Small Shop Hyperconverged Options
-
@scotth said in Small Shop Hyperconverged Options:
I updated by host to 7.2 right after I ran the XO install script. I didn't pay attention to what Citrix was doing.
7.2 is still good. 7.3 is the one Citrix crippled.
-
@scotth said in Small Shop Hyperconverged Options:
@scottalanmiller said in Small Shop Hyperconverged Options:
@scotth said in Small Shop Hyperconverged Options:
@scottalanmiller said in Small Shop Hyperconverged Options:
@scotth said in Small Shop Hyperconverged Options:
@scottalanmiller said in Small Shop Hyperconverged Options:
If you do need HA, and you only need the capacity of one node, then you want to be looking primarily at @StarWind_Software
BEcause they focus on the two node scope for their HA / HC systems.This is actually my target for our desired upgrade. I'm currently running ESXi on two DL370 G6's. I'm getting prices for drives to populate the both drive cages so that I can re-purpose the current servers into backup targets. I won't have time to address this until later this spring but I intend to read up on it and talk to vendors during this time.
Good time to update to Hyper-V, too. Starwind is really well integrated with Hyper-V.
We are planning to look at all flavors. I have to admit out loud that I'm really looking forward to try the new XCP-NG on my home lab. I keep thinking that I could try it at work as well. Much research coming.
That is a good option, too.
I updated by host to 7.2 right after I ran the XO install script. I didn't pay attention to what Citrix was doing.
YOu are fine. XCP-NG will be your future step.
-
@bnrstnr said in Small Shop Hyperconverged Options:
@scotth said in Small Shop Hyperconverged Options:
I updated by host to 7.2 right after I ran the XO install script. I didn't pay attention to what Citrix was doing.
7.2 is still good. 7.3 is the one Citrix crippled.
Cool. I've been holding off running the 7.2 specific updates
-
@scottalanmiller said in Small Shop Hyperconverged Options:
@scotth said in Small Shop Hyperconverged Options:
@scottalanmiller said in Small Shop Hyperconverged Options:
@scotth said in Small Shop Hyperconverged Options:
@scottalanmiller said in Small Shop Hyperconverged Options:
@scotth said in Small Shop Hyperconverged Options:
@scottalanmiller said in Small Shop Hyperconverged Options:
If you do need HA, and you only need the capacity of one node, then you want to be looking primarily at @StarWind_Software
BEcause they focus on the two node scope for their HA / HC systems.This is actually my target for our desired upgrade. I'm currently running ESXi on two DL370 G6's. I'm getting prices for drives to populate the both drive cages so that I can re-purpose the current servers into backup targets. I won't have time to address this until later this spring but I intend to read up on it and talk to vendors during this time.
Good time to update to Hyper-V, too. Starwind is really well integrated with Hyper-V.
We are planning to look at all flavors. I have to admit out loud that I'm really looking forward to try the new XCP-NG on my home lab. I keep thinking that I could try it at work as well. Much research coming.
That is a good option, too.
I updated by host to 7.2 right after I ran the XO install script. I didn't pay attention to what Citrix was doing.
YOu are fine. XCP-NG will be your future step.
And to think that I started on XCP in the 1st place.
I think it was actually 4.9 beta or some such. -
@scotth said in Small Shop Hyperconverged Options:
@scottalanmiller said in Small Shop Hyperconverged Options:
@scotth said in Small Shop Hyperconverged Options:
@scottalanmiller said in Small Shop Hyperconverged Options:
@scotth said in Small Shop Hyperconverged Options:
@scottalanmiller said in Small Shop Hyperconverged Options:
@scotth said in Small Shop Hyperconverged Options:
@scottalanmiller said in Small Shop Hyperconverged Options:
If you do need HA, and you only need the capacity of one node, then you want to be looking primarily at @StarWind_Software
BEcause they focus on the two node scope for their HA / HC systems.This is actually my target for our desired upgrade. I'm currently running ESXi on two DL370 G6's. I'm getting prices for drives to populate the both drive cages so that I can re-purpose the current servers into backup targets. I won't have time to address this until later this spring but I intend to read up on it and talk to vendors during this time.
