<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/" xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/" xmlns:rdf="http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#" xmlns:taxo="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/taxonomy/" version="2.0">
  <channel>
    <title>topic Re: SMSQL SnapVault Fanout configuration in Data Protection</title>
    <link>https://community.netapp.com/t5/Data-Protection/SMSQL-SnapVault-Fanout-configuration/m-p/106116#M4381</link>
    <description>&lt;P&gt;Hi Heino,&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;I am also running SMSQL 7.2 with SD 7.1.1 on cDOT 8.2.3.&amp;nbsp; I have two clusters and have two SnapVault relationships running from one source.&amp;nbsp; I intend on using the first SnapVault relationship for SMVI backups and the second relationship for SMSQL backups.&amp;nbsp; I intend on using this configuration in order to split the number of snapshots being acumulated (SMVI SnapShots and SMSQL SnapShots).&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;My concern now is however that when I run an SMSQL job it updates both SnapVault relationships.&amp;nbsp; Additionally it also adds the SMSQL snapshots to the first relationship which completely goes against what I am trying to achieve in terms of spreading the snapshot burden across more volumes.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;I hope that somebody sees this post and can answer both your question and also mine.&lt;/P&gt;</description>
    <pubDate>Thu, 11 Jun 2015 09:17:35 GMT</pubDate>
    <dc:creator>JustinM</dc:creator>
    <dc:date>2015-06-11T09:17:35Z</dc:date>
    <item>
      <title>SMSQL SnapVault Fanout configuration</title>
      <link>https://community.netapp.com/t5/Data-Protection/SMSQL-SnapVault-Fanout-configuration/m-p/104585#M4380</link>
      <description>&lt;P&gt;Hi there&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;I'm trying to get SMSQL 7.2 with SD 7.1.1 on cDot ontap 8.3GA to work in a configuration where we want to have two snapvault relationships from one primary source.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;I have setup the XDP and Protection Policy to catch "Daily" and "Weekly" snapmirror-labels, but I have not setup any schedules on the VSM snapvaut relation, as it should of cause be pushed by SMSQL.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Sadly I cannot get both SV relations to update after a successful backup, and I am unsure is it is officially supported?&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;I have ofcause configured SD so it can use all 3 VSM's on the 3 different clusteres, and I have done the baselines.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;No apparent errors in SMSQL's logs, and it does also update the first relation I created, but never the other one... &amp;nbsp;I have can manually do an update of the relation, and it transferes the updates ok...&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;One simple workaround could be to just setup a schedule on one or maybe even both the protection policies...&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Another workaround could be to execute a little powershell script at the end of the backu jobs, to make sure both relations update...&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;But I would like to know if it should infact be possible with two snapvault relations ?&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Kind regards,&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Heino&lt;/P&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Thu, 05 Jun 2025 04:22:26 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.netapp.com/t5/Data-Protection/SMSQL-SnapVault-Fanout-configuration/m-p/104585#M4380</guid>
      <dc:creator>heinowalther</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2025-06-05T04:22:26Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: SMSQL SnapVault Fanout configuration</title>
      <link>https://community.netapp.com/t5/Data-Protection/SMSQL-SnapVault-Fanout-configuration/m-p/106116#M4381</link>
      <description>&lt;P&gt;Hi Heino,&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;I am also running SMSQL 7.2 with SD 7.1.1 on cDOT 8.2.3.&amp;nbsp; I have two clusters and have two SnapVault relationships running from one source.&amp;nbsp; I intend on using the first SnapVault relationship for SMVI backups and the second relationship for SMSQL backups.&amp;nbsp; I intend on using this configuration in order to split the number of snapshots being acumulated (SMVI SnapShots and SMSQL SnapShots).&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;My concern now is however that when I run an SMSQL job it updates both SnapVault relationships.&amp;nbsp; Additionally it also adds the SMSQL snapshots to the first relationship which completely goes against what I am trying to achieve in terms of spreading the snapshot burden across more volumes.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;I hope that somebody sees this post and can answer both your question and also mine.&lt;/P&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Thu, 11 Jun 2015 09:17:35 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.netapp.com/t5/Data-Protection/SMSQL-SnapVault-Fanout-configuration/m-p/106116#M4381</guid>
      <dc:creator>JustinM</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2015-06-11T09:17:35Z</dc:date>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>

