If you want to backup the snapshots made on your filer volume, you can use ndmp to backup to tape or use snapvault to transfer the snapshots to a secondary filer (or snapmirror if you like).

Tom

________________________________

From: owner-toasters@mathworks.com [mailto:owner-toasters@mathworks.com] On Behalf Of Nils Vogels Sent: dinsdag 4 maart 2008 1:25 To: Amateur-FASadmin Cc: toasters@mathworks.com Subject: Re: VMware - snap - backup

Hi!

On Tue, Mar 4, 2008 at 12:40 AM, Amateur-FASadmin jesper@harderconsult.dk wrote:

- Question is: How do I copy/backup out my Snaps on the filer ? I have an external Windows Server and software iSCSI. License is only iSCSI on the filer.

You can use NDMP to redirect the snapshot to a backupstream over the the network, or directly to tape, attached to the filer using NDMP as well.

Most backup implementations support NDMP, so that shouldn't be that big of a problem.

Greets,

Nils

Right now I have 2 ESX servers _(no VC) and a filer with 2 shelves - 1 attached to the A-controller and 1 to B. Servers attaching with hardware iSCSI.

Current backups are done in the box with Backup Exec. But I was thinking if I could do this more smart with the filers snap functions.

So I was looking at LUNS with VMFS - RDM and each machine in it's own VOL.

What are NDMP?

But maybe I will go the VCB way instead. Just seemed nice and fast to do the snaps on the filer.

Regards Jesper

Jack Lyons wrote:

How are your esx servers attaching to the storage. How are you backing up the rest of the filer or is it all just ISCSI for ESX?

Amateur-FASadmin wrote:

...

Dear group.

I have some scripting working now - 1- Snap all VM machines on ESX 2- Snap VOL on filer 3- delete snaps on ESX

• Question is: How do I copy/backup out my Snaps on the filer ?

I have an external Windows Server and software iSCSI.

License is only iSCSI on the filer.

Thanks - Jesper Harder

---

-I have a high Google IQ

----- -I have a high Google IQ

Thanks! My view are turning towards the VBC soloution. I'll probally have som questions on that as well.

GREAT group here - Always fast and good answers.

Regards Jesper Harder

Jedan58 wrote:

As I told you in another mail your environment make me more persuaded that the best thing you could do is to use VCB.

NDMP stands for Network Data Management Protocol, a special subset to drive backup/restore images directly from storage appliance to tape drives, VTL/VDL and so on. Normally is an option you've to pay to get in your backup software but with Backup Exec you've an issue. The issue is that BE supports (and works) using NDMP only if the tapes are directly attached to the storage (in a single tier model) or to drive NDMP backup from a storage to another (in a 2 tier). If I suppose, you've the classical schema of "tapes" attached to the media server you can't use NDMP.

To use VCB first you need space somewhere to stage the data from ESX to the server where VCB proxy is installed. More space if you perform a file level backup (only for Windows guests!), less in case of image level (faster, only the vmdk(s) are transferred to the stage area and only the blocks really written! And faster for you push a big file to the tape, not a lot of smaller files...)

There's literature and the needed scripts for BE on the VMware site. As I wrote times ago practically you need the iSCSI initiator for Windows on your server to let the virtual driver of VCB "see" the VMFS LUNs, then VCB 'mount' this LUN somewhere on your C:\ or D:\ disks and the BE client backup it. VCB is the only that does not need to pause or stop the VM guests (you need to freeze them at least if you want to snap with NetApp) and to freeze 10 VMs can take up to 20/30 mins with no service for users.

With BE another (worst for you need to freeze or stop the VMs again) job i sto use RALUS installed on the Service Console (option to pay but cheaper). Then you can backup everything, VMFS volumes and their files...

