Skip to main content

Ran into a small issue with plans when trying to define two datacenters(regions) in same city. Trying to figure out if this is intended behavior, or if I have misunderstood the region concept totally.

In the two datacenters I have workloads that should be backed up locally and then replicated to the other datacenter, so i set up the serverplan to be regionbased.

However I was unable to add the new destination, since the regions was so similar. I had to change the city of one of them to be able to use it. 

It then works as intended, using the region of the client to decide where to backup. However, I can see having multiple DC’s in same city as being relevant. Wouldn’t it be better to use the name of the region as the only validator and not the city. Using just the city as metadata, or is there another thought behind this?

As a workaround I know I could derive the plan and get a new server plan where i specify storage the other way around, but i like the concept of regionbased, except that it could not be two in the same city.

Additionally it would be beneficial to be able to add new regions to Azure, as multiple regions are missing there. in my case Azure Norway East and Norway West. I can define them as user-configured.

Hi @John Robert , hope all is well.

Regions are meant to denote physical areas of geography and the storage within to tell clients to use those local resources.

For those following along, here’s the docs:

https://documentation.commvault.com/2022e/essential/107547_regions.html

In your case, you’re using the region functionality without using the intention (i.e. you are dividing resources but within the same geographic area).

I’m going to ask internally if there’s any better method here (or if we need a CMR).

You could also use tags to better set things up in this specific a scenario, though I totally see where you are thinking here.

https://documentation.commvault.com/2022e/essential/139220_creating_tag_for_entity.html

I have some additional info from one of our top SMEs.

Your specific request would probably be a CMR (especially regarding adding the Azure regions).

In FR28 we allow for the creation of 'Plan Rules' to automatically associate entities to different plans based on a number of different factors (both Regions and Tags both being applicable criteria).

However that would require that these different backup destinations be configured in 2 different plans, rather than 2 different destinations within the same plan, so I'm not sure if that's something you wants to do or not.

 

In your case, you’re using the region functionality without using the intention (i.e. you are dividing resources but within the same geographic area).

 

Hi @Mike Struening,

You can say I may want to use the intention of regionbased. But in my case the geographical area is a bit smaller especially in this usecase, and the only reason i discovered it was that one region was azure norway east located in oslo, and a local datacenter in oslo.  So the question is how big should a region be? 

Currently a region can be defined as two neighbouring areas. like Woodside and Jackson Heights in New York 2.2 km apart from each other (assuming that there is no other behind the scene logic than name of location deciding if it is identical). This works great for US and probably other big cities, as you have divided locations down to smaller locations. as the example of Woodside and Jackson heights. But in Norway, Oslo is one location. 20 km across.

---

In afterthought I see that for my environment I think plan rules would be the way forward for me, as they would scale more in a multi-tenant environment with company associations. as the regions would be visible for all and thus could not contain customer locations.

 

Glad to hear plan rules fit your needs!!

Reply


Terms & ConditionsCookie settings