toasters

toasters@lists.teaparty.net

3 participants
13513 discussions

Re:
by Douglas Siggins 18 Nov '20

18 Nov '20

Florian, On upgrade you will see newly created custom policies. From my understanding service policies will replace both roles and firewall policies. However at this point (and I could be slightly incorrect) both the firewall policy and service policy will apply. I've done numerous upgrades and have not had to pre create these policies. You may however want/need to clean these policies up later. EG: custom-data-29990 data-core: 0.0.0.0/0 data-cifs: 0.0.0.0/0 management-portmap: 0.0.0.0/0 default-data-blocks data-core: 0.0.0.0/0 data-iscsi: 0.0.0.0/0 default-data-files data-core: 0.0.0.0/0 data-cifs: 0.0.0.0/0 default-management data-core: 0.0.0.0/0 management-ssh: 0.0.0.0/0 management-https: 0.0.0.0/0 This is yet another gripe on netapp making yet another option for lifs. If Netapp is listening, remove complexity dont add more. What did service policies offer vs roles and firewall policies? As with any upgrade, you should have a test environment to see exactly what is happening (maybe an old FAS2554?). Thanks! Douglas On Tue, Nov 17, 2020 at 5:55 AM Florian Schmid via Toasters < toasters(a)teaparty.net> wrote: > > > > ---------- Forwarded message ---------- > From: Florian Schmid <fschmid(a)ubimet.com> > To: toasters <toasters(a)teaparty.net> > Cc: > Bcc: > Date: Tue, 17 Nov 2020 10:52:28 +0000 (UTC) > Subject: Netapp upgrade from 9.5P10 to 9.7P7 - lif service policy > Hi, > > I have to upgrade our netapp cluster from 9.5P10 to 9.7P8 and I read in > the release notes about the "new" lif service policy. > I also read, that lif roles, like we are using them for now, are > deprecated in 9.6. > > My question is now, do I need to add a service policy to every lif before > upgrading to 9.7 or can I do this later? > Do I need to do this or does netapp it automatically, when upgrading to a > release, which doesn't support it anymore? > > Thank you very much in advance. > > BR Florian > > > > ---------- Forwarded message ---------- > From: Florian Schmid via Toasters <toasters(a)teaparty.net> > To: toasters <toasters(a)teaparty.net> > Cc: > Bcc: > Date: Tue, 17 Nov 2020 10:52:34 GMT > Subject: > _______________________________________________ > Toasters mailing list > Toasters(a)teaparty.net > https://www.teaparty.net/mailman/listinfo/toasters

2 1

Netapp upgrade from 9.5P10 to 9.7P7 - lif service policy
by Florian Schmid 17 Nov '20

17 Nov '20

Hi, I have to upgrade our netapp cluster from 9.5P10 to 9.7P8 and I read in the release notes about the "new" lif service policy. I also read, that lif roles, like we are using them for now, are deprecated in 9.6. My question is now, do I need to add a service policy to every lif before upgrading to 9.7 or can I do this later? Do I need to do this or does netapp it automatically, when upgrading to a release, which doesn't support it anymore? Thank you very much in advance. BR Florian