-----Messaggio originale----- Da: owner-toasters@mathworks.com [mailto:owner-toasters@mathworks.com] Per conto di Amateur-FASadmin Inviato: martedì 4 marzo 2008 10.47 A: toasters@mathworks.com Oggetto: Re: VMware - snap - backup

Right now I have 2 ESX servers _(no VC) and a filer with 2 shelves - 1 attached to the A-controller and 1 to B. Servers attaching with hardware iSCSI.

Current backups are done in the box with Backup Exec. But I was thinking if I could do this more smart with the filers snap functions.

So I was looking at LUNS with VMFS - RDM and each machine in it's own VOL.

What are NDMP?

But maybe I will go the VCB way instead. Just seemed nice and fast to do the snaps on the filer.

Regards Jesper

Jack Lyons wrote:

...

How are your esx servers attaching to the storage. How are you backing up the rest of the filer or is it all just ISCSI for ESX?

Amateur-FASadmin wrote:

...

Dear group.

I have some scripting working now - 1- Snap all VM machines on ESX 2- Snap VOL on filer 3- delete snaps on ESX

• Question is: How do I copy/backup out my Snaps on the filer ?

I have an external Windows Server and software iSCSI.

License is only iSCSI on the filer.

Thanks - Jesper Harder

---

-I have a high Google IQ

---

-I have a high Google IQ

View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/VMware---snap---backup-tp15816945p15823694.html Sent from the Network Appliance - Toasters mailing list archive at Nabble.com.

----- -I have a high Google IQ

I have to correct you :) We did some tests with vcb and iscsi, it works fine, but vcb in general was not very convenient. And the other thing is that the iscsi implementation in esx is horrible. Use NFS to earn more flexibility and an even better performance.

That's the experience we've made.

-----Original Message----- From: owner-toasters@mathworks.com [mailto:owner-toasters@mathworks.com] On Behalf Of Nick Silkey Sent: Tuesday, March 04, 2008 1:17 PM To: toasters@mathworks.com Subject: Re: R: VMware - snap - backup

Milazzo Giacomo wrote:

As I told you in another mail your environment make me more persuaded that the best thing you could do is to use VCB.

VCB = VMWare Consolidated Backup?

AFAIK, it is not an option in an iSCSI environment[1] ... if this is not the case, do correct me as we are aggressively pursuing iSCSI on our 3020s as a prod means to store vmdks for ESX. :)

[1]: http://www.vmware.com/files/pdf/iSCSI_design_deploy.pdf

And I've to (re)correct you :-) NFS? Avoiding phylosophical discussion on performances, VMware itself states to use it just for ISO or templates... you perfectly know how much costs the NFS license! Terrible!!! iSCSI is free (bundle) and we've tested also on huge SATA disks...no issues.

Why do you said that iSCSI implementation is horrible? It's so easy to setup...

-----Messaggio originale----- Da: owner-toasters@mathworks.com [mailto:owner-toasters@mathworks.com] Per conto di Buerger, Andreas Inviato: martedì 4 marzo 2008 14.38 A: Nick Silkey; toasters@mathworks.com Oggetto: RE: R: VMware - snap - backup

I have to correct you :) We did some tests with vcb and iscsi, it works fine, but vcb in general was not very convenient. And the other thing is that the iscsi implementation in esx is horrible. Use NFS to earn more flexibility and an even better performance.

That's the experience we've made.

-----Original Message----- From: owner-toasters@mathworks.com [mailto:owner-toasters@mathworks.com] On Behalf Of Nick Silkey Sent: Tuesday, March 04, 2008 1:17 PM To: toasters@mathworks.com Subject: Re: R: VMware - snap - backup

Milazzo Giacomo wrote:

As I told you in another mail your environment make me more persuaded that the best thing you could do is to use VCB.

VCB = VMWare Consolidated Backup?

AFAIK, it is not an option in an iSCSI environment[1] ... if this is not the case, do correct me as we are aggressively pursuing iSCSI on our 3020s as a prod means to store vmdks for ESX. :)

[1]: http://www.vmware.com/files/pdf/iSCSI_design_deploy.pdf

Only to answer to your question.

