For those interested; You cannot perform a vol clone split on a cloned vol with snapmirror \ snapvault etc. as it needs to delete all snaps. We resolved this by performing a vol move to another aggregate and then a move back. Luckily we had enough space for this and it was pretty quick for 5tb it took only a few hours. (CDOT handles vol moves MUCH better than 7-Mode). Every day is a school day!

From: toasters-bounces@teaparty.net [mailto:toasters-bounces@teaparty.net] On Behalf Of Chris Hague Sent: 30 August 2017 13:14 To: Steiner, Jeffrey Jeffrey.Steiner@netapp.com; Toasters@teaparty.net Toasters@teaparty.net Subject: RE: vol clone split

From here; https://kb.netapp.com/support/s/article/ka21A0000000eO1QAI/faq-flexclone-spl...

Are there any special considerations for using FlexClone split?

Splitting a FlexClone volume will result in all the snapshot copies on the FlexClone being deleted and will prevent any new snapshots on the FlexClone volume until the split completes. The FlexClone split operation is processed by a background scanner at a low priority and can take a considerable amount of time to complete. FlexVols with many inodes (files) will process slower than FlexVols with few inodes (files).

This is most annoying as I'm pretty sure that CDOT won't allow me to re-baseline the mirror to the same destination volume. Can anyone confirm this? As this is actually a snapvault destination, I would mean I have to create another destination volume and keep my original one simply to hold all of the backup snapshots. Effectively doubling the baseline storage for all of these volumes.

From: Steiner, Jeffrey [mailto:Jeffrey.Steiner@netapp.com] Sent: 30 August 2017 12:21 To: Chris Hague <Chris_Hague@ajg.commailto:Chris_Hague@ajg.com>; <Toasters@teaparty.netmailto:Toasters@teaparty.net> <Toasters@teaparty.netmailto:Toasters@teaparty.net> Subject: RE: vol clone split

I'd recommend opening a support case on this one. I don't see a technical reason why a split should require deleting snapshots, nor can I think of a reason why a snapmirror baseline should block a split operation. I suspect there are diag level overrides for that behavior but it would probably depend on the exact version of ONTAP. I know that's speculative, but I don't want to give bad advice that would result in a major inconvenience if the snapshots went missing.

From: toasters-bounces@teaparty.netmailto:toasters-bounces@teaparty.net [mailto:toasters-bounces@teaparty.net] On Behalf Of Chris Hague Sent: Wednesday, August 30, 2017 11:29 AM To: <Toasters@teaparty.netmailto:Toasters@teaparty.net> <Toasters@teaparty.netmailto:Toasters@teaparty.net> Subject: vol clone split

Hi Toasters,

I have a number of volumes running from a common snapshot and would like to split them out. All these volumes are snapmirrored to our DR site.

However, when I try to perform a vol clone split, it complains about an in-use snapshot. Reading further, it appears that the split will delete all snapshots, so doesn't like the snapmirror snap.

What is the best way to split these volumes? Ideally without having to re-baseline \ lose my snapmirror destination volume \ snaps.

ONTAP v9.1P2

Error below; Time Node Severity Event ------------------- ---------------- ------------- --------------------------- 8/30/2017 09:02:17 filer1 INFORMATIONAL mgmtgwd.jobmgr.jobcomplete.failure: Job "Clone Split" [id 6716] (Split vol1) completed unsuccessfully: Volume has locked snapshots (1). 8/30/2017 09:02:17 filer1 DEBUG wafl.config.req.error: Config request 'VV_CONFIG_REQ_CLONE_SPLIT_START' by WAFL for volume vol1 is not being processed because of the error: '387 - CR_VV_VOLUME_SNAPSHOTS'. 8/30/2017 09:02:17 filer1 NOTICE wafl.vv.clone.splitBusySnap: Volume 'vol1 has locked snapshots, not splitting.

KR, Chris.

Hi Jeffrey Following up on this, did the RFE go anywhere? I hit by this same problem today, and we had the space+IO (AFF aggregates) to move stuff around but it wasn't very convenient.

________________________________________ From: toasters-bounces@teaparty.net toasters-bounces@teaparty.net on behalf of Steiner, Jeffrey Jeffrey.Steiner@netapp.com Sent: Tuesday, September 19, 2017 06:29 To: Chris Hague; Toasters@teaparty.net Subject: RE: vol clone split

Just a note - I've filed an RFE to get this addressed. I don't see a reason why snapshots need to be deleted during a split operation, but there could be something about WAFL that makes that harder to do than it may seem.

I'll keep this email on record and provide an update when I learn something, but it will probably be a while before I get any clear answer either way.

