<?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 Split site failover? in HPE Nimble Storage Solution Specialists</title>
    <link>https://community.hpe.com/t5/hpe-nimble-storage-solution/split-site-failover/m-p/7097777#M311</link>
    <description>&lt;P&gt;Hello,&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Does anyone know of a split site failover setup? As in site A fails and 50% of the workload goes to site B and 50% to site C. 100% virtualized on VMware. Since the Nimble arrays support multiple replications partners it should be theoretically possible, but it gives me the shivers in regards of complexity.&lt;BR /&gt;All sites active, so a failure on site B should fail over 50% of the workload to site A and 50% to site C. Same for site C.&lt;BR /&gt;The VM network is virtualized so all sites have access to the same VLANs to run VMs.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;I've got an executive who pushes for that, even with 4 sites so only 33% workload goes to each of the remaining site.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;I can't find any documentation that it isn't possible, but I can't find anyone who has done it either. Any thoughts?&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;The end goal is to run the compute workload higher than 50% on each site and still be able to fail over to the remaining sites without any resource contention in a DR scenario. Which means redistribution of the workload if there are changes is also important.&lt;/P&gt;</description>
    <pubDate>Mon, 10 Aug 2020 16:36:20 GMT</pubDate>
    <dc:creator>k_erik</dc:creator>
    <dc:date>2020-08-10T16:36:20Z</dc:date>
    <item>
      <title>Split site failover?</title>
      <link>https://community.hpe.com/t5/hpe-nimble-storage-solution/split-site-failover/m-p/7097777#M311</link>
      <description>&lt;P&gt;Hello,&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Does anyone know of a split site failover setup? As in site A fails and 50% of the workload goes to site B and 50% to site C. 100% virtualized on VMware. Since the Nimble arrays support multiple replications partners it should be theoretically possible, but it gives me the shivers in regards of complexity.&lt;BR /&gt;All sites active, so a failure on site B should fail over 50% of the workload to site A and 50% to site C. Same for site C.&lt;BR /&gt;The VM network is virtualized so all sites have access to the same VLANs to run VMs.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;I've got an executive who pushes for that, even with 4 sites so only 33% workload goes to each of the remaining site.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;I can't find any documentation that it isn't possible, but I can't find anyone who has done it either. Any thoughts?&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;The end goal is to run the compute workload higher than 50% on each site and still be able to fail over to the remaining sites without any resource contention in a DR scenario. Which means redistribution of the workload if there are changes is also important.&lt;/P&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Mon, 10 Aug 2020 16:36:20 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.hpe.com/t5/hpe-nimble-storage-solution/split-site-failover/m-p/7097777#M311</guid>
      <dc:creator>k_erik</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2020-08-10T16:36:20Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: Split site failover?</title>
      <link>https://community.hpe.com/t5/hpe-nimble-storage-solution/split-site-failover/m-p/7100070#M319</link>
      <description>&lt;P&gt;With new NOS code 5.2.1.x and above, you can replicate same volume to two different arrays.&lt;BR /&gt;you can make replicated volume online when array A is not available. volume can be online on array B but it can't be online on array C at the same time.&lt;BR /&gt;As i know, Nimble Arrays do not support split site failover. However, this concept may be implemented in future.&lt;/P&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Wed, 02 Sep 2020 17:10:59 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.hpe.com/t5/hpe-nimble-storage-solution/split-site-failover/m-p/7100070#M319</guid>
      <dc:creator>Candhade</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2020-09-02T17:10:59Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: Split site failover?</title>
      <link>https://community.hpe.com/t5/hpe-nimble-storage-solution/split-site-failover/m-p/7100073#M320</link>
      <description>&lt;P&gt;Thanks, luckily I managed to get the exec away from the idea.&lt;BR /&gt;&lt;BR /&gt;His plan wasn't to replicate each volume to two arrays, but 50% of the load (by capacity and performance usage) to one downstream array, and the other 50% to a different downstream array. Then rebalance this automatically when the load changed.&lt;BR /&gt;I told him I understand the concept, but that I can't create a such an advanced software.&lt;/P&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Wed, 02 Sep 2020 18:11:19 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.hpe.com/t5/hpe-nimble-storage-solution/split-site-failover/m-p/7100073#M320</guid>
      <dc:creator>k_erik</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2020-09-02T18:11:19Z</dc:date>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>