1 0

Config Advisor 6.1 Misleading Information?
by Alexander Griesser 12 Nov '20

12 Nov '20

Hey there, we just deployed CA 6.1 and had it running against some of our clusters. Some of the findings here are "interesting", f.ex.: Warning: A minimum of 2 Cluster LIFs should be configured and active. This storage appliance has 0 cluster LIFs defined but only 0 is active. Cluster Interconnect Bandwidth is compromised and cluster LIF redundancy is unavailable. vs: CLUSTER::> net int show -role cluster (network interface show) Logical Status Network Current Current Is Vserver Interface Admin/Oper Address/Mask Node Port Home ----------- ---------- ---------- ------------------ ------------- ------- ---- Cluster Node1_clus1 up/up 169.254.221.243/16 node1 e0a true Node1_clus2 up/up 169.254.71.9/16 node1 e0b true Node2_clus1 up/up 169.254.111.202/16 node2 e0a true node2_clus2 up/up 169.254.213.249/16 node2 e0b true 4 entries were displayed. What exactly is it checking here? Do I need to assign a new flag to those LIFs in order for CA to recognize them properly? Informational: Thin provisioning features are not enabled. Thin Provisioning features are not enabled on following volumes: node1:node1_root Until "Volume Guarantees" are removed, thin provisioning is not enabled, therefore storage efficiency cannot be guaranteed. Vs: https://library.netapp.com/ecmdocs/ECMP1196981/html/GUID-38F008C4-3CAA-4C81… "You should not use thin provisioning for root volumes." Informational: The node is configured as a single node cluster and is not saving configuration backups remotely. Single node cluster configurations should save backup configuration files remotely to allow for recovery in the event of a node/root volume failure. In the event of a node failure, the cluster configuration will not be able to be recovered. Vs: CLUSTER::> cluster show Node Health Eligibility --------------------- ------- ------------ Node1 true true Node2 true true 2 entries were displayed. -> It also failed to recognize a two-node cluster, is there a flag it checks which I missed to set? Anyone else experiencing issues like these? Thanks, Alexander Griesser Head of Systems Operations ANEXIA Internetdienstleistungs GmbH E-Mail: AGriesser(a)anexia-it.com<mailto:AGriesser@anexia-it.com> Web: http://www.anexia-it.com<http://www.anexia-it.com/> Anschrift Hauptsitz Klagenfurt: Feldkirchnerstraße 140, 9020 Klagenfurt Geschäftsführer: Alexander Windbichler Firmenbuch: FN 289918a | Gerichtsstand: Klagenfurt | UID-Nummer: AT U63216601

2 2

NetApp disks in Lenovo branded storage
by Heino Walther 10 Nov '20

10 Nov '20

Hi there A Lenovo DM5000 (A300 equivariant) has X357 SSD’s installed. Does anyone know if it is possible to install NetApp X357 disks in such a system? Will it work? And is the canister different color? My guess it that the color might be different, but that it will work without any problems, but has anyone tried? /Heino Heino Walther<https://www.linkedin.com/in/heinowalther/> Beardmann ApS<http://beardmann.dk/> Jellingvej 9 - 7100 Vejle<https://goo.gl/maps/xQVPFMHXpXu> D: 7199 9060 M: 2075 7501 --

1 0

Cluster stall issue going to switched cluster...
by Heino Walther 09 Nov '20

09 Nov '20

Hi guys I just had a bad experience today when trying to convert my switchless AFF8080 to a switched cluster using a pair of CN1610 switches. The two switches are about 100M from the AFF8080 so the round trip is of cause increased from 0,5M to 200M. But I do not think this is the problem here? We of cause use MultiMode fibers between the two DCs, and the fibers checks out and didn’t seem to have any errors. I followed this guide to convert two ports at a time: https://library.netapp.com/ecm/ecm_download_file/ECMP1140535 And it seemed to work just great on the console 😉 I must admit that I didn’t down the CN1610 ports as described because you also down the ports on the NetApp side, so it seems pointless to do it on both sides… Other than that I followed the guide. As soon as I completed the migration, the users started to complain about very slow access on both CIFS, NFS and iSCSI. We looked at the port stats of the link but there were no errors… and the system seemed to serve data, just very much slower the normal… so we had to bite the bullet and switch back again, and as soon as we were back to the normal back2back cables, the system was normal again… Going through the logs I found this error on one of the four links… 11/9/2020 13:40:34 STOR01-01 ERROR netif.sfpNotSupported: The SFP+ or QSFP+ module (FINISAR CORP. FTLF8528P3BCV-QL) installed in e0a is not supported with this network interface. And I must admit that a non-netapp SFP+ module had found its way to my stash 😉. The other SFP+ modules were the same PN but just with a “NA1” at the end…. I’m not sure if this could cause this issue? I have seen poor performance when using a non-supported NIC in a NetApp, but non-supported SFP+ module? Has anyone had issues like this? We are on ONTAP 9.7P7 and the CN1610 are running a quote old FW, but I have used them for other projects with no issues (i.e. multi node NetApp clusters)… /Heino

