separate repositories.

    1 - reverse incremental for light DR/file recovery operations.

    2 - normal incremental for tape/offsite storage & monthly archiving.

    And yeah, totally agree with the Symantec pricing, total joke, way over the top, having to license 4000 different components is ridiculous too.
     
  5. elvis

    elvis Old school old fool

    Joined:
    Jun 27, 2001
    Messages:
    41,701
    Location:
    Brisbane
    I see this time and time again.

    People use ESXi on a small scale for testing, like it, roll it out large scale and it all falls over (I speak from rather direct experience there too).

    VMWare just doesn't scale to large enterprise, period. Nice for small sites, crap for anything of a reasonable scale/size.
     
  6. NSanity

    NSanity Member

    Joined:
    Mar 11, 2002
    Messages:
    17,984
    Location:
    Canberra
    Try it first - just to make sure it does what you want.

    We grabbed our licenses from Data 3. $681+gst/cpu w/ 36 months support.

    Was dealing with Justin Moss - pm if you need contact details.
     
  7. Gecko

    Gecko Member

    Joined:
    Jul 3, 2004
    Messages:
    2,715
    Location:
    Sydney
    Hand up as another place that has a few ESXi boxes around.

    Having all sorts of growing pains with them, as others above have said, great for really small setups, the moment you grow though you have issues (in our scenario, we've gone from 2 to 30+ servers in about 2 years - should give an idea of the growth rate here :) )

    Biggest problem we have is the absolutely terrible IOPS, which is going from bearable to unacceptable as the loads increase.

    Looking in other directions as we speak, will fire up a RHEL box and have a play around.
     
  8. lavi

    lavi Member

    Joined:
    Dec 20, 2002
    Messages:
    4,004
    Location:
    Brisbane
    dude ... the way i got around all the vmwarre bullshit when it comes to backing everything up is very simple

    i wrote a script that runs on a cron job every x hours or whatever your backup interval is

    this script runs on every esx host this script checks for a config file on shared storage from other hosts then goes on to manually snapshot and backup each vm while constantly checking if any vm's have moved from one esx host to another, it backs every vm onto a NAS from there symantec BE puts it to tape

    now yes it's very very rudimentary and agricultural but has not failed yet and many vm's were restored, fuck their agents and shit, they can keep it and showe them up their asses

    you can also write this in windows if you want to use the vmware backup that comes with it, it's what the other backup agens use anyway but i found if i go one step closer i'm on the ESX host and doing work from there

    yup the console is not as fast to do things but fuck it, it works and does not fail and you can put checks in to your hearts content
     
  9. Gecko

    Gecko Member

    Joined:
    Jul 3, 2004
    Messages:
    2,715
    Location:
    Sydney
    Any hope of you posting up the appropriate script(s) here?
     
  10. NSanity

    NSanity Member

    Joined:
    Mar 11, 2002
    Messages:
    17,984
    Location:
    Canberra
    What's you're solution given that 4.1 is the last version of ESX?

    ESXi is the future, VMWare decreed it so.

    What's your Storage?
     
  11. ewok85

    ewok85 Member

    Joined:
    Jul 4, 2002
    Messages:
    8,104
    Location:
    Tokyo, Japan
    I've been updating our ESXi boxes using the remote CLI - one box a night :D

    I'm always impressed with how well most things work with VMware stuff. Pity about the prices though.
     
  12. lavi

    lavi Member

    Joined:
    Dec 20, 2002
    Messages:
    4,004
    Location:
    Brisbane
    sorry still on 3.5, 4 was terrible in testing and 4.1 have not had time to go and test but might not be such a big improvement from 4.0

    the idea behind it is the same ... get a list of vm's running, snapshot them one by one and move the vmdk and relevant files to NAS, crc check the bakced up vmdk with current if you want to, remove snapshot, do some checking and move on to the next, check if it's still on the same host as it was before (sometimes they move around in about an hour or whatever your vm takes to backup) and you get the drift

    i don't see how version 4.1 is any different

    the idea behind it was that every other "Agent" does something similar with a pretty interface and an astronomical price tag, some are not expensive per se but expensive for what it is .... 20 hours of programming = 15k ?

    ESXi is the future because that would stop me and hundreds of people like me, they are making no money in backing up! you can use windows backup for all you care which is reliable and free, also vmware is trying to put everything on the one box, basically pull all the features of esx away from it and leave a dog bone esxi which is probably OK but takes away your ability to do extra things

    IOPS are trrible with vmware full stop, compared to xen at least, from my testing

    if you run 30vms on a esxi host with local storage then yes you trully went over the limit of your IO because god forbid you have to power them all at once...it will crawl

    you also have to understand how scsi works and how the queue on scsi works ... you have so much queueing per LUN so if you have 30 vm's on one LUN then that queue is for 30vm's ... not so good now is it?