Good time to update to Hyper-V, too. Starwind is really well integrated with Hyper-V.
We are planning to look at all flavors. I have to admit out loud that I'm really looking forward to try the new XCP-NG on my home lab. I keep thinking that I could try it at work as well. Much research coming.
That is a good option, too.
I updated by host to 7.2 right after I ran the XO install script. I didn't pay attention to what Citrix was doing.
YOu are fine. XCP-NG will be your future step.
And to think that I started on XCP in the 1st place.
I think it was actually 4.9 beta or some such.Well XCP-NG isn't XCP
-
@scottalanmiller said in Small Shop Hyperconverged Options:
@scotth said in Small Shop Hyperconverged Options:
@scottalanmiller said in Small Shop Hyperconverged Options:
@scotth said in Small Shop Hyperconverged Options:
@scottalanmiller said in Small Shop Hyperconverged Options:
@scotth said in Small Shop Hyperconverged Options:
@scottalanmiller said in Small Shop Hyperconverged Options:
@scotth said in Small Shop Hyperconverged Options:
@scottalanmiller said in Small Shop Hyperconverged Options:
If you do need HA, and you only need the capacity of one node, then you want to be looking primarily at @StarWind_Software
BEcause they focus on the two node scope for their HA / HC systems.This is actually my target for our desired upgrade. I'm currently running ESXi on two DL370 G6's. I'm getting prices for drives to populate the both drive cages so that I can re-purpose the current servers into backup targets. I won't have time to address this until later this spring but I intend to read up on it and talk to vendors during this time.
Good time to update to Hyper-V, too. Starwind is really well integrated with Hyper-V.
We are planning to look at all flavors. I have to admit out loud that I'm really looking forward to try the new XCP-NG on my home lab. I keep thinking that I could try it at work as well. Much research coming.
That is a good option, too.
I updated by host to 7.2 right after I ran the XO install script. I didn't pay attention to what Citrix was doing.
YOu are fine. XCP-NG will be your future step.
And to think that I started on XCP in the 1st place.
I think it was actually 4.9 beta or some such.Well XCP-NG isn't XCP
Even better
-
@scotth: I will deploy a hybrid SW two node cluster soon. Many other solutions use KVM under the hood, which means that you will have to either script something or do agent based backups.
With Hyper-V, you just use Veeam (or whatever you prefer)
-
@thwr said in Small Shop Hyperconverged Options:
@scotth: I will deploy a hybrid SW two node cluster soon. Many other solutions use KVM under the hood, which means that you will have to either script something or do agent based backups.
With Hyper-V, you just use Veeam (or whatever you prefer)
The closer to turn-key, the better. When we decide, we'll want it in production with all facets planned and implemented.
-
@thwr said in Small Shop Hyperconverged Options:
@scotth: I will deploy a hybrid SW two node cluster soon. Many other solutions use KVM under the hood, which means that you will have to either script something or do agent based backups.
With Hyper-V, you just use Veeam (or whatever you prefer)
I use agents regardless
-
@scottalanmiller said in Small Shop Hyperconverged Options:
@thwr said in Small Shop Hyperconverged Options:
@scotth: I will deploy a hybrid SW two node cluster soon. Many other solutions use KVM under the hood, which means that you will have to either script something or do agent based backups.
With Hyper-V, you just use Veeam (or whatever you prefer)
I use agents regardless
And I don't know why, as it conterfeits some of the virtualization fundamentals, IMHO. But I don't want to start this discussion now.
-
@thwr said in Small Shop Hyperconverged Options:
@scottalanmiller said in Small Shop Hyperconverged Options:
@thwr said in Small Shop Hyperconverged Options:
@scotth: I will deploy a hybrid SW two node cluster soon. Many other solutions use KVM under the hood, which means that you will have to either script something or do agent based backups.
With Hyper-V, you just use Veeam (or whatever you prefer)
I use agents regardless
And I don't know why, as it conterfeits some of the virtualization fundamentals, IMHO. But I don't want to start this discussion now.
It doesn't. That functionality is in no way part of virtualization or its value. It's just one of the many myths than people have mistakenly add to virtualization.