3 3

Netapp Insight Virtual
by John Stoffel 09 Nov '20

09 Nov '20

Wow, I just watched Jeffrey Steiner's presentation "BRK-1151-2 Data Performance: What do you really need?" While attending the Virtual Insight conference. What an amazingly useful talk, I wish it *was* a two hour course, I'd take it again in a hearbeat. My Netapp setup isn't nearly as upto date as I'd like, and my Oracle DBA does a pretty good job of keeping things humming, but this talk was just really excellent. If you have a chance, go attend this conference and watch this presentation. John

5 5

SVM Trident limits/config
by Alexander Griesser 09 Nov '20

09 Nov '20

Hey there, due to popular demand, I'm currently playing around with the trident integration and am following the docs here: https://netapp-trident.readthedocs.io/en/stable-v18.07/docker/install/ndvp_… >From what I can see, there's no easy way to limit the total amount of volume space created from within the SVM. I can limit the amount of volumes that can be created, but I cannot limit the maximum total size of those - or is there any option to do that? I just want to make sure that none of these clients are using more resources than assigned (without having to assign dedicated aggregates). Is that possible? Thanks, Alexander Griesser Head of Systems Operations ANEXIA Internetdienstleistungs GmbH E-Mail: AGriesser(a)anexia-it.com<mailto:AGriesser@anexia-it.com> Web: http://www.anexia-it.com<http://www.anexia-it.com/> Anschrift Hauptsitz Klagenfurt: Feldkirchnerstraße 140, 9020 Klagenfurt Geschäftsführer: Alexander Windbichler Firmenbuch: FN 289918a | Gerichtsstand: Klagenfurt | UID-Nummer: AT U63216601

5 11

IOPs limit?
by Heino Walther 29 Oct '20

29 Oct '20

Hi there We have an A300 connected to two FC fabrics with 2 x 8G FC per controller node. We are doing tests on an “older” HP C7000 with VirtualConnect modules and with blades that have 2 x 8G FC mezzanine. The VCs are connected into the fabric with two 8G FC per fabric. So the throughput to a given LUN would be 16Gbps. As the other two links are standby. The blade is running ESXi 7.0 and on top of this we are running a virtual Windows 2016 server from where the tests are done. There are no one else on the A300. We hav created a standard LUN in a volume, presented it to ESXi from where we created a VMFS and the VM is then presented with a VMDK-based disk. It seems that no matter what we adjust we have a limit at about 70.000 IOPs on the disks. We are able to run other workloads while we are testing with 70.000 IOPs, and we are able to load the system even more, so the NetApp does not seem to be the limiting factor… we can also not see that much load on the system from the NetApp Harvest/Grafana we have running… We of cause make sure that the tests we do is not done in cache on the host… The specific test is with 64k block size. Questions: * Can there be a limit of IOPs in the C7000 setup? PCI-bridge stuff? * Does it make sense to add more paths, in either the NetApp and/or the C7000? (each blade can only have two ports) * Would it make sense to upgrade the FC links to 16G? * We have adjusted the queue depth as per NetApp’s recommendations, as far as I know there is no way to adjust QD on the ONTAP node itself, is this correct? * The shelf attached is IOM6 based, would it make sense to upgrade this to IOM12? * Would it make sense to cable the IOM12 in a Quad-Path setup? Any suggestions are welcome… also if you have any insights of how many IOPs one should expect from an A300 with 24 x 3.7T SSDs. /Heino --

