ok7827125
Contributor
Contributor

The problem of mismatch between CG and Protection Group in SRM

Jump to solution

We are using EMC RecoverPoint Replication (CRR) to replicate our main set of datastores to a remote site, and utilizing VMware SRM 6.5 to run failover/failback. To protect 30 datastores through CG,  created 10 consistency group in Recoverpoint and each of them with three or four LUNs. The strange problem is when we are going to create Protection Group in SRM, we suffer from the mismatch between the number of CG in Recoverpoint and the number of CGs seen in Protection Group wizard in SRM. To make it clear, in this step, we could see and selected only 5 CGs which is not match to the number of CGs in RecoverPoint. One of the CGs has comprised 12 datastores and mixed them together, and it would be strange!.

Furthermore, after this stage, if I create new CG in RecoverPoint and add numbers of datastores to it, there is no problem and I can see it correctly in SRM Protection Group wizard!

What are the problems or possible cases I have to check?

If there is any idea or best practices to design CGs in Recoverpoint, please share it.

0 Kudos
1 Solution

Accepted Solutions
ok7827125
Contributor
Contributor

To notify others, after a little research I realized the problem. The problem was precisely the case with a number of virtual machines that have multiple disks, and VMDKs were located in different datastores. In fact, a virtual machine with multiple disks where the disks were in a different datastores, so that each datastore was in a consistency group. after relocating VMDKs in the same datastores, the mismatch seen in the protection group wizard is solved!Smiley Wink

View solution in original post

0 Kudos
1 Reply
ok7827125
Contributor
Contributor

To notify others, after a little research I realized the problem. The problem was precisely the case with a number of virtual machines that have multiple disks, and VMDKs were located in different datastores. In fact, a virtual machine with multiple disks where the disks were in a different datastores, so that each datastore was in a consistency group. after relocating VMDKs in the same datastores, the mismatch seen in the protection group wizard is solved!Smiley Wink

0 Kudos