Even Veeam with Hyper-V/VMware.... there is no universal agentless capability. So if it was an intrinsic part of virtualization, that would imply no virtualization product has been made yet.
-
@scottalanmiller said in Small Shop Hyperconverged Options:
@thwr said in Small Shop Hyperconverged Options:
@scottalanmiller said in Small Shop Hyperconverged Options:
@thwr said in Small Shop Hyperconverged Options:
@scotth: I will deploy a hybrid SW two node cluster soon. Many other solutions use KVM under the hood, which means that you will have to either script something or do agent based backups.
With Hyper-V, you just use Veeam (or whatever you prefer)
I use agents regardless
And I don't know why, as it conterfeits some of the virtualization fundamentals, IMHO. But I don't want to start this discussion now.
It doesn't. That functionality is in no way part of virtualization or its value. It's just one of the many myths than people have mistakenly add to virtualization.
Even Veeam with Hyper-V/VMware.... there is no universal agentless capability. So if it was an intrinsic part of virtualization, that would imply no virtualization product has been made yet.
Don't you agree that adding agents to each and every guest VM adds to costs and complexity compared to a "simple" hypervisor based backup?
-
@thwr said in Small Shop Hyperconverged Options:
@scottalanmiller said in Small Shop Hyperconverged Options:
@thwr said in Small Shop Hyperconverged Options:
@scottalanmiller said in Small Shop Hyperconverged Options:
@thwr said in Small Shop Hyperconverged Options:
@scotth: I will deploy a hybrid SW two node cluster soon. Many other solutions use KVM under the hood, which means that you will have to either script something or do agent based backups.
With Hyper-V, you just use Veeam (or whatever you prefer)
I use agents regardless
And I don't know why, as it conterfeits some of the virtualization fundamentals, IMHO. But I don't want to start this discussion now.
It doesn't. That functionality is in no way part of virtualization or its value. It's just one of the many myths than people have mistakenly add to virtualization.
Even Veeam with Hyper-V/VMware.... there is no universal agentless capability. So if it was an intrinsic part of virtualization, that would imply no virtualization product has been made yet.
Don't you agree that adding agents to each and every guest VM adds to costs and complexity compared to a "simple" hypervisor based backup?
Wouldn't you install the agent in your gold image?
-
@thwr said in Small Shop Hyperconverged Options:
@scottalanmiller said in Small Shop Hyperconverged Options:
@thwr said in Small Shop Hyperconverged Options:
@scottalanmiller said in Small Shop Hyperconverged Options:
@thwr said in Small Shop Hyperconverged Options:
@scotth: I will deploy a hybrid SW two node cluster soon. Many other solutions use KVM under the hood, which means that you will have to either script something or do agent based backups.
With Hyper-V, you just use Veeam (or whatever you prefer)
I use agents regardless
And I don't know why, as it conterfeits some of the virtualization fundamentals, IMHO. But I don't want to start this discussion now.
It doesn't. That functionality is in no way part of virtualization or its value. It's just one of the many myths than people have mistakenly add to virtualization.
Even Veeam with Hyper-V/VMware.... there is no universal agentless capability. So if it was an intrinsic part of virtualization, that would imply no virtualization product has been made yet.
Don't you agree that adding agents to each and every guest VM adds to costs and complexity compared to a "simple" hypervisor based backup?
Having backup at all adds complexity. It's not that simple of a question.
There are two pieces...
- Is it part of virtualization - demonstrably it is not.
- is it good to do - that's totally by circumstance, it is not always possible. Of the times it is possible, only sometimes is it good. Often, but far from always.
-
@coliver said in Small Shop Hyperconverged Options:
@thwr said in Small Shop Hyperconverged Options:
@scottalanmiller said in Small Shop Hyperconverged Options:
@thwr said in Small Shop Hyperconverged Options:
@scottalanmiller said in Small Shop Hyperconverged Options:
@thwr said in Small Shop Hyperconverged Options:
@scotth: I will deploy a hybrid SW two node cluster soon. Many other solutions use KVM under the hood, which means that you will have to either script something or do agent based backups.
With Hyper-V, you just use Veeam (or whatever you prefer)
I use agents regardless
And I don't know why, as it conterfeits some of the virtualization fundamentals, IMHO. But I don't want to start this discussion now.