I would be interested in the reason, why you have chosen iscsi instead

of nfs. Just because of the license costs?

The cost of license could be a reason, over all if you consider the tiering appliend on 3000 or 6000 family but the real reason is that we've a loto f environment where db with great I/O demand (Exchange with hundreds of mailboxes, Oracle, SQL with dozens of GB of db and so on...) installed on iSCSI SAN using only software initiator (such as the Microsoft) and with great user perception and benchmarked performance.

We also are aware that NFS on NetApp filer is really fast (think to Oracle, also RAC, on NFS!) but up to know we've used for VMware only in limited and little farm of ESX servers. The biggest problem on iSCSI (or F/C) is the oversizing (double) you've to let on volume for snapshot of VMFS stores, the restore that from a snapped LUN is not so easy (I spoke of Vizioncore or Tomato to add value to VM backup, but is another cost) and so on.

Anyway, for any 'transport' you choose to use you can be sure that on NetApp appliances VMware will perform always better than other storage.

PS) just as sample we've setup a VMware cluster on a filer without F/C switches, using a direct attach and letting igroup and lun masking act as switch :-)...this you can have with FAS only!

NetApp¹s TR3428, Storage best Practices for VMware, states to set the fractional reserve to 0%, so there is no overhead for a LUN.

Cheers,

Vaughn Stewart | Virtualization Evangelist

From: "Buerger, Andreas" andreas.buerger@wincor-nixdorf.com Date: Wed, 5 Mar 2008 10:05:45 +0100 To: Milazzo Giacomo G.Milazzo@sinergy.it, toasters@mathworks.com Subject: RE: R: VMware - snap - backup

Yes, I agree to your statement regarding iSCSI SAN. We've made the same experience, but not with the ESX iscsi solution.

The biggest problem on iSCSI (or F/C) is the oversizing (double) you've to let on volume for snapshot of VMFS stores, the restore that from a snapped LUN is not so easy (I

spoke

of Vizioncore or Tomato to add value to VM backup, but is another cost) and so on.

If I got it right, you've set fractional_reserve of the volume to 100%. You can decrease this amount, so that you can save a lot of space. In relation to this you can setup vol autosize and snap autodelete, to secure your LUNs. These are pretty functions given by OnTAP.

-----Original Message----- From: Milazzo Giacomo [mailto:G.Milazzo@sinergy.it] Sent: Tuesday, March 04, 2008 9:02 PM To: Buerger, Andreas; Nick Silkey; toasters@mathworks.com Subject: R: R: VMware - snap - backup

Only to answer to your question.

I would be interested in the reason, why you have chosen iscsi instead

of nfs. Just because of the license costs?

The cost of license could be a reason, over all if you consider the tiering appliend on 3000 or 6000 family but the real reason is that we've a loto f environment where db with great I/O demand (Exchange with hundreds of mailboxes, Oracle, SQL with dozens of GB of db and so on...) installed on iSCSI SAN using only software initiator (such as the Microsoft) and with great user perception and benchmarked performance.

We also are aware that NFS on NetApp filer is really fast (think to Oracle, also RAC, on NFS!) but up to know we've used for VMware only in limited and little farm of ESX servers. The biggest problem on iSCSI (or F/C) is the oversizing (double) you've to let on volume for snapshot of VMFS stores, the restore that from a snapped LUN is not so easy (I spoke of Vizioncore or Tomato to add value to VM backup, but is another cost) and so on.

Anyway, for any 'transport' you choose to use you can be sure that on NetApp appliances VMware will perform always better than other storage.

PS) just as sample we've setup a VMware cluster on a filer without F/C switches, using a direct attach and letting igroup and lun masking act as switch :-)...this you can have with FAS only!

Based on a VMWare training class that a colleague just attended, VMWare stated that they were removing references to FCP outperforming NFS from the training material. I think that says a lot.