3 5

AW: Wrong disk bay reported
by Alexander Griesser 29 Oct '20

29 Oct '20

Hi Robin, thanks, that’s exactly the case. I asked the customer to pull the disks again and wait a minute before reinserting and the disks are now displayed correctly. Best, Alexander Griesser Head of Systems Operations ANEXIA Internetdienstleistungs GmbH E-Mail: AGriesser(a)anexia-it.com<mailto:AGriesser@anexia-it.com> Web: http://www.anexia-it.com<http://www.anexia-it.com/> Anschrift Hauptsitz Klagenfurt: Feldkirchnerstraße 140, 9020 Klagenfurt Geschäftsführer: Alexander Windbichler Firmenbuch: FN 289918a | Gerichtsstand: Klagenfurt | UID-Nummer: AT U63216601 Von: Robin Mesotten <robin(a)mesotten.eu> Gesendet: Donnerstag, 29. Oktober 2020 02:59 An: Alexander Griesser <AGriesser(a)anexia-it.com> Betreff: Re: Wrong disk bay reported Hi Alexander, I have seen this a few time in the lab when moving disks from one slot to another. Is it possible your customer first inserted the disks in to slot 22 and 23 then afterwards realised they started on the wrong side and moved them? I also found this bug 1246444. Moving disks within a system without following the appropriate procedure can cause the same disk name to be reported for multiple physical disk locations. This might cause the management gateway process to crash or generate other unpredictable system behavior. When moving storage disks, you must wait at least 20 seconds after removal before inserting the disk in the new location. To recover from this issue, choose one of the following options: 1. Perform a takeover and giveback of the affected systems. 2. Remove the disk for at least 20 seconds, and then reinsert it. Note: If the disk is part of an aggregate, this option will result in a degraded RAID group and disk reconstruction will be initiated. Regards, Robin On 28/10/2020 22:45, Alexander Griesser wrote: Hey, did anyone ever encounter such a mismatch? Customer reported that they installed new disks in slots 0 and 1, but this is what I can see here: CLUSTER::*> disk show -container-type unassigned Usable Disk Container Container Disk Size Shelf Bay Type Type Name Owner ---------------- ---------- ----- --- ------- ----------- --------- -------- 1.11.22 - 11 22 SAS unassigned - - 1.11.23 - 11 23 SAS unassigned - - 2 entries were displayed. Whereas: CLUSTER::*> node run -node node1 disk show -n DISK OWNER POOL SERIAL NUMBER HOME DR HOME ------------ ------------- ----- ------------- ------------- ------------- 0b.11.1 Not Owned NONE 50M0A02MF4XR 0b.11.0 Not Owned NONE 50M0A01XF4XR And also: CLUSTER::*> node run -node node1 sasadmin shelf Expanders on channel 0a: +-----------------------------------------------------------------------+ 0 | 0| 1| 2| 3| 4| 5| 6| 7| 8| 9|10|11|12|13|14|15|16|17|18|19|20|21|22|23| +-----------------------------------------------------------------------+ +-----------------------------------------------------------------------+ 11 | 0| 1|DD|DD|DD|DD|DD|DD|DD|DD|DD|DD|DD|DD|DD|DD|DD|DD|DD|DD|DD|DD|DD|DD| +-----------------------------------------------------------------------+ The system is running on an older Ontap release (9.2P2). Is there any command to „rescan“ the disk locations? Best, Alexander Griesser Head of Systems Operations ANEXIA Internetdienstleistungs GmbH E-Mail: AGriesser(a)anexia-it.com<mailto:AGriesser@anexia-it.com> Web: http://www.anexia-it.com<http://www.anexia-it.com/> Anschrift Hauptsitz Klagenfurt: Feldkirchnerstraße 140, 9020 Klagenfurt Geschäftsführer: Alexander Windbichler Firmenbuch: FN 289918a | Gerichtsstand: Klagenfurt | UID-Nummer: AT U63216601

1 0

Anyone using Cohesity or Rubrik for Netapp CIFS NAS backup?
by Sami Kapanen 28 Oct '20

28 Oct '20

Anyone using Cohesity or Rubrik for Netapp CIFS NAS backup? Considering these, looking for experiences, br, sk

6 9

Jump to page:

2025

2024

2023

2022

2021

2020

2019

2018

2017

2016

2015

2014

2013

2012

2011

2010

2009

2008

2007

2006

2005

2004

2003

2002

2001

2000

1999

1998

1997

toasters