It doesn't. That functionality is in no way part of virtualization or its value. It's just one of the many myths than people have mistakenly add to virtualization.
Even Veeam with Hyper-V/VMware.... there is no universal agentless capability. So if it was an intrinsic part of virtualization, that would imply no virtualization product has been made yet.
Don't you agree that adding agents to each and every guest VM adds to costs and complexity compared to a "simple" hypervisor based backup?
Wouldn't you install the agent in your gold image?
Depends. Agents are rarely all the same, I can't do it that way so not for us.
-
@thwr said in Small Shop Hyperconverged Options:
@scottalanmiller said in Small Shop Hyperconverged Options:
@thwr said in Small Shop Hyperconverged Options:
@scottalanmiller said in Small Shop Hyperconverged Options:
@thwr said in Small Shop Hyperconverged Options:
@scotth: I will deploy a hybrid SW two node cluster soon. Many other solutions use KVM under the hood, which means that you will have to either script something or do agent based backups.
With Hyper-V, you just use Veeam (or whatever you prefer)
I use agents regardless
And I don't know why, as it conterfeits some of the virtualization fundamentals, IMHO. But I don't want to start this discussion now.
It doesn't. That functionality is in no way part of virtualization or its value. It's just one of the many myths than people have mistakenly add to virtualization.
Even Veeam with Hyper-V/VMware.... there is no universal agentless capability. So if it was an intrinsic part of virtualization, that would imply no virtualization product has been made yet.
Don't you agree that adding agents to each and every guest VM adds to costs and complexity compared to a "simple" hypervisor based backup?
Permit my ignorance please but, Veeam is lightweight, free, and bang -- full / incrementals over two-one week periods, out of the box.
-
@scotth said in Small Shop Hyperconverged Options:
@thwr said in Small Shop Hyperconverged Options:
@scottalanmiller said in Small Shop Hyperconverged Options:
@thwr said in Small Shop Hyperconverged Options:
@scottalanmiller said in Small Shop Hyperconverged Options:
@thwr said in Small Shop Hyperconverged Options:
@scotth: I will deploy a hybrid SW two node cluster soon. Many other solutions use KVM under the hood, which means that you will have to either script something or do agent based backups.
With Hyper-V, you just use Veeam (or whatever you prefer)
I use agents regardless
And I don't know why, as it conterfeits some of the virtualization fundamentals, IMHO. But I don't want to start this discussion now.
It doesn't. That functionality is in no way part of virtualization or its value. It's just one of the many myths than people have mistakenly add to virtualization.
Even Veeam with Hyper-V/VMware.... there is no universal agentless capability. So if it was an intrinsic part of virtualization, that would imply no virtualization product has been made yet.
Don't you agree that adding agents to each and every guest VM adds to costs and complexity compared to a "simple" hypervisor based backup?
Permit my ignorance please but, Veeam is lightweight, free, and bang -- full / incrementals over two-one week periods, out of the box.
When it works for you, but it doesn't work universally so carries a big risk that people will just use it and not ensure that they have reliable backup methodologies. But agents aren't that much heavier and are also free. And agents can be even lighter.
-
@scottalanmiller said in Small Shop Hyperconverged Options:
@scotth said in Small Shop Hyperconverged Options:
@thwr said in Small Shop Hyperconverged Options:
@scottalanmiller said in Small Shop Hyperconverged Options:
@thwr said in Small Shop Hyperconverged Options:
@scottalanmiller said in Small Shop Hyperconverged Options:
@thwr said in Small Shop Hyperconverged Options:
@scotth: I will deploy a hybrid SW two node cluster soon. Many other solutions use KVM under the hood, which means that you will have to either script something or do agent based backups.
With Hyper-V, you just use Veeam (or whatever you prefer)
I use agents regardless
And I don't know why, as it conterfeits some of the virtualization fundamentals, IMHO. But I don't want to start this discussion now.
It doesn't. That functionality is in no way part of virtualization or its value. It's just one of the many myths than people have mistakenly add to virtualization.
Even Veeam with Hyper-V/VMware.... there is no universal agentless capability. So if it was an intrinsic part of virtualization, that would imply no virtualization product has been made yet.