Glenn

-----Original Message----- From: owner-toasters@mathworks.com [mailto:owner-toasters@mathworks.com] On Behalf Of Jack Lyons Sent: Tuesday, March 04, 2008 6:09 PM To: Milazzo Giacomo Cc: Buerger, Andreas; Nick Silkey; toasters@mathworks.com Subject: Re: R: R: VMware - snap - backup

I don't speak for VMWare but I know that they are moving away from only storing ISO and templates. There are several good size implementations of vmware on nfs. We have about 2 dozen VM's running on nfs and another 40 running on FCP.

Milazzo Giacomo wrote:

And I've to (re)correct you :-) NFS? Avoiding phylosophical discussion on performances, VMware itself states to use it just for ISO or templates... you perfectly know how much costs the NFS license! Terrible!!! iSCSI is free (bundle) and we've tested also on huge SATA disks...no issues.

Why do you said that iSCSI implementation is horrible? It's so easy to setup...

-----Messaggio originale----- Da: owner-toasters@mathworks.com [mailto:owner-toasters@mathworks.com] Per conto di Buerger, Andreas Inviato: martedì 4 marzo 2008 14.38 A: Nick Silkey; toasters@mathworks.com Oggetto: RE: R: VMware - snap - backup

I have to correct you :) We did some tests with vcb and iscsi, it works fine, but vcb in general was not very convenient. And the other thing is that the iscsi implementation in esx is horrible. Use NFS to earn more flexibility and an even better performance.

That's the experience we've made.

-----Original Message----- From: owner-toasters@mathworks.com [mailto:owner-toasters@mathworks.com] On Behalf Of Nick Silkey Sent: Tuesday, March 04, 2008 1:17 PM To: toasters@mathworks.com Subject: Re: R: VMware - snap - backup

Milazzo Giacomo wrote:

...

As I told you in another mail your environment make me more persuaded that the best thing you could do is to use VCB.

VCB = VMWare Consolidated Backup?

AFAIK, it is not an option in an iSCSI environment[1] ... if this is not the case, do correct me as we are aggressively pursuing iSCSI on our 3020s as a prod means to store vmdks for ESX. :)

For those of you who have worked with both block protocols and NFS in VM environments, do you see NFS+NetApp as a game changing solution going forward? I do, and I hope NetApp does. I think if the price for the NFS license was more reasonable, the adoption rate of NFS would skyrocket.

iSCSI was great when it came out, and NetApp gave away the license for free. But iSCSI, in IMHO, didn't have an application like VMWare to drive it. NFS+NetApp does, and I hope they take advantage of it.

--Carl

From: owner-toasters@mathworks.com [mailto:owner-toasters@mathworks.com] On Behalf Of Vaughn Stewart Sent: Wednesday, March 05, 2008 7:33 AM To: Jack Lyons; Milazzo Giacomo Cc: Buerger, Andreas; Nick Silkey; toasters@mathworks.com Subject: Re: R: R: VMware - snap - backup

There are many customers running 100s and 1000s of VMs over NFS. It seems like a natural way to integrate NetApp's storage virtualization directly with VMware, and NFS performs on par with FCP. You should try it, you'd be surprised.

Cheers,

Vaughn Stewart | Virtualization Evangelist

________________________________

From: Jack Lyons jack1729@gmail.com Date: Tue, 04 Mar 2008 18:09:12 -0500 To: Milazzo Giacomo G.Milazzo@sinergy.it Cc: "Buerger, Andreas" andreas.buerger@wincor-nixdorf.com, Nick Silkey silkey@ece.utexas.edu, toasters@mathworks.com Subject: Re: R: R: VMware - snap - backup

I don't speak for VMWare but I know that they are moving away from only storing ISO and templates. There are several good size implementations of vmware on nfs. We have about 2 dozen VM's running on nfs and another 40 running on FCP.

Milazzo Giacomo wrote:

And I've to (re)correct you :-) NFS? Avoiding phylosophical discussion on performances, VMware itself states to use it just for ISO or templates... you perfectly know how much costs the NFS license! Terrible!!! iSCSI is free (bundle) and we've tested also on huge SATA disks...no issues.

