So I just saw the announcement of the release of Policy Manager 6.6 for ESRS and I can't believe that redundant deployments are still not an option. This has been a huge miss for years now and with the exception to a small reference to it "coming sometime later" it isn't there.
Yes, there have been lots of things that needed tweaking, but I feel that this is a massive miss by the product development team. We were told a few years ago at EMC World that the ESRS Product Managers heard our voices when we talked about this issue. I'm waiting to see the results!
Hello Alan; ;, I am part of the ESRS Product team , and will consult with my team members iwho are SMEs in regards to the Policy manager , I will fortward your statement If needed please feel free to email me and any additional statements to Calvin.Buckley@emc.com, and I will present this to the appropiate engineer, thank You
It looks like you were hoping to see a “high availability” option for the Policy Manager with this release – similar to the H.A. option that we provide for Gateway servers. You are absolutely correct, this is a feature that is on the roadmap for future development. While we believe that full H.A. capabilities present a significant set of challenges for our development teams, we are working to incorporate a “near H.A.” capability in to a future release. Since we haven’t released new Policy Manager code in some time, we didn’t want to delay the v6.6 release any longer. One of our biggest challenges is the significant upgrade that would be required for current ESRS code in order to maintain compatibility with an H.A. / near H.A. Policy Manager capability.
Thanks for your feedback and patience – please stay tuned!
That's honestly more info than I've heard on the question for a few years now. Yes, what I'm looking for is the same HA type of functionality that is already in the Gateway. Today's process that has been around for years to manually back up data on a primary, then restore it on a secondary regularly to make sure the secondary COULD take over if it had to... and then manually reconfiguring the Gateways to repoint them to a secondary... it really isn't a usable solution in a production environment.
Even if we could get simplification of changing the Gateways to a secondary and some more automated way of getting the data synched up would be a huge step forward. It just feels that absolutely nothing has happened on this. I'm frustrated, but I'll wait and see. I just won't hold my breath.