    with storage you have to do some thinking behind it ... split your luns accordingly and make sure things like exchange and sql go on the right LUN, of course we can all come in here and start being experts but the best thing is to sit down with a pen and paper and design your storage rather than fire up a web browser and do the cowboy thing and play god in OnTap or Flare only to see possibly hundreds of thousands of storage perform worse than your average leacher PC

    i did some thest only a few years back, DL380 G5 with 8 drives 4 drives in raid10 4 drives in raid5 running esxi and was OK with about 15 vms then did the same thing with esx 2.5 and my god did 2.5 fly! we put some more vm's and got to about 22 vms inc a TS box with 20 users on it and was fine.

    what i have learned is that ESX got a bit of bloat ware in it lately as it matured and from being lean and mean it ends up doing all this ghizmo's and all this features takes the speed away, i have not tried 4.1 but i honestly expect it to be slower than 3.5

    On local storage or DAS you have to be mental to go over 10 VM's per esx box unless they do fuck all, the servers simply do not have the capacity for hard disk I/O, you will proper storage

    atm deploying some ibm boxen with 64gb ram and ibm san back end, 3x of these boxen are as powerfull as 2x blade centers ... go figure! and use less power

    so yeah if you think ESXi is shit and runs slow can you post your storage config and what vm's you're running? can you get some snmp stuff out of it and graph it? so you have something to look at and better understand why it's slowing down before you blame one thing or another?
     
  13. Nyarghnia

    Nyarghnia (Taking a Break)

    Joined:
    Aug 5, 2008
    Messages:
    1,274
    That name is familiar.. i've dealt with Data 3 recently on a different matter (anti Virus etc), lemme check my contacts list.

    As to previous poster.. the backp solution proposed to me by the solutions architect was VMDR, with the idea that the VMDR stuff would then be dumped to tape by a basic tape backup solution, which is fine for me.

    Which seems on the face of it a perfectly laudable idea, but its not gone that smoothly i'm affraid, They claim they've fixed VMDR but it'll take a bit of convincing.

    Definately not going to even think about using VMWare for core transactional systems until I'm comfortable with server and data recovery.

    -NyarghNia
     
  14. elvis

    elvis Old school old fool

    Joined:
    Jun 27, 2001
    Messages:
    41,701
    Location:
    Brisbane
    Red Hat will happily give you resources to assist with your testing. Phone your account manager (and if you don't have one, phone APAC head office and ask for one) and tell them what you're doing. They'll give you plenty of time and tips to make your life easier.

    I've found Red Hat to consistently be one of the best "hands on" vendors around.
     
  15. NSanity

    NSanity Member

    Joined:
    Mar 11, 2002
    Messages:
    17,984
    Location:
    Canberra
    4 and 4.1 has *huge* io improvements over 3.5... At least they claimed (and when we moved our RHEL/Oracle/Cobol ERP system over, noticed better performance - even on a shitty Dell MD3000i san...)

    vRanger's $681/cpu for 3 years is more than palatable.


    3, max, per 15k drive drive (not including parity/mirror) imo.
     
  16. lavi

    lavi Member

    Joined:
    Dec 20, 2002
    Messages:
    4,004
    Location:
    Brisbane
    strangely .net apps and other stuff works better on 3.5, teste over a full month and on 4.0 it almost came down to standing still, same ibm hardware, didnt bother with 4.1 because never had the time but mid next year refresh is coming, currently 180 vms on 3 servers with 1 spare server in there but i think it's still turned off as everything is peachy, EMC Clariion back end in this case which i think will stay

    so the backend storage was the same, same LUNS and everything heck even same switch port, same server from IBM they were in box unused as we had 8 but only used 4 well we used 3 with 1 as a cold spare as we din't wanna pay for a license when we knew it was not needed, and in my case the 3.5 was much faster well over 1 moth, the only thing that really slows it doen is presentation server 4.5 but that's moving forward so more performance will be on the way
     
    Last edited: Oct 8, 2010
  17. s4mmy

    s4mmy Member

    Joined:
    May 20, 2004
    Messages:
    2,200
    Location:
    Melbourne
    Hyper-V! :p
     
  18. elvis

    elvis Old school old fool

    Joined:
    Jun 27, 2001
    Messages:
    41,701
    Location:
    Brisbane
    I would have gone with "Not VMWare", but seeing as Hyper-V is a subset of that, then good enough. :)
     
  19. s4mmy

    s4mmy Member

    Joined:
    May 20, 2004
    Messages:
    2,200
    Location:
    Melbourne
    Well when you think of it what are your options?

    VMware
    Hyper-V
    Sun V-Box
     
  20. elvis

    elvis Old school old fool

    Joined:
    Jun 27, 2001
    Messages:
    41,701
    Location:
    Brisbane
    Red Hat Enterprise Virtualisation (based on open source KVM)
    Citrix XenServer (based on open source Xen)

    Both are available from multiple vendors with or without support.
     

Share This Page

Advertisement: