3 Replies Latest reply on Jun 13, 2018 10:16 AM by Bentze Perlmutter

    Control-m V9 in Virtual Redhat machine on Vmware

    Mandar Ingale

      Hi All,

       

      Has any one implemented control-m v9 in redhat virtual machine (with vmware).? We are in middle of upgrading control-m version from v7 to v9 and also working migrating from IBM AIX physical to Redhat Virtual machines.

      I am requesting my infra team to provide os clustering along with Vmware. But my infra team is saying it will be overkill of system and vmware HA and Vmware Vmotion will sufffice failover cases.. I am bit worried for os failure, os corruption which vmware can not handle.

       

      Has any one implemented vmware plus os clustering solution? if not how you are handling os corruption or os failure cases.

       

      Also, how is performance in running application in virtual environment??

       

      Ichecked with BMC support, and got answer as "it is upto you" if you want additional safety net you can have it.

        • 1. Re: Control-m V9 in Virtual Redhat machine on Vmware
          Bentze Perlmutter

          Hi Mandar,

           

          I'm aware of many customers that have Control-M on VMWare (Linux RH or Windows seem to be the most popular) and overall no issues.

          The performance is fine as long as the underlying VM environment is managed well and can handle the load of all the VM images.

          I agree with you that VMWare out-of-the-box solution does not offer real HA for applications.

          It only covers issues to the ESX servers themselves.

          O/S corruption, planned outages (for example for OS patching), accidental file deletion will not be prevented by having VM.

          I would recommend you use Control-M v9 HA solution which doesn't require an expensive cluster software.

          Just have two VM Images and install Control-M on them, one as Primary and one as Secondary, and you now have a much better HA solution. (this is possible as long as your DB is Oralce)

           

          Regards,

          Bentze

          • 2. Re: Control-m V9 in Virtual Redhat machine on Vmware
            Mandar Ingale

            Hi Bentze,

            Thanks for your reply. Much appreciated. Good to know other customers moving on VMware and guest os as RH/windows.

            With proposed solution as to utilize control-m application ha and decouple DB as separate instance db host(for oracle).

             

            But here also can you confirm which db clustering software you are using (if any?) because we take out db component then there should be dedicated DB cluster software to tackle DB failure. Do you happen to know what DB clustering software you are using with ORacle? Will oracle rac suffice requirement with Data center and across data center Oracle Data Guard?

             

            If any chance you have such setup, will it possible for you to share your experience on that front? Any technical consideration while using Oracle RAC or Data Guard? Whether Oracle RAC will be compatible with VMware HA?

             

            Basically with oracle DB in place, control-m setup will be of Two tiers setup. First Tier is DB layer and Second tier is Application layer (we don't have third tier as web layer) and I was planning to have separate cluster solution for all tiers. For application tier, control-m HA and DB tier DB clustering solution and for Infra level we will continue with VMware HA.

             

            Any suggestion will be welcomed on this. Thanks again.

            • 3. Re: Control-m V9 in Virtual Redhat machine on Vmware
              Bentze Perlmutter

              Hi Mandar,

               

              The Oracle setups I see, in the order of most common to least common are:

              1. Oracle RAC for intra DC HA and Data Guard for Inter DC DR

              2. Only Data Guard, usually inter DC

              3. Oracle Exadata (inter and intra DC)

               

              I believe it is a question of cost if to use RAC, only DG, or Exadata.

              Control-M works fine with all three, RAC and Exadata require no changes in Control-M when the DB failsover, but with DG you tend to have to update the DB hostname when Data Guard failsover.

              In v9 Control-M comes with a script to update the hostname of the DB so that task is now very easy and doesn't take a long time.

               

              What you use I guess depends on your budget and what your DB team offers. In my opinion Exadata is the best as it theoretically offers automated failover with no downtime. RAC offers the same but only in the DC, while DG would require an outage to the application when a failover happens.

               

              BTW, in v918 the EM Web Server is used for all communication between Clients and EM Server (CORBA is not used for that purpose anymore) so you may want to consider to put the Web Server on its own servers and therefore tier 3.

              You can do that using the Control-M/EM Distributed install were you run a Web Server + GSR on a third, and even fourth server.

              Then you put an F5 LB between clients and the two Web Server hosts so you have active/active web servers.

               

              Regards,

              Bentze