There is vmotion and storage vmotion, two separate products. I expect they
are licensed separately, though I do not know for sure.
http://searchvmware.techtarget.com/definition/Storage-vMotion
http://www.mosaictec.com/tessera/what-is-vmotion.htm
On Fri, Jun 30, 2017 at 10:25 AM, MacGregor, Ian A. <ian@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
wrote:
I was hoping to check with my VM admin before I replied, but could not.
I do know the methodology she is using moves the entire VM, both files
and processes. The had mentioned one VM which takes 20 minutes to move
due to the size of its associated files. I thought she was doing this
through vMotion, but I may be wrong. Anyway, even if vMotion is the
methodology, it sounds as if normally it is only used to migrate
processes and not files.
Thanks you for the assistance
Ian
On Jun 29, 2017, at 6:10 AM, Andrew Kerber <andrew.kerber@xxxxxxxxx>
wrote:
Vmotion is only possible on shared storage. But no, a single physical lun
does not provide enough protection. Most people use a san for their
storage in VMware, your configuration is unusual in that it is on local
disks.
On Wed, Jun 28, 2017 at 2:38 PM, MacGregor, Ian A. <ian@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
wrote:
Seth both. I don’t see how a single physical LUN provides enough
protection. As far as moving of the databases is the even possible with
this setup?
IAN
On Jun 28, 2017, at 11:57 AM, Seth Miller <sethmiller.sm@xxxxxxxxx>
wrote:
Ian,
Can you clarify your concern? Is the problem that you can't migrate your
databases without taking an outage, or that the LUN doesn't offer enough
protection for your database files?
Seth Miller
On Wed, Jun 28, 2017 at 1:39 PM, Andrew Kerber <andrew.kerber@xxxxxxxxx>
wrote:
Most people run their VM's over shared storage, which allows for vmotion
and storage vmotion. When I am setting up small stuff, not enterprise, but
want to make sure of the data I use ASM and ASM native data protection, ie
standard redundancy. On the OS side, we can use snapshots.
On Wed, Jun 28, 2017 at 11:05 AM, MacGregor, Ian A. <
ian@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
We run our VMs on local disk; i.e, no SAN or NAS. Let’s say physical
machine a has 24 disks. The standard configuration to create a 22 disk
RAID 10 physical LUN. Then carve the virtual file systems out of that.
I don’t like this idea because, to doesn’t provide enough protection
for the control and online redo log files.
The reason for setting up one physical LUN is to allow for VM
migration.
I presently have several small databases running on several VMs.
I insisted on at least two physical LUNs. The inability to migrate VMs
means the possibility of additional outages should their hypervisors need
to be shutdown, and the outage cannot be coordinated with other patching.
So the only databases I have on VMs are ones which do not have to be up
24 X 365
I’m not sure how VmWare has become so popular with this restriction.
We are replacing our present physical machines which host the VMs. The
main difference is the new servers are all SSD. This is highly
attractive, but the VmWare administrator has indicated their will be no
exceptions for Oracle
If it is standard to care the VM file systems out of one physical LUNs
what is being done to protect the control file and redo logs.
Ian MacGregor
SLAC National Accelerator Laboratory
ian@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
--
Andrew W. Kerber
'If at first you dont succeed, dont take up skydiving.'
--
Andrew W. Kerber
'If at first you dont succeed, dont take up skydiving.'