It's good to know the vol-move procedure is a viable workaround in some cases, but it would be nice to avoid the extra IO.

From: Chris Hague [mailto:Chris_Hague@ajg.com] Sent: Friday, September 01, 2017 11:26 AM To: Chris Hague Chris_Hague@ajg.com; Steiner, Jeffrey Jeffrey.Steiner@netapp.com; Toasters@teaparty.net Toasters@teaparty.net Subject: RE: vol clone split

For those interested; You cannot perform a vol clone split on a cloned vol with snapmirror \ snapvault etc. as it needs to delete all snaps. We resolved this by performing a vol move to another aggregate and then a move back. Luckily we had enough space for this and it was pretty quick for 5tb it took only a few hours. (CDOT handles vol moves MUCH better than 7-Mode). Every day is a school day!

From: toasters-bounces@teaparty.netmailto:toasters-bounces@teaparty.net [mailto:toasters-bounces@teaparty.net] On Behalf Of Chris Hague Sent: 30 August 2017 13:14 To: Steiner, Jeffrey <Jeffrey.Steiner@netapp.commailto:Jeffrey.Steiner@netapp.com>; <Toasters@teaparty.netmailto:Toasters@teaparty.net> <Toasters@teaparty.netmailto:Toasters@teaparty.net> Subject: RE: vol clone split

From here; https://kb.netapp.com/support/s/article/ka21A0000000eO1QAI/faq-flexclone-spl...https://protect-us.mimecast.com/s/QQ57BQUpx6AIg?domain=kb.netapp.com

Are there any special considerations for using FlexClone split?

Splitting a FlexClone volume will result in all the snapshot copies on the FlexClone being deleted and will prevent any new snapshots on the FlexClone volume until the split completes. The FlexClone split operation is processed by a background scanner at a low priority and can take a considerable amount of time to complete. FlexVols with many inodes (files) will process slower than FlexVols with few inodes (files).

This is most annoying as I’m pretty sure that CDOT won’t allow me to re-baseline the mirror to the same destination volume. Can anyone confirm this? As this is actually a snapvault destination, I would mean I have to create another destination volume and keep my original one simply to hold all of the backup snapshots. Effectively doubling the baseline storage for all of these volumes.

From: Steiner, Jeffrey [mailto:Jeffrey.Steiner@netapp.com] Sent: 30 August 2017 12:21 To: Chris Hague <Chris_Hague@ajg.commailto:Chris_Hague@ajg.com>; <Toasters@teaparty.netmailto:Toasters@teaparty.net> <Toasters@teaparty.netmailto:Toasters@teaparty.net> Subject: RE: vol clone split

I'd recommend opening a support case on this one. I don't see a technical reason why a split should require deleting snapshots, nor can I think of a reason why a snapmirror baseline should block a split operation. I suspect there are diag level overrides for that behavior but it would probably depend on the exact version of ONTAP. I know that's speculative, but I don't want to give bad advice that would result in a major inconvenience if the snapshots went missing.

From: toasters-bounces@teaparty.netmailto:toasters-bounces@teaparty.net [mailto:toasters-bounces@teaparty.net] On Behalf Of Chris Hague Sent: Wednesday, August 30, 2017 11:29 AM To: <Toasters@teaparty.netmailto:Toasters@teaparty.net> <Toasters@teaparty.netmailto:Toasters@teaparty.net> Subject: vol clone split

Hi Toasters,

I have a number of volumes running from a common snapshot and would like to split them out. All these volumes are snapmirrored to our DR site.

However, when I try to perform a vol clone split, it complains about an in-use snapshot. Reading further, it appears that the split will delete all snapshots, so doesn’t like the snapmirror snap.

What is the best way to split these volumes? Ideally without having to re-baseline \ lose my snapmirror destination volume \ snaps.

ONTAP v9.1P2

Error below; Time Node Severity Event ------------------- ---------------- ------------- --------------------------- 8/30/2017 09:02:17 filer1 INFORMATIONAL mgmtgwd.jobmgr.jobcomplete.failure: Job "Clone Split" [id 6716] (Split vol1) completed unsuccessfully: Volume has locked snapshots (1). 8/30/2017 09:02:17 filer1 DEBUG wafl.config.req.error: Config request 'VV_CONFIG_REQ_CLONE_SPLIT_START' by WAFL for volume vol1 is not being processed because of the error: '387 - CR_VV_VOLUME_SNAPSHOTS'. 8/30/2017 09:02:17 filer1 NOTICE wafl.vv.clone.splitBusySnap: Volume 'vol1 has locked snapshots, not splitting.

KR, Chris.

Great news Jeffery. Thanks for running with this and keeping us in the loop.

