We are currently looking into purchasing VCF in a stretched setup to replace our current HCI Solution from another vendor.
A lot of our applications are already redundant and have no need to be stretched over two locations, which seems to be rather easy to setup with Storage Policies, so that is a no issue for us.
Our biggest concern is that there seems to be no good way to properly place VMs in their correct sight without jumping through hops with:
- Creating the VM with the correct Storage Policy
- Add VM manually to VM-Host Group
I really can't see how it's acceptable for a product to not have implemented any kind of VM Policy to solve this issue, nor why a VM with PFTT=0 and SiteAffinity is not following the storage placement.
Either I'm dumb and I just can't find it in all the menus or else this featuring is lacking which is a major issue when looking at the product.
Any tips on our concern and perhaps any upcoming enhancments regarding this?
Hi there, sadly the is no out of the box option for that.
If you using vRA or any other IaaS tool, you have affinity rules and when provision have the new vms added to the groups (site a and site b for example)
I know that is an overhead of work and configurations but it is a viable workaround. (had the same issue and this was one of the ways I figured out this placement could be done)
Cheers and lets hope for some improvements here!
Unfortunately we don't have this as part of the product today. I have already asked our engineering team to make "affinity group membership" part of the VM provisioning workflow, but if/when that would be added to the product I don't know. For now you would have to indeed do this after the provisioning of the VM.
Note that we are working on some enhancements to DRS, basically integration with vSAN, which would allow for smarter load balancing etc. But that is also something that is planned for a future release, which may or may not ever make it.