New subject: AW: Config Advisor 6.1 Misleading Information?

9 Nov 2020


      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@anexia-it.commailto:AGriesser@anexia-it.com
Web: http://www.anexia-it.comhttp://www.anexia-it.com/
Anschrift Hauptsitz Klagenfurt: Feldkirchnerstraße 140, 9020 Klagenfurt
Geschäftsführer: Alexander Windbichler
Firmenbuch: FN 289918a | Gerichtsstand: Klagenfurt | UID-Nummer: AT U63216601