Solved

CommServe database views

  • 23 May 2022
  • 9 replies
  • 114 views

Userlevel 7
Badge +16

I'm trying to assemble a list, for customer billing based on companies, of unique client object who are protected by all forms of protection methods. So think of application-level, file-system-level and VM-level and all within the scope of a company. 

So I though this would be an easy walk in the park by enumerating views:

  • Lic_CUR_ProtectedVMs_vw - to retrieve a list of VMs who are protected on VM-level
  • Lic_CUR_VOIs_vw - to retrieve a list of VM's who are protected using an agent.

I would then make sure to filter out the duplicatie objects (I will have to do some filtering machine as I'm already noticing duplicate client computer with an _ in their names) and to remove the clients from the output of Lic_CUR_VOIs_vw who exist in the output of Lic_CUR_ProtectedVMs_vw because I want to make sure we capture all VMs running on an on-premise cloud platform which  doesn't support VM-level protection.

Now I'm running into an issue in where the output of Lic_CUR_VOIs_vw is not showing clients who I would have expected to show-up. Those are protected on VM-level and via an agent. 

Can someone point me in the right direction??

In addition it would be really helpful if you could create some documentation on the newly added CommCell views. The list currently has grown substantially and https://documentation.commvault.com/11.24/expert/5521_available_commcell_views.html is still not showing any of the newly added views.

 

icon

Best answer by Mike Struening 8 August 2022, 19:26

View original

9 replies

Userlevel 7
Badge +15

Hi @Onno van den Berg 

Thanks for raising this, I can bring the question around documentation for SQL Views up internally and see if we can expand on the documentation you mention to include any new additions.

 

As for a VOI client that also uses an agent, since you’re checking this from a licensing perspective, it may be that the agent installed removes the VM from VOI consumption.

When an agent is installed on a client manually (not using AppAware workflow), this causes the client to be considered as a physical client and would no longer be considered for VOI.

This may be the reason why some expected clients aren’t showing the VOI consumption view - a cross reference with License Summary Report to compare license consumption for specific clients might help confirm/eliminate this theory.

 

As this is quite a specific and detailed question, in order to get into the details for specific clients, I think a support case here may be more beneficial as we can stage your Commserve database and have these discussions that aren’t appropriate for public forums.

 

We can then discuss the views and put some requests to Development to really get the details you are looking for - if you would PM me the case number, I can track this internally for you.

 

Thanks,

Stuart

Userlevel 7
Badge +16

I will open a ticket and will explain my requirements. I think I'm hitting a strange issue here. As far as I know a VOI might only change into an OI in case of a specific circumstance, but normally VM's with an agent installed are reported as VOI. It is also documented here:
https://documentation.commvault.com/11.26/essential/114664_virtual_operating_instances_in_license_summary_report_02.html

But I'm seeing inconsistencies in where a VM that is protected as VM and through an agent not being reported as VOI. I however just found this:

Multiple protection methods/agents within a single VM
When a single virtual machine is protected in more than one way (i.e., multiple agents are used), a single virtual machine name will not be counted more than once against license consumption when Virtual Operating Instance metering is in use. There are no limits considered (from a license perspective) around how many applications within a single VM can be supported. However, if a virtual machine is further parsed or partitioned into multiple logically named operating entities, those individual names may be counted as their own VM, depending on how (or if) those entities are addressed for protection


Source: https://documentation.commvault.com/11.26/assets/pdf/commvault-complete-license-guide.pdf

I have interpreted this as in case you do both way than you will not see the client listed as VOI anymore.

So to keep it short I just need confirmation that a client will indeed not appear in the output of Lic_CUR_VOIs_vw once you protect it through VSA but that it will be reported as part of Lic_CUR_VOIJobs_NotInCapacity_vw.

Userlevel 7
Badge +15

Hi @Onno van den Berg 

Yes, we need to get to the bottom of this and the best way will be staging your Commserve database and checking this through in detail with specific examples via a support case.

SQL Views are a very low level way to view data in the Commserve database, where the user interface and license consumption may take other values into consideration.

Let’s check all these factors together and figure out the best way for you to obtain the data you need.

Thanks,

Stuart

 

 

Userlevel 7
Badge +16

I openend TR 220524-348

Userlevel 7
Badge +15

Thanks @Onno van den Berg 

I’m tracking this support case internally, Development have been engaged and we’re getting some feedback for you.

I’ll allow the case to run it’s course and then provide a summary here with the outcomes.

Thanks,

Stuart

Userlevel 7
Badge +16

Update: so version 2022e aka FR28 contains an updated version of the "License summary - worldwide" giving access to almost all required information, but it is lacking the hypervisor type which will be added as part of FR29 → release 2023.

I honestly do not like this route as it requires the scheduling of a report that dumps the info to CSV which we'll process and make available via a datacube. Would have been nice if this can be done directly from the database or which I'm still investigating via the restAPI.

 

 

Userlevel 7
Badge +23

Sharing case resolution:

Solution:

Customer agreed to wait for FR30 , meanwhile customer work internally to find some workaround.
From Development response following information may help customer to build the report with some (not all) the information customer requested.

Cloud report we have will give some of the information at one place ( e.g VOI Type Protected or not protected, company name , Company ID, Jobid, and Client details)
However for workload or Hypervisor model information we need to wait for SP29.

 

Patch ID, Script, Service Pack, or MR#:

FR29 ( CPR 2023)

 

As per @Onno van den Berg , adding a small note that it does not allow you to create a new report. It is a standard Metrics report which can be exported and then be imported into another source. Not sure if you can copy the report and make changes to it without loosing the logic.

In in the meantime working on an alternative which you might noticed giving the fact that I'm chasing development to fix the v2 Powershell SDK → https://www.powershellgallery.com/packages/CommvaultPowerShell

Userlevel 7
Badge +16

Yes, with a small note that it does not allow you to create a new report. It is a standard Metrics report which can be exported and then be imported into another source. Not sure if you can copy the report and make changes to it without loosing the logic.

In in the meantime working on an alternative which you might noticed giving the fact that I'm chasing development to fix the v2 Powershell SDK → https://www.powershellgallery.com/packages/CommvaultPowerShell
 

Userlevel 7
Badge +23

Awesome, thanks!

Reply