Unsolved
This post is more than 5 years old
5 Practitioner
•
274.2K Posts
0
2489
Hyper-V Integration with VNX and Cluster enabler (against NTAP MC)
Specialists,
I'm competing against NTAP Metro-Cluster with VNX 5300 and MirrorView.
As I couldn't find any best prcticies and argument against this and pro our Solution can you please help me in this cae:
Questions:
- Does MV-CE and/or RP-CE support Hyper-V Dual Site integration and is there any Whitepaper or Design Paper ?
- Is there any argument against NTAP Metro-Cluster vs. EMC DR-Solution (especially like Split Brain risk in Metro-Cluster) ?
- how about SRM like features and integration in Hyper-V with VNX and Unisphere (will VSI help me on that?)
- will ESI be supported in DUal Site Hyper-V Scenarios?
- What are the best practicies to deliver in the concept for 2 SItes for such customer?
Thanks in advamce for your help,
Martin.
Anonymous
5 Practitioner
5 Practitioner
•
274.2K Posts
0
November 16th, 2011 04:00
Hi,
I guess there was a solution called SANbolic for Hyper-V over VPLEX metro environment.which makes it active-active both sites
Thx
Tx1_f906d5
21 Posts
0
November 16th, 2011 05:00
For the most part, when you use something like Cluster Enabler with some of the traditional Block Level replication technologies like MirrorView, RecoverPoint and SRDF, the solution is somewhat limited. These block level replications solutions implement a unidirectional update process for any given LUN. This means that whatever is reading, and more importantly *writing* to that LUN can only be in one of the locations ... typically the "Production" site. If the technology can support replication processes operating in both directions (again, a single LUN can only be going in one direction, but other LUNs used by different applications could be transferring data in the reverse direction) - then you could assume to have multiple Active sites. But any given application could only be "active" in one site.
If you put VPLEX into the mix, you now have federated data devices, and a single LUN can be read/write in BOTH sites. For solutions like Hyper-V using Windows Server 2008 R2 Cluster Shared Volumes, when a customer wants to be able to be Active/Active, and want to be able to do Live Migrations from site to site, then VPLEX is a great solution. While the LUNs will be active/active, Windows Server 2008 R2 will manage the locking for the LUN, and any given VM will only be active in a single site, on the Node that it is running on. So now, instead of a LUN being replicated in one direction, and possibly other LUNs being replicated in the other direction .. this is happening at the FILE level. Block changes for a given VHD will occur on one site, and be replicated to the other site. But because you can have multiple VHDs on a Cluster Shared Volume, this is happening equally on the two sites.
duckew
126 Posts
0
November 21st, 2011 06:00
Martin,
Questions:
- Does MV-CE and/or RP-CE support Hyper-V Dual Site integration and is there any Whitepaper or Design Paper ?
Bill>>> RP/CE and MV/CE is not supported with Hyper-V...you might want to submit a RPQ for this
- Is there any argument against NTAP Metro-Cluster vs. EMC DR-Solution (especially like Split Brain risk in Metro-Cluster) ?
Bill>>> you will need to engage Studio E. you can contact them if you need any further information(https://studioe.emc.com/login.php?page=/members/index.php)
I found this white paper that might help you with you Vplex questions
This white paper describes the design, deployment, and validation of a virtualized application environment incorporating Microsoft Windows 2008 R2 with Hyper-V, SAP ERP 6.0 EHP4, Microsoft SharePoint 2010, and Oracle Database 11gR2 on virtualized EMC VNX series and EMC Symmetrix VMAX storage presented by EMC VPLEX Geo.
http://powerlink.emc.com/km/live1/en_US/Offering_Technical/White_Paper/h8214-application-mobility-vplex-geo-wp.pdf?mtcs=ZXZlbnRUeXBlPUttQ2xpY2tDb250ZW50RXZlbnQsZG9jdW1lbnRJZD0wOTAxNDA2NjgwNWM4NGVlLGRvY3VtZW50VHlwZT1wZGYsbmF2ZU5vZGU9MGIwMTQwNjY4MDRkYTIyOF9Hcmlk
Tx1_f906d5
21 Posts
0
November 21st, 2011 06:00
Let's be a little careful with a "not supported" statement.
Hyper-V is supported as an application resource within a Cluster Enabler environment. Which has some limitations is the implementation of Cluster Shared Volumes with certain implementations of Cluster Enabler. Additionally, there are some functions, such as Live Migrations, that may be restricted due to the timing requirements.
But if you were to implement Hyper-V as a resource within a Cluster Enabler, and didn't need CSVs and/or LIve Migrations, then you could have a D/R implementation.
I would point out that CSVs and Live Migrations are supported in the latest versions of SRDF/CE ... the Release Notes and Product Guide provide information on this. But note that this is SRDF, and this may not apply to RP or MV implementations.
reseach
225 Posts
0
February 21st, 2012 01:00
Martin,
Some of my thoughts for your consideration.
From user case respective, NTAP Metro Cluster is different with data replication solution, like RDF, MV, etc. it uses high-speed link to stretch device across two sites in close distance. Front-end host from two site see one storage, when site or host fail-over, storage part is still.
Therefore, @ the angle of competitive, VPLEX might be a good player for case.
Thanks,
Eddy