Virtualize Every Server
-
I should add that I'm not separating my server from my backup repository, which I might want to do it if it was virtualised. Currently everything resides on the same physical box.
-
@Carnival-Boy said:
I should add that I'm not separating my server from my backup repository,
I don't follow, can you give me more details?
-
@Carnival-Boy said:
I should add that I'm not separating my server from my backup repository, which I might want to do it if it was virtualised. Currently everything resides on the same physical box.
Why would virtualization change that decision?
-
I mean the backup repository (the location of the backup files) doesn't have to be on the same server as the Veeam software. If you separated them you could then backup the Veeam software itself (I think, I assume that Veeam could backup itself). If you didn't separate them, you wouldn't want to backup the Veeam VM as that would be backing up the backup. You don't want to backup your backup repository.
-
@Carnival-Boy said:
I mean the backup repository (the location of the backup files) doesn't have to be on the same server as the Veeam software. If you separated them you could then backup the Veeam software itself (I think, I assume that Veeam could backup itself). If you didn't separate them, you wouldn't want to backup the Veeam VM as that would be backing up the backup. You don't want to backup your backup repository.
This part makes sense. But why would you separate (potentially) if virtualized but did not when physical? Is it because when virtualized this is just easier so you have more options? And does that not then make virtualization that much better as an option?
-
@scottalanmiller said:
But why would you separate (potentially) if virtualized but did not when physical?
Without virtualisation, separation requires two machines.
-
There's that, and then if the Host where your Veeam instance live burns out the RAID array, you have lost all of your backups, lol.
-
@Carnival-Boy said:
@scottalanmiller said:
But why would you separate (potentially) if virtualized but did not when physical?
Without virtualisation, separation requires two machines.
Okay, gotcha. So that's a major vote pro-virtualization then
-
@dafyre said:
There's that, and then if the Host where your Veeam instance live burns out the RAID array, you have lost all of your backups, lol.
That's the case if your array burns out virtualized or not.
-
@scottalanmiller said:
Okay, gotcha. So that's a major vote pro-virtualization then
Maybe. I'd have to consider any licencing implications of separation.
-
@scottalanmiller said:
@dafyre said:
There's that, and then if the Host where your Veeam instance live burns out the RAID array, you have lost all of your backups, lol.
That's the case if your array burns out virtualized or not.
That's why you need replication and/or archival. SPOF for backups is never an "ok" thing.
-
@Carnival-Boy said:
@scottalanmiller said:
Okay, gotcha. So that's a major vote pro-virtualization then
Maybe. I'd have to consider any licencing implications of separation.
Even if you don't decide to do it, having additional options is a positive on its own. If needed, it is there in case.
-
The only other server I still have physical is Hamachi. I virtualised it originally but it was very flaky so went physical, which is a pain.
-
Oh, and our PBX is physical.
-
@Carnival-Boy said:
The only other server I still have physical is Hamachi. I virtualised it originally but it was very flaky so went physical, which is a pain.
Is that a Hamachi Gateway? Like a hub and spoke VPN design?
-
Yes
-
Cool, haven't used Hamachi in many years. They kept dropping support for things and we gave up on it.
-
-
I'm starting to wonder if virtualising my firewall was such a good idea.
-
@Carnival-Boy said:
I'm starting to wonder if virtualising my firewall was such a good idea.
What makes you say that?
