I had an SE say the same thing and stayed away from it also for same reason - we have an older filer that gets pounded in evenings and was wondering if anyone had a big success story.
Thanks Jack ------Original Message------ From: Scott Eno To: Jack Lyons Cc: toasters@teaparty.net Subject: Re: FlexShare Sent: Feb 8, 2012 9:06 AM
Hi Jack,
I have done some small testing with it, but I shied away from implementing it when a NetApp instructor said that to get the best results you have to apply it to ALL the volumes on the filer hosting the particular volume(s) you are looking to improve performance on. Not sure if that's true or not, but it was his suggestion. I figured if that were the case I would be spending a lot of time tweaking all volumes on a filer just to possibly squeeze a bit more out of one or two.
--- Scott Eno (First time poster, long time reader)
On Feb 8, 2012, at 7:20 AM, Jack Lyons jack1729@gmail.com wrote:
Has anyone used FlexShare and had extremely positive results. IT seems that the improvement would be minor and misconfiguration could lead to no improvement for intended volumes and degradation for others. From reading, it seems that you need to assign priorities to each volume otherwise the volumes in the default queue will experience degradation.
Would anyone like to share details of how the implemented flexshare and the impact it had on the performance issue they were working to resolve?
Would also like to know if anyone has try to 'schedule flexshare' settings using rsh or api e.g. we want to give higher priorities to certain volumes from 6pm to 11pm nightly.
Thanks Jack _______________________________________________ Toasters mailing list Toasters@teaparty.net http://www.teaparty.net/mailman/listinfo/toasters
Sent from my Verizon Wireless BlackBerry