Why do you said that iSCSI implementation is horrible? It's so easy to setup...

-----Messaggio originale----- Da: owner-toasters@mathworks.com [mailto:owner-toasters@mathworks.com] Per conto di Buerger, Andreas Inviato: martedì 4 marzo 2008 14.38 A: Nick Silkey; toasters@mathworks.com Oggetto: RE: R: VMware - snap - backup

I have to correct you :) We did some tests with vcb and iscsi, it works fine, but vcb in general was not very convenient. And the other thing is that the iscsi implementation in esx is horrible. Use NFS to earn more flexibility and an even better performance.

That's the experience we've made.

-----Original Message----- From: owner-toasters@mathworks.com [mailto:owner-toasters@mathworks.com] On Behalf Of Nick Silkey Sent: Tuesday, March 04, 2008 1:17 PM To: toasters@mathworks.com Subject: Re: R: VMware - snap - backup

Milazzo Giacomo wrote:

...

As I told you in another mail your environment make me more persuaded that the best thing you could do is to use VCB.

VCB = VMWare Consolidated Backup?

AFAIK, it is not an option in an iSCSI environment[1] ... if this is not the case, do correct me as we are aggressively pursuing iSCSI on our 3020s as a prod means to store vmdks for ESX. :)

For VMware deals work with NetApp on the protocol license cost

As for a game changer, it¹d say that when you consider that VMware encapsulates data into files, NAS makes allot more sense than block. Don¹t take my word on it, EMC shares my view (see Chuck Hollis¹ blogs from 12/06 & 12/07). Also see: http://www.vmworld.com/vmworld/videos/2008/BingTsai.mov

Virtualization changes everything...

Cheers,

Vaughn Stewart | Virtualization Evangelist

From: Carl Howell chowell@uwf.edu Date: Thu, 6 Mar 2008 08:04:59 -0600 To: Vaughn Stewart vmwarestorageguy@gmail.com, Jack Lyons jack1729@gmail.com, Milazzo Giacomo G.Milazzo@sinergy.it Cc: "Buerger, Andreas" andreas.buerger@wincor-nixdorf.com, Nick Silkey silkey@ece.utexas.edu, toasters@mathworks.com Subject: RE: R: R: VMware - snap - backup

For those of you who have worked with both block protocols and NFS in VM environments, do you see NFS+NetApp as a game changing solution going forward? I do, and I hope NetApp does. I think if the price for the NFS license was more reasonable, the adoption rate of NFS would skyrocket.

iSCSI was great when it came out, and NetApp gave away the license for free. But iSCSI, in IMHO, didn¹t have an application like VMWare to drive it. NFS+NetApp does, and I hope they take advantage of it.

--Carl

From: owner-toasters@mathworks.com [mailto:owner-toasters@mathworks.com] On Behalf Of Vaughn Stewart Sent: Wednesday, March 05, 2008 7:33 AM To: Jack Lyons; Milazzo Giacomo Cc: Buerger, Andreas; Nick Silkey; toasters@mathworks.com Subject: Re: R: R: VMware - snap - backup

There are many customers running 100s and 1000s of VMs over NFS. It seems like a natural way to integrate NetApp¹s storage virtualization directly with VMware, and NFS performs on par with FCP. You should try it, you¹d be surprised.

Cheers,

Vaughn Stewart | Virtualization Evangelist

From: Jack Lyons jack1729@gmail.com Date: Tue, 04 Mar 2008 18:09:12 -0500 To: Milazzo Giacomo G.Milazzo@sinergy.it Cc: "Buerger, Andreas" andreas.buerger@wincor-nixdorf.com, Nick Silkey silkey@ece.utexas.edu, toasters@mathworks.com Subject: Re: R: R: VMware - snap - backup

I don't speak for VMWare but I know that they are moving away from only storing ISO and templates. There are several good size implementations of vmware on nfs. We have about 2 dozen VM's running on nfs and another 40 running on FCP.

