Version 6.5.0 Build 5318154
↧
Re: Failed to validate Site Recovery Manager compatibility with vCenter Server - error during SRM 6 setup
↧
Re: Failed to validate Site Recovery Manager compatibility with vCenter Server - error during SRM 6 setup
I suppose that you was running vCenter 5.5 and then upgrade the vCenter directly to version 6.5, right? If yes, not 100% sure, but I believe that is the cause of the problem. My recommendation is to upgrade the vCenter from 5.5 to 6.0U3, then upgrade the SRM from 5.8.1 to 6.1.2... and the next stage is to upgrade the vCenter and SRM to version 6.5.
↧
↧
Re: SRM vCenter connection
Hi,
I have managed to resolved the issue. In vCenter 5.5 update 3b SSLv3 was disabled. However SRM requires this to be enabled.
I have updated the c:\ProgramData\VMware\VMware VirtualCenter\vpxd.cfg file to enable SSLv3.
This can be done by adding the following:
<sslOptions>16924672</sslOptions>
example:
<vmacore>
<ssl>
<sslOptions>16924672</sslOptions>
</ssl>
</vmacore>
↧
Help...vmware srm 6.5 error
Hi guy,
I have a error about vmware srm 6.5
i add a single array manager ok at site DC or DR i add a pair array manager error In array based replication error :
Unable to find a matching consistency group at the remote site for the local consistency group 'SRM-Group
Unable to find a matching device at the remote site for the local device '10.1.2.139-inhoadon-App01-pro
system config
vcsa 6.5
srm 6.5 and ibm sra 2.3.0 install windows 2016
srm use embeded db storage is xiv system version 11.1 ...
pls help check this issue
....
See image attach files.
image 1,2: check sra on vcenter 6.5 ok
image 3,4,5 : error a pair array
Thanks !
↧
Change Embedded Database "Hardcoded" DSN?
I believe there is an issue with the DSN SRM is using to connect to the embedded database. The problem is that when I do a modify on SRM install, the DSN is grayed out and I can't change it.
Does anyone know how to change this seemingly "hardcoded" DSN value?
↧
↧
SRM w/Array Based Replication VM LUN Placement
If you're using array based replication with SRM does that mean that all VM's you place on a LUN have to be part of a recovery plan?
Also, when you re-protect is the data still on the original LUN or does that get blown away (assuming nothing major happened to the SAN) and need to be completely replicated or is it still there and you push changes to it? Does that also mean you change the direction of the replication at the SAN level. Reprotect and make the original site the primary and change the replication back again?
↧
Re: SRM w/Array Based Replication VM LUN Placement
The short answer is yes.
If you're using array based replication with SRM does that mean that all VM's you place on a LUN have to be part of a recovery plan?
Yes, with SANs the unit of replication is the entire LUN. SRM cannot recover individual VMs on a LUN, it needs to recover all of them (for the sake of consistency).
Also, when you re-protect is the data still on the original LUN or does that get blown away (assuming nothing major happened to the SAN) and need to be completely replicated or is it still there and you push changes to it? Does that also mean you change the direction of the replication at the SAN level. Reprotect and make the original site the primary and change the replication back again?
Re-protect operation in SRM does indeed reverse the replication at SAN level. Making a step back, the failover operation moves all VMs on a LUN from the production to the DR site. If the production site is still up, SRM will cleanly shut down all the VMs and force the SAN to synchronize these changes.Then it will reconfigure the VMs at the production site so they can no longer be powered on. Now that the VMs are the DR site and VMs at the production site are "disabled", it is safe to reverse the replicaton and overwrite the LUN at the original production site.
↧
SRM Authentication Issues
Hello everyone
I have completed an installation of SRM at two seperate sites and have managed to pair the two sites using the SSO Admin account. However, when I log in with my user account witch has admin rights at root level I get a connection error when accessing SRM in the webgui.
Next thing I tried was assigning the SRM Administrator role on the site wile logged in with the SSO admin account. Yet when logging back in with my user account which is now SRM admin on the site I get same permissions error.