Don't you agree that adding agents to each and every guest VM adds to costs and complexity compared to a "simple" hypervisor based backup?
Permit my ignorance please but, Veeam is lightweight, free, and bang -- full / incrementals over two-one week periods, out of the box.
When it works for you, but it doesn't work universally so carries a big risk that people will just use it and not ensure that they have reliable backup methodologies. But agents aren't that much heavier and are also free. And agents can be even lighter.
As part of our upcoming DR solution, this must needs be discussed
-
@scotth said in Small Shop Hyperconverged Options:
@scottalanmiller said in Small Shop Hyperconverged Options:
@scotth said in Small Shop Hyperconverged Options:
@thwr said in Small Shop Hyperconverged Options:
@scottalanmiller said in Small Shop Hyperconverged Options:
@thwr said in Small Shop Hyperconverged Options:
@scottalanmiller said in Small Shop Hyperconverged Options:
@thwr said in Small Shop Hyperconverged Options:
@scotth: I will deploy a hybrid SW two node cluster soon. Many other solutions use KVM under the hood, which means that you will have to either script something or do agent based backups.
With Hyper-V, you just use Veeam (or whatever you prefer)
I use agents regardless
And I don't know why, as it conterfeits some of the virtualization fundamentals, IMHO. But I don't want to start this discussion now.
It doesn't. That functionality is in no way part of virtualization or its value. It's just one of the many myths than people have mistakenly add to virtualization.
Even Veeam with Hyper-V/VMware.... there is no universal agentless capability. So if it was an intrinsic part of virtualization, that would imply no virtualization product has been made yet.
Don't you agree that adding agents to each and every guest VM adds to costs and complexity compared to a "simple" hypervisor based backup?
Permit my ignorance please but, Veeam is lightweight, free, and bang -- full / incrementals over two-one week periods, out of the box.
When it works for you, but it doesn't work universally so carries a big risk that people will just use it and not ensure that they have reliable backup methodologies. But agents aren't that much heavier and are also free. And agents can be even lighter.
As part of our upcoming DR solution, this must needs be discussed
Sorry, I've been reading too much fantasy lately.
-
@scotth said in Small Shop Hyperconverged Options:
@scottalanmiller said in Small Shop Hyperconverged Options:
@scotth said in Small Shop Hyperconverged Options:
@thwr said in Small Shop Hyperconverged Options:
@scottalanmiller said in Small Shop Hyperconverged Options:
@thwr said in Small Shop Hyperconverged Options:
@scottalanmiller said in Small Shop Hyperconverged Options:
@thwr said in Small Shop Hyperconverged Options:
@scotth: I will deploy a hybrid SW two node cluster soon. Many other solutions use KVM under the hood, which means that you will have to either script something or do agent based backups.
With Hyper-V, you just use Veeam (or whatever you prefer)
I use agents regardless
And I don't know why, as it conterfeits some of the virtualization fundamentals, IMHO. But I don't want to start this discussion now.
It doesn't. That functionality is in no way part of virtualization or its value. It's just one of the many myths than people have mistakenly add to virtualization.
Even Veeam with Hyper-V/VMware.... there is no universal agentless capability. So if it was an intrinsic part of virtualization, that would imply no virtualization product has been made yet.
Don't you agree that adding agents to each and every guest VM adds to costs and complexity compared to a "simple" hypervisor based backup?
Permit my ignorance please but, Veeam is lightweight, free, and bang -- full / incrementals over two-one week periods, out of the box.
When it works for you, but it doesn't work universally so carries a big risk that people will just use it and not ensure that they have reliable backup methodologies. But agents aren't that much heavier and are also free. And agents can be even lighter.
As part of our upcoming DR solution, this must needs be discussed
It's a great product and works for loads of stuff and things that it isn't totally reliable for it often works. But it has workloads for which it is not reliable (often ones that people don't think about) and it's a lot heavier than often necessary depending on your infrastructure. It's only really good... when other things are really bad.
Veeam and similar hypervisor level backups are great... as workarounds to lacking rapid rebuild or state systems. Basically, they are a truly amazing bandaid.
