Is there any reason why SAN HQ cannot be installed on the same servers that is also a vcentre? I am unable to find any user experiences or Best Practice that covers this topic.
Joerg, Can you elaborate why it is not good to have both SAN HQ and vCentre on the same server? We have virtual private environments for each of our client, each with their resource pool. If they now need a additional vm just for SAN HQ, then I think they will not be happy that they will have less resource available. Also, I dont understand your statement "...future of vCenter is the Appliance....".
SANHQ is listing on Port 514 because an EQL Group sends Syslog messages to SANHQ.
vSphere vCenter comes with a optional Syslog Server because ESXi may not have enough capacity for storing logs over a longer time periods and depending on your deployment model its using stateless installation. So a Syslog server for ESXi is mandatory.
So you have a port conflict. Check the installation manuals of needed TCP/UDP Ports and see if you find more conflicting ports. Also if there is none that doesnt mean that the next version of Product Foo needs more ports because of new features.
Installation vCenter Server on Windows is "old school" and the VCSA will be the feature. It also consumes less resourses (on paper). Minimum memory requirement for a 5.5 Windows vCenter is 12GB without the database. The VCSA is configurated with 8GB.
MD Storage Manager uses a Jetty based Webserver which conflicts with the VMware Update Manager. You can change the Port during istallation but also some manual edit in *.xml is needed. Thinking about when you update the MDSM is a pain in the ass.
I've seen the PowerVault MD Storage Manager installed on a windows vcenter before, and it did indeed conflict with the ports that vcenter uses, so I'd also say don't.
trigram
14 Posts
923
0
Posted December 8th, 2014 08:00
Joerg, Can you elaborate why it is not good to have both SAN HQ and vCentre on the same server? We have virtual private environments for each of our client, each with their resource pool. If they now need a additional vm just for SAN HQ, then I think they will not be happy that they will have less resource available. Also, I dont understand your statement "...future of vCenter is the Appliance....".
Thanks