cancel
Showing results for 
Search instead for 
Did you mean: 

How to add virtual interface of media server in NBU console

dpx_99
Level 4

Hi Experts,

I'v configured 3 teaming interfaces (total 6 NIC ports) on my physical media server. all 3 teaming interfaces are having their own ip addresses.

my question is how can i add these virtual interfaces as media servers in NBU console?

also i want to present 3 media servers (virtual) to my clients. idea is to use 3 GB throughput (inbound in LACP) for all clients. at this moment, only can use 1GB interface on media servers.

for example:

msserver-a1_team1   192.168.10.150

msserver-a2_team2   192.168.10.151

msserver-a2_team3   192.168.10.152

Any suggestion will be highly appriciated.

Thanks,

dpx

14 REPLIES 14

quebek
Moderator
Moderator
   VIP    Certified

Hey

Via hostname.... ie in bp.conf file you would need to add on master and all medias and clients...

MEDIA_SERVER=msserver-a1_team1

MEDIA_SERVER=msserver-a2_team2

MEDIA_SERVER=msserver-a3_team3

 

Or check this https://www.veritas.com/support/en_US/article.000028827

Mike_Gavrilov
Moderator
Moderator
Partner    VIP    Accredited Certified

It isn't a good solution. What about creating teaming over 6 NICs and network switch incoming traffic balancing? You'll avoid  all these steps with "virtual" media servers and futher problems that come with such imperfect architecture. 

@Mike,
I,ve already this configuration (lacp ) but as we know in teaming 6 interfaces with lacp only will give 1GB inbound throughput and balance the load. But creating 3 teaming interfaces (lacp) would create 3gb throughput. Pls correct me if it is wrong approach?
Thanks
Dpx

Mike_Gavrilov
Moderator
Moderator
Partner    VIP    Accredited Certified

No, network switch could balance incoming traffic using different algorithms (round-robin, MAC-based and so on) among all NICs and each connection could go to a different NIC in aggregation (teaming). Of course, it wouldn't be perfectly balanced but still.

If you create several teamed interfaces then you would get lots of unnecessary work. Imagine the situation then media-server has 3 IPs in the same network. It would use the same NIC all the time for all clients in the same subnet, you'll have to fix lots of network issues, write static routes or play with preferred networks. Do you really need it? 

@Mike, I agree that incoming traffic can be balanced but it will still use one interface in LACP for incoming traffic and throughput will be 1G. My thought is to use 3 teaming interfaces ( 6 ports) for backup and duplication. Before teaming interfaces (without LACP) I had better performance for backup when only 2 NICs were connected to switch without load balance (switch independent configuration on Windows)
Therefore, now I,m thinking to implement this.

Mike_Gavrilov
Moderator
Moderator
Partner    VIP    Accredited Certified

Many thanks @Mike_Gavrilov,

I understand the concept but is it possible to have good throughput when you are running backup and duplication together on teaming interface?

My thought is here to create many streams to media servers + and dedicated links among media servers for duplication.

thanks

dpx

Mike_Gavrilov
Moderator
Moderator
Partner    VIP    Accredited Certified

>I understand the concept but is it possible to have good throughput when you are running backup and duplication together on teaming interface?

Yes, it's possible because LACP isn't active-passive model and you can balance incoming/outgoing traffic among all NICs. 

>My thought is here to create many streams to media servers + and dedicated links among media servers for duplication.

If you don't believe me you can test this configuration first and if it doesn't work you can implement your own solution. It wouldn't take a lot of time.

@Mike, many thanks for the conversation.
Well, I have already changed the configuration from 2 ports team (without LACP) to 6 ports teaming interface (lacp active/active) but performance is even degraded what I had before.

Configuration before : 2 NICs without LACP on switch.
After: 6 NICs with LACP active/active in switch ( lacp + address hash on Windows level.

Mike_Gavrilov
Moderator
Moderator
Partner    VIP    Accredited Certified
How did you test performance?

I compared the backup time from client backup report.

Mike_Gavrilov
Moderator
Moderator
Partner    VIP    Accredited Certified

It's wrong. You should create load from multiple clients because LACP  incoming balancing wouldn't occur for one clients it would simlply utilize one interface. Run 10 backups and calculate total bandwidth.  

That's fine, but what about throughput ? in my opinion, It would be still 1GB and only load will balance across interfaces.

Mike_Gavrilov
Moderator
Moderator
Partner    VIP    Accredited Certified

No, all interfaces will be utilized. The main idea is that 1 connection from a clinet can't get more that 1Gb but  6 clients will get 1Gb x 6. That's why you can't test 6 NICs aggregation using 1 client.