toasters

toasters@lists.teaparty.net

13520 discussions

Re: Runaway FlexGroup constituent
by Scott Eno 18 Dec '20

18 Dec '20

Hi Tim, Thanks for the link! It looks as if this bug wasn’t fixed until 9.7 so it very well could be what I’m hitting. On December 18, 2020, Timothy Naple <tnaple(a)berkcom.com> wrote: > Scott, > > > > It is hard to say because this does not specifically mention 9.6P5 but > I wonder if you might be running into this bug: > > > > <https://mysupport.netapp.com/site/bugs- > online/product/ONTAP/BURT/1262593> > > > > I am using FlexGroups quite a bit (mostly nfs, but some cifs) and I > have not seen this sort of imbalance. I also wonder if something > temporary is happening on the filesystem like some sort of large > backup file being written. In theory elastic sizing would cover for > it as long as autogrow is off, but I am not sure I would want to get > to 99% capacity on that one member to test that theory! > > > > Thank you, > Tim > > > > From: Scott Eno <cse(a)hey.com> > Sent: Thursday, December 17, 2020 5:21 PM > To: Toasters <toasters(a)teaparty.net> > Subject: Runaway FlexGroup constituent > > > > Hi, > > I have a troublesome volume in a FlexGroup that continues to fill > faster than the other constituents. > > 6.25TB 4.22TB 32% > 6.25TB 4.19TB 32% > 6.25TB 328.9GB 94% > 6.25TB 4.24TB 32% > 6.25TB 4.20TB 32% > 6.25TB 4.20TB 32% > 6.25TB 4.23TB 32% > 6.25TB 4.24TB 32% > > With autogrow disabled, from what I understand after reading Mr. > Parisi's document, elastic sizing will make sure writes will happen. > This FlexGroup is a CIFS share for a document management system, so > it's millions of little files. > > Am I safe to leave the FlexGroup like this until the other > constituents catch up, or is there a need to grow the entire > FlexGroup? > > Cluster is 9.6P5. >

2 1

Runaway FlexGroup constituent
by Scott Eno 18 Dec '20

18 Dec '20

Hi, I have a troublesome volume in a FlexGroup that continues to fill faster than the other constituents. 6.25TB 4.22TB 32% 6.25TB 4.19TB 32% 6.25TB 328.9GB 94% 6.25TB 4.24TB 32% 6.25TB 4.20TB 32% 6.25TB 4.20TB 32% 6.25TB 4.23TB 32% 6.25TB 4.24TB 32% With autogrow disabled, from what I understand after reading Mr. Parisi's document, elastic sizing will make sure writes will happen. This FlexGroup is a CIFS share for a document management system, so it's millions of little files. Am I safe to leave the FlexGroup like this until the other constituents catch up, or is there a need to grow the entire FlexGroup? Cluster is 9.6P5.

1 0

3party NetApp NAS auditing software?
by Sami Kapanen 09 Dec '20

09 Dec '20

Hi, There seems to be many 3rd party solutions available for NetApp NAS auditing. Anyone using those? Any pros and cons? br, sk

5 6

Security Roles...
by Heino Walther 01 Dec '20

01 Dec '20

Hi I’m trying to create a local user role that allows login via the web GUI, and update the snapmirror relations, but not be able to delete them or any volumes for that matter… I thought this was a walk in the park, but somehow I run into the same issue… I start by creating a simple role: security login role ad -role ro -cmddirname DEFAULT -access all security login role create -role ro -cmddirname volume -access readonly I create a new user and assign the role: security login create -user-or-group-name rotest -application http -authentication-method password -role ro When trying to login, it fails like the password is wrong…. But why? I even tried to create a role identical to the admin role (basically just the first of the two lines above), and even twith that, it is not possible to login to the web GUI… I’m beginning to fear that you need to have the admin role in order to login to the web GUI… Can someone please confirm that this is true… I almost cannot believe it 😉 /Heino

4 5

Performance maxing out at 70k IOPs
by Heino Walther 25 Nov '20

25 Nov '20

Hi there We have a system that needs 100k+ IOPS but for some strange reason we cannot get past about 70k IOPS. The server is Windows VM on ESXi with two FC HBAs running 8G. (we have adjusted queue depth etc.) The server is connected to the NetApp via two Brocade 6510 switches. The clusters we have tested up against are an A300 with 24 x 7TB SSD. And an A700 with a mixed setup of shelfs (two disk loops with quad cabling). But even up against the A700 we cannot seem to get past the 70k IOPS. Now we have read about the concurrency on a NetApp system, where each volume is assigned a CPU core, which might be our problem.. https://kb.netapp.com/Advice_and_Troubleshooting/Data_Storage_Software/ONTA… Our storage setup is a volume with a LUN which is presented to the host, which then creates a VMFS as a datastore… We have tried to create two LUNs on separate volumes, and we can pull out 70k on each, at the same time… which seems to point towards the concurrency… But is there a way around this? We would rather not have multiple LUNs, but rather one LUN. Any input would be helpful 😊 /Heino

3 2

Converting HA into MC ?
by Heino Walther 19 Nov '20

19 Nov '20

Hi there Can anyone please tell me if it is possible to convert a normal AFF8080HA into an AFF8080SMC? (there is only one disk shelf attached) I can imagine I would need the following: * 2 x FCVI Cards * 1 x Empty AFF8080 chassis * 4 x QSFP to LC cables * 1 x disk shelf identical to current shelf First job is to install the FCVI cards, which can be done with a few failovers. Then we need to do a failover and pull out the downed controller and install it into the new chassis, and attach the two systems. We then need to change the chassis setup from the maint.-console. Configure the FCVI cards and do a giveback. .. … As you maybe can tell, this is just of the top of my head 😉 Has anyone tried this? The plan was to convert a running system without any downtime… then mirror up the aggregates, move the SVMs, and then convert back to a normal HA setup again… But won’t start this if there is a gotcha somewhere… and there is a somewhat high risk of that? 😊 /Heino

2 1

any free training options at all?
by Rue, Randy 18 Nov '20

18 Nov '20

Hello All, We're about to receive a new AFF-220 to replace our aged FAS and it occurs to me that my team could use an update in our general NetApp knowledge. But we have zero dollars available for training. Are there any free online training resources? Barring that, any good dirt-cheap ones? Thanks in advance, Randy (he/him) in Seattle

5 4

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

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