Milazzo Giacomo wrote:

And I've to (re)correct you :-) NFS? Avoiding phylosophical discussion on performances, VMware itself states

to use it just for ISO or templates...

you perfectly know how much costs the NFS license! Terrible!!! iSCSI is free

(bundle) and we've tested also on huge SATA disks...no issues.

Why do you said that iSCSI implementation is horrible? It's so easy to

setup...

-----Messaggio originale----- Da: owner-toasters@mathworks.com [mailto:owner-toasters@mathworks.com] Per

conto di Buerger, Andreas

Inviato: martedì 4 marzo 2008 14.38 A: Nick Silkey; toasters@mathworks.com Oggetto: RE: R: VMware - snap - backup

I have to correct you :) We did some tests with vcb and iscsi, it works fine, but vcb in general was not very convenient. And the other thing is that the iscsi implementation in esx is horrible. Use NFS to earn more flexibility and an even better performance.

That's the experience we've made.

-----Original Message----- From: owner-toasters@mathworks.com [mailto:owner-toasters@mathworks.com] On Behalf Of Nick Silkey Sent: Tuesday, March 04, 2008 1:17 PM To: toasters@mathworks.com Subject: Re: R: VMware - snap - backup

Milazzo Giacomo wrote:

...

As I told you in another mail your environment make me more persuaded that the best thing you could do is to use VCB.

VCB = VMWare Consolidated Backup?

AFAIK, it is not an option in an iSCSI environment[1] ... if this is not the case, do correct me as we are aggressively pursuing iSCSI on our 3020s as a prod means to store vmdks for ESX. :)

There are many tools on NetApp¹s site today which provide the data consistency point required for backing up this data. At VMworld Europe last week NetApp was demonstrating a product which will do this in the very near future.

Cheers,

Vaughn Stewart | & Virtualization Evangelist

From: Milazzo Giacomo G.Milazzo@sinergy.it Date: Thu, 6 Mar 2008 20:44:49 +0100 To: Vaughn Stewart vmwarestorageguy@gmail.com, Carl Howell chowell@uwf.edu, Jack Lyons jack1729@gmail.com Cc: "Buerger, Andreas" andreas.buerger@wincor-nixdorf.com, Nick Silkey silkey@ece.utexas.edu, toasters@mathworks.com, Nils Vogels bacardicoke@gmail.com Subject: R: R: R: VMware - snap - backup

It seems we¹re transforming this mailing list in a monothematic oneŠshould VMware pay us for this? J

Ok. All this sounds good. So, VMware on NFS to obtain adavanteges and performances butŠ

But, I was asking myself reading you and your experience. Many of you told us about the advantages of snapshot on a file system volume (NFS) respect another containing LUNs that hosts vmdkŠI¹m sure you got me.

But, again, a vmdk file is a big or huge file that ³lives², full of block that change continously because the os guest is acting in itŠdo you get me? A thing is to take a snap of a unstructured file system that contains files that can be opened or closed and another is to take a snap of a file system containing ³living² filesŠ

Where I¹m wronging? J When you speak of snap on NFS volume maybe do you mean the VMware ones?

Keep in touch

Da: Vaughn Stewart [mailto:vmwarestorageguy@gmail.com] Inviato: giovedì 6 marzo 2008 16.39 A: Carl Howell; Vaughn Stewart; Jack Lyons; Milazzo Giacomo Cc: Buerger, Andreas; Nick Silkey; toasters@mathworks.com Oggetto: Re: R: R: VMware - snap - backup

For VMware deals work with NetApp on the protocol license cost

As for a game changer, it¹d say that when you consider that VMware encapsulates data into files, NAS makes allot more sense than block. Don¹t take my word on it, EMC shares my view (see Chuck Hollis¹ blogs from 12/06 & 12/07). Also see: http://www.vmworld.com/vmworld/videos/2008/BingTsai.mov

Virtualization changes everything...

