[ovirt-users] Re: Active-Passive DR: mutual for different storage domains possible?

2019-07-29 Thread Eyal Shenitzky
You can submit an RFE in Bugzilla and explain the improvements and its use case: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/enter_bug.cgi?product=ovirt-engine Please add [RFE][DR] to the bug summary. On Mon, Jul 29, 2019 at 11:54 AM Gianluca Cecchi wrote: > On Mon, Jul 29, 2019 at 10:35 AM Eyal Shenitzky >

[ovirt-users] Re: Active-Passive DR: mutual for different storage domains possible?

2019-07-29 Thread Gianluca Cecchi
On Mon, Jul 29, 2019 at 10:35 AM Eyal Shenitzky wrote: > > > On Mon, Jul 29, 2019 at 11:23 AM Gianluca Cecchi < > gianluca.cec...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> On Mon, Jul 29, 2019 at 10:16 AM Eyal Shenitzky >> wrote: >> >>> >>> 4) VM consistency Can we say that all the imported VMs

[ovirt-users] Re: Active-Passive DR: mutual for different storage domains possible?

2019-07-29 Thread Eyal Shenitzky
On Mon, Jul 29, 2019 at 11:23 AM Gianluca Cecchi wrote: > On Mon, Jul 29, 2019 at 10:16 AM Eyal Shenitzky > wrote: > >> >> >>> >>> 4) VM consistency >>> Can we say that all the imported VMs will be "crash consistent"? >>> >> >> I am not sure what you mean by "crash consistent", is it means

[ovirt-users] Re: Active-Passive DR: mutual for different storage domains possible?

2019-07-29 Thread Gianluca Cecchi
On Mon, Jul 29, 2019 at 10:16 AM Eyal Shenitzky wrote: > > >> >> 4) VM consistency >> Can we say that all the imported VMs will be "crash consistent"? >> > > I am not sure what you mean by "crash consistent", is it means "highly > available" is oVirt language? > > I mean in the similar state

[ovirt-users] Re: Active-Passive DR: mutual for different storage domains possible?

2019-07-29 Thread Eyal Shenitzky
On Thu, Jul 25, 2019 at 6:24 PM Gianluca Cecchi wrote: > On Thu, Jul 25, 2019 at 2:21 PM Eyal Shenitzky > wrote: > >> On Thu, Jul 25, 2019 at 3:02 PM Gianluca Cecchi < >> gianluca.cec...@gmail.com> wrote: >> >>> On Thu, Jul 25, 2019 at 1:54 PM Eyal Shenitzky >>> wrote: >>> Please

[ovirt-users] Re: Active-Passive DR: mutual for different storage domains possible?

2019-07-25 Thread Gianluca Cecchi
On Thu, Jul 25, 2019 at 2:21 PM Eyal Shenitzky wrote: > On Thu, Jul 25, 2019 at 3:02 PM Gianluca Cecchi > wrote: > >> On Thu, Jul 25, 2019 at 1:54 PM Eyal Shenitzky >> wrote: >> >>> >>> Please notice that a automation python scripts created in order to >>> facilitate the DR process. >>> You

[ovirt-users] Re: Active-Passive DR: mutual for different storage domains possible?

2019-07-25 Thread Eyal Shenitzky
On Thu, Jul 25, 2019 at 1:50 PM Gianluca Cecchi wrote: > On Thu, Jul 25, 2019 at 7:37 AM Eyal Shenitzky > wrote: > >> >> >> You can use the following manual to understand what is required for the >> DR process - >> >>

[ovirt-users] Re: Active-Passive DR: mutual for different storage domains possible?

2019-07-25 Thread Gianluca Cecchi
On Thu, Jul 25, 2019 at 7:37 AM Eyal Shenitzky wrote: > > > You can use the following manual to understand what is required for the DR > process - > > https://ovirt.org/documentation/disaster-recovery-guide/active_passive_overview.html > > Thanks Eyal. I was already using it as a reference, but

[ovirt-users] Re: Active-Passive DR: mutual for different storage domains possible?

2019-07-24 Thread Eyal Shenitzky
On Tue, Jul 23, 2019 at 6:11 PM Gianluca Cecchi wrote: > On Mon, Jul 8, 2019 at 10:39 AM Eyal Shenitzky > wrote: > >> I don't see any reason not to do it in case the SD replicas are separated >> storage domain. >> Just note that for the DR, you should prepare a separated DC with a >> cluster.

[ovirt-users] Re: Active-Passive DR: mutual for different storage domains possible?

2019-07-23 Thread Gianluca Cecchi
On Mon, Jul 8, 2019 at 10:39 AM Eyal Shenitzky wrote: > I don't see any reason not to do it in case the SD replicas are separated > storage domain. > Just note that for the DR, you should prepare a separated DC with a > cluster. > > P.S - I most to admit that I didn't try this configuration -

[ovirt-users] Re: Active-Passive DR: mutual for different storage domains possible?

2019-07-08 Thread Eyal Shenitzky
I don't see any reason not to do it in case the SD replicas are separated storage domain. Just note that for the DR, you should prepare a separated DC with a cluster. P.S - I most to admit that I didn't try this configuration - please share your results. On Mon, Jul 8, 2019 at 10:45 AM Gianluca