Has anybody experience this and gotten around it?
↧
Re: SRM w/Array Based Replication VM LUN Placement
Thanks Stefan. So when you decide to re-protect is it SRM with the san plugin that tells the SAN to reverse the replication? Or do we need to engage the SAN team to do that?
Thanks again!
↧
↧
Re: SRM w/Array Based Replication VM LUN Placement
This is one of the things the SRA (storage replication adaptor) does. It handles communication with the array and handles all the array-side operations. Changes should not need to be made directly on the array.
↧
Re: SRM Authentication Issues
On what objects did you apply the SRM Administrator role? SRM root or vCenter root?
↧
Re: SRM Authentication Issues
Hello Stefan
At this point SRM root. I left my account on the administrator role on the vCenter root at both sites as I need admin privileges for day to day tasks.
I also cross referenced all the permissions between the admin and SRM admin role and found that the normal admin role has all the same permissions as the SRM admin role but the SRM admin role does not have all the same permissions as the VC admin role. So theoretically having full admin permissions at VC root level should enable me to administer SRM as well as it propagates down. Key word there being should.
The proof however would indicate that this assumption is incorrect. Hence having tried applying SRM admin role on each site object.
Regards
Russell
↧
Asymmetric hosts (2 host in protected site to 1 host at recovery site) configuration in SRM recovery.
Hi,
We are planning to configure a SRM recovery plan with by using 2 host at protected site and 1 host at recovery site.
I believe this type of configuration is a common scenario at many customer site. We should be allowed to
configure multiple host to single/few hosts at recovery site.
I wanted to check whether this type of configuration is valid or not? If yes, are there any documents
in SRM sites/ Administration guide which describes how to configure it?
Are there any special configuration steps needed to recover VM’s in non-uniform configurations
across protected and recovery sites.
Thanks in advance.
-Murali
↧
↧
best size LUN with SRM Array Based
↧
Re: best size LUN with SRM Array Based
As with many things, it depends. From an SRM standpoint, your LUNs or more specifically your array-based replication consistency groups (consisting of one or more LUNs) map to SRM Protection Groups which are the smallest unit of failover. So, depending on how you want to handle your failovers and how big your VMs are you can make them larger or smaller.
I frequently see people map protection groups to applications (eg. Email, web app) so if you went down that road you would size your LUNs or consistency groups to fit your applications.
↧
Re: Asymmetric hosts (2 host in protected site to 1 host at recovery site) configuration in SRM recovery.
There wouldn't be any issue supporting this. I would recommend creating resource pools and placing your VMs in those and mapping them to the 2 sites. It will make it easier to ensure that the VMs that you want get resources and the the others don't.
↧
Re: Change Embedded Database "Hardcoded" DSN?
This only appears if you use the embedded database. You cannot change this value. See Modify a Site Recovery Manager Server Installation for more information
↧
↧
Re: Asymmetric hosts (2 host in protected site to 1 host at recovery site) configuration in SRM recovery.
Thanks Khalsa :-)
↧
SRM upgrade 6.0 > 6.1 Existing Site Recovery Manager registrations are inconsistent with the registration for this new or upgraded instance.
Hi to all,
have someone seen this error before (Google and VMware KB gives me nothing)?
I am upgrading working SRM 6.0.0-2700459 to VMware-srm-6.1.0-3037005 and in the upgrade process I get following error.
Same is with update to 6.1.1.
If you continue, upgrade process finishes OK, but in web client is shown that SRM doesnt talk with vCenter (6.0 U2 - 6.0.0-3634788).
Thank you.
Best regards
Goran
↧
Re: SRM upgrade 6.0 > 6.1 Existing Site Recovery Manager registrations are inconsistent with the registration for this new or upgraded instance.
I believe that popup is expected and not a problem.
Can you try right click the remote site and select 'reconfigure pairing'? Run through the wizard to reconnect the sites, and that should hopefully resolve the "Server Connection" alert.
↧