Cheers,

Vaughn Stewart | Virtualization Evangelist

From: Carl Howell chowell@uwf.edu Date: Thu, 6 Mar 2008 08:04:59 -0600 To: Vaughn Stewart vmwarestorageguy@gmail.com, Jack Lyons jack1729@gmail.com, Milazzo Giacomo G.Milazzo@sinergy.it Cc: "Buerger, Andreas" andreas.buerger@wincor-nixdorf.com, Nick Silkey silkey@ece.utexas.edu, toasters@mathworks.com Subject: RE: R: R: VMware - snap - backup

For those of you who have worked with both block protocols and NFS in VM environments, do you see NFS+NetApp as a game changing solution going forward? I do, and I hope NetApp does. I think if the price for the NFS license was more reasonable, the adoption rate of NFS would skyrocket.

iSCSI was great when it came out, and NetApp gave away the license for free. But iSCSI, in IMHO, didn¹t have an application like VMWare to drive it. NFS+NetApp does, and I hope they take advantage of it.

--Carl

From: owner-toasters@mathworks.com [mailto:owner-toasters@mathworks.com] On Behalf Of Vaughn Stewart Sent: Wednesday, March 05, 2008 7:33 AM To: Jack Lyons; Milazzo Giacomo Cc: Buerger, Andreas; Nick Silkey; toasters@mathworks.com Subject: Re: R: R: VMware - snap - backup

There are many customers running 100s and 1000s of VMs over NFS. It seems like a natural way to integrate NetApp¹s storage virtualization directly with VMware, and NFS performs on par with FCP. You should try it, you¹d be surprised.

Cheers,

Vaughn Stewart | Virtualization Evangelist

From: Jack Lyons jack1729@gmail.com Date: Tue, 04 Mar 2008 18:09:12 -0500 To: Milazzo Giacomo G.Milazzo@sinergy.it Cc: "Buerger, Andreas" andreas.buerger@wincor-nixdorf.com, Nick Silkey silkey@ece.utexas.edu, toasters@mathworks.com Subject: Re: R: R: VMware - snap - backup

I don't speak for VMWare but I know that they are moving away from only storing ISO and templates. There are several good size implementations of vmware on nfs. We have about 2 dozen VM's running on nfs and another 40 running on FCP.

Milazzo Giacomo wrote:

And I've to (re)correct you :-) NFS? Avoiding phylosophical discussion on performances, VMware itself states

to use it just for ISO or templates...

you perfectly know how much costs the NFS license! Terrible!!! iSCSI is free

(bundle) and we've tested also on huge SATA disks...no issues.

Why do you said that iSCSI implementation is horrible? It's so easy to

setup...

-----Messaggio originale----- Da: owner-toasters@mathworks.com [mailto:owner-toasters@mathworks.com] Per

conto di Buerger, Andreas

Inviato: martedì 4 marzo 2008 14.38 A: Nick Silkey; toasters@mathworks.com Oggetto: RE: R: VMware - snap - backup

I have to correct you :) We did some tests with vcb and iscsi, it works fine, but vcb in general was not very convenient. And the other thing is that the iscsi implementation in esx is horrible. Use NFS to earn more flexibility and an even better performance.

That's the experience we've made.

-----Original Message----- From: owner-toasters@mathworks.com [mailto:owner-toasters@mathworks.com] On Behalf Of Nick Silkey Sent: Tuesday, March 04, 2008 1:17 PM To: toasters@mathworks.com Subject: Re: R: VMware - snap - backup

Milazzo Giacomo wrote:

...

As I told you in another mail your environment make me more persuaded that the best thing you could do is to use VCB.

VCB = VMWare Consolidated Backup?

AFAIK, it is not an option in an iSCSI environment[1] ... if this is not the case, do correct me as we are aggressively pursuing iSCSI on our 3020s as a prod means to store vmdks for ESX. :)

...

...

