The NetApp Community is moving to a new platform and is in Read-Only mode. Click to learn more.
Stay connected during the transition - Join our Discord community today.

Data Protection

SMSQL SnapVault Fanout configuration

heinowalther
3,364 Views

Hi there

 

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.

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.

Sadly I cannot get both SV relations to update after a successful backup, and I am unsure is it is officially supported?

I have ofcause configured SD so it can use all 3 VSM's on the 3 different clusteres, and I have done the baselines.

No apparent errors in SMSQL's logs, and it does also update the first relation I created, but never the other one...  I have can manually do an update of the relation, and it transferes the updates ok...

One simple workaround could be to just setup a schedule on one or maybe even both the protection policies... 

Another workaround could be to execute a little powershell script at the end of the backu jobs, to make sure both relations update...

 

But I would like to know if it should infact be possible with two snapvault relations ?

 

Kind regards,

Heino

1 REPLY 1

JustinM
3,252 Views

Hi Heino,

 

I am also running SMSQL 7.2 with SD 7.1.1 on cDOT 8.2.3.  I have two clusters and have two SnapVault relationships running from one source.  I intend on using the first SnapVault relationship for SMVI backups and the second relationship for SMSQL backups.  I intend on using this configuration in order to split the number of snapshots being acumulated (SMVI SnapShots and SMSQL SnapShots).

 

My concern now is however that when I run an SMSQL job it updates both SnapVault relationships.  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.

 

I hope that somebody sees this post and can answer both your question and also mine.

Public