Earlier this month I had the opportunity to meet with a number of VMware customers in both Singapore and in the UAE. Most of the sessions were enablement and education type sessions, where there was a lot of white-boarding of VSAN (VMware’s hyper-converged infrastructure product) and Virtual Volumes (VVols – Software Defined Storage or SDS for the storage arrays). This wasn’t a sales session; I’m not in sales. The objective of these sessions was simply to educate. I guess when you are immersed in this stuff 24×7, it easy to fall into the trap of believing that everyone is well versed in this technology, and that’s simply not the case.
With both virtualization teams and storage teams in the room at the same time, it was important to show the building blocks with each approach, as well as to compare and contrast the advantages of the different storage solutions over the other. As I repeatedly delivered the same session, I thought it might be useful to share my thoughts with a broader audience, in the guise of this blog post.
By default VSAN.ClomMaxComponentSizeGB is set to 255GB. When Virtual SAN stores virtual machine objects, it creates components whose default size does not exceed 255 GB. If you use physical disks that are smaller than 255GB, then you might see errors similar to the following when you try to deploy a virtual machine:
There is no more space for virtual disk XX. You might be able to continue this session by freeing disk space on the relevant volume and clicking retry.
This is a new feature in vSphere 6.0 that I only recently became aware of. Prior to vSphere 6.0, all the I/Os from a given virtual machine to a particular device would share a single I/O queue. This would result in all the I/Os from the VM (boot VMDK, data VMDK, snapshot delta) queued into a single per-VM, per-device queue. This caused I/Os from different VMDKs interfere with each other and could actually hurt fairness.
For example, if a VMDK was used by a database, and this database issued a lot of I/O, this could compete with I/Os from the boot-disk. This in turn could make it appear that the VM (Guest OS) is running slowly.
I already wrote an article on the NexentaConnect for VSAN product after seeing it in action at VMworld last year. More recently, I had the opportunity to play with it in earnest. Rather than giving you the whole low-down on NexentaConnect, instead I will use this post to show the steps involved in presenting a file share built by NexentaConnect to a VM. In this case, the VM and the file share both reside on Virtual SAN. I will also show you how to simply revert to a point-in-time snapshot of the file share using NexentaConnect. To answer the common question, “can VSAN do file shares as well as storing virtual machines?”, the answer is yes. This post will show you how.
I’ve had an opportunity recently to get some hands-on with HyTrust’s Data Control product to do some data encryption of virtual machine disks in my Virtual SAN 6.0 environment. I won’t deep dive into all of the “bells and whistle” details about HyTrust – my good buddy Rawlinson has already done a tremendous job detailing that in this blog post. Instead I am going to go through a step-by-step example of how to use HyTrust and show how it prevents your virtual machine disk from being snooped. In my case, I am encrypting virtual machine disks from VMs that are deployed on VSAN, as I have had this question in the past, i.e. can VMDKs on VSAN be encrypted? The answer is yes. This post will show you how.
I’ve been hit up this week by a number of folks asking about “ATS Miscompare detected between test and set HB images” messages after upgrading to vSphere 5.5U2 and 6.0. The purpose of this post is to give you some background on why this might have started to happen.
In vSphere 5.5U2, we started using ATS for maintaining the heartbeat. Prior to this release, we only used ATS when the heartbeat state changed. For example, referring to the older blog, we would use ATS in the following cases:
Acquire a heartbeat
Clear a heartbeat
Replay a heartbeat
Reclaim a heartbeat
We did not use ATS for maintaining the ‘liveness’ of a heartbeat. This is the change that was introduced in 5.5U2 and which appears to have led to issues for certain storage arrays.