There is no doubt about the superior functionality provided by VMware +Netapp Snapshot.

Oops. Meant to say VMware + NFS + Netapp Snapshot.

-Tim-

From: owner-toasters@mathworks.com [mailto:owner-toasters@mathworks.com] On Behalf Of Timothy Hollingworth Sent: Thursday, March 06, 2008 5:22 PM To: toasters@mathworks.com Subject: RE: R: R: VMware - snap - backup

I'll give my coworker Chauncey full credit for pointing out the recent paper by VMware on the subject of protocol performance at http://www.vmware.com/files/pdf/storage_protocol_perf.pdf. I'm reluctant to join a religious conversation about FCP vs NFS and really don't mean to stir the pot but just thought I'd put it out there to foster technical discussion.

There is no doubt about the superior functionality provided by VMware +Netapp Snapshot

Timothy L. Hollingworth | Sr. Network Engineer | ePlus Technology Inc. MCSE | VMware VCP | HP ASE-BladeSystem | NetApp ASA/NACA | Symantec Technical Specialist HollingworthTim (AIM/YIM) | 678.462.6698 (Cell) | http://www.eplus.com

From: owner-toasters@mathworks.com [mailto:owner-toasters@mathworks.com] On Behalf Of Vaughn Stewart Sent: Wednesday, March 05, 2008 8:33 AM To: Jack Lyons; Milazzo Giacomo Cc: Buerger, Andreas; Nick Silkey; toasters@mathworks.com Subject: Re: R: R: VMware - snap - backup

There are many customers running 100s and 1000s of VMs over NFS. It seems like a natural way to integrate NetApp's storage virtualization directly with VMware, and NFS performs on par with FCP. You should try it, you'd be surprised.

Cheers,

Vaughn Stewart | Virtualization Evangelist

________________________________ From: Jack Lyons jack1729@gmail.com Date: Tue, 04 Mar 2008 18:09:12 -0500 To: Milazzo Giacomo G.Milazzo@sinergy.it Cc: "Buerger, Andreas" andreas.buerger@wincor-nixdorf.com, Nick Silkey silkey@ece.utexas.edu, toasters@mathworks.com Subject: Re: R: R: VMware - snap - backup

I don't speak for VMWare but I know that they are moving away from only storing ISO and templates. There are several good size implementations of vmware on nfs. We have about 2 dozen VM's running on nfs and another 40 running on FCP.

Milazzo Giacomo wrote:

And I've to (re)correct you :-) NFS? Avoiding phylosophical discussion on performances, VMware itself states to use it just for ISO or templates... you perfectly know how much costs the NFS license! Terrible!!! iSCSI is free (bundle) and we've tested also on huge SATA disks...no issues.

Why do you said that iSCSI implementation is horrible? It's so easy to setup...

-----Messaggio originale----- Da: owner-toasters@mathworks.com [mailto:owner-toasters@mathworks.com] Per conto di Buerger, Andreas Inviato: martedì 4 marzo 2008 14.38 A: Nick Silkey; toasters@mathworks.com Oggetto: RE: R: VMware - snap - backup

I have to correct you :) We did some tests with vcb and iscsi, it works fine, but vcb in general was not very convenient. And the other thing is that the iscsi implementation in esx is horrible. Use NFS to earn more flexibility and an even better performance.

That's the experience we've made.

-----Original Message----- From: owner-toasters@mathworks.com [mailto:owner-toasters@mathworks.com] On Behalf Of Nick Silkey Sent: Tuesday, March 04, 2008 1:17 PM To: toasters@mathworks.com Subject: Re: R: VMware - snap - backup

Milazzo Giacomo wrote:

...

As I told you in another mail your environment make me more persuaded that the best thing you could do is to use VCB.

VCB = VMWare Consolidated Backup?

AFAIK, it is not an option in an iSCSI environment[1] ... if this is not the case, do correct me as we are aggressively pursuing iSCSI on our 3020s as a prod means to store vmdks for ESX. :)