The memories of the sleepless nights just came flooding back!! =D

From: Steiner, Jeffrey Jeffrey.Steiner@netapp.com Sent: 09 October 2018 19:53 To: Chris Hague Chris_Hague@ajg.com; Toasters@teaparty.net Toasters@teaparty.net Subject: RE: vol clone split

Greetings from the year 2017. This issue is fixed now. From the ONTAP 9.4 documentation:

The improved FlexClone splitting operation on AFF systems has the following benefits:

* Storage efficiency is preserved after splitting the clone from the parent. * Existing Snapshot copies are not deleted. * The operation is faster.

Not only do we preserve snapshots during a clone, but it's space efficient! You can split clones and get rid of the locked snapshot on the parent!

From: Steiner, Jeffrey Sent: Tuesday, September 19, 2017 6:27 AM To: 'Chris Hague' <Chris_Hague@ajg.commailto:Chris_Hague@ajg.com>; <Toasters@teaparty.netmailto:Toasters@teaparty.net> <Toasters@teaparty.netmailto:Toasters@teaparty.net> Subject: RE: vol clone split

Just a note - I've filed an RFE to get this addressed. I don't see a reason why snapshots need to be deleted during a split operation, but there could be something about WAFL that makes that harder to do than it may seem.

I'll keep this email on record and provide an update when I learn something, but it will probably be a while before I get any clear answer either way.

It's good to know the vol-move procedure is a viable workaround in some cases, but it would be nice to avoid the extra IO.

From: Chris Hague [mailto:Chris_Hague@ajg.com] Sent: Friday, September 01, 2017 11:26 AM To: Chris Hague <Chris_Hague@ajg.commailto:Chris_Hague@ajg.com>; Steiner, Jeffrey <Jeffrey.Steiner@netapp.commailto:Jeffrey.Steiner@netapp.com>; <Toasters@teaparty.netmailto:Toasters@teaparty.net> <Toasters@teaparty.netmailto:Toasters@teaparty.net> Subject: RE: vol clone split

For those interested; You cannot perform a vol clone split on a cloned vol with snapmirror \ snapvault etc. as it needs to delete all snaps. We resolved this by performing a vol move to another aggregate and then a move back. Luckily we had enough space for this and it was pretty quick for 5tb it took only a few hours. (CDOT handles vol moves MUCH better than 7-Mode). Every day is a school day!

From: toasters-bounces@teaparty.netmailto:toasters-bounces@teaparty.net [mailto:toasters-bounces@teaparty.net] On Behalf Of Chris Hague Sent: 30 August 2017 13:14 To: Steiner, Jeffrey <Jeffrey.Steiner@netapp.commailto:Jeffrey.Steiner@netapp.com>; <Toasters@teaparty.netmailto:Toasters@teaparty.net> <Toasters@teaparty.netmailto:Toasters@teaparty.net> Subject: RE: vol clone split

From here; https://kb.netapp.com/support/s/article/ka21A0000000eO1QAI/faq-flexclone-spl...

Are there any special considerations for using FlexClone split?

Splitting a FlexClone volume will result in all the snapshot copies on the FlexClone being deleted and will prevent any new snapshots on the FlexClone volume until the split completes. The FlexClone split operation is processed by a background scanner at a low priority and can take a considerable amount of time to complete. FlexVols with many inodes (files) will process slower than FlexVols with few inodes (files).

This is most annoying as I'm pretty sure that CDOT won't allow me to re-baseline the mirror to the same destination volume. Can anyone confirm this? As this is actually a snapvault destination, I would mean I have to create another destination volume and keep my original one simply to hold all of the backup snapshots. Effectively doubling the baseline storage for all of these volumes.

From: Steiner, Jeffrey [mailto:Jeffrey.Steiner@netapp.com] Sent: 30 August 2017 12:21 To: Chris Hague <Chris_Hague@ajg.commailto:Chris_Hague@ajg.com>; <Toasters@teaparty.netmailto:Toasters@teaparty.net> <Toasters@teaparty.netmailto:Toasters@teaparty.net> Subject: RE: vol clone split

I'd recommend opening a support case on this one. I don't see a technical reason why a split should require deleting snapshots, nor can I think of a reason why a snapmirror baseline should block a split operation. I suspect there are diag level overrides for that behavior but it would probably depend on the exact version of ONTAP. I know that's speculative, but I don't want to give bad advice that would result in a major inconvenience if the snapshots went missing.

From: toasters-bounces@teaparty.netmailto:toasters-bounces@teaparty.net [mailto:toasters-bounces@teaparty.net] On Behalf Of Chris Hague Sent: Wednesday, August 30, 2017 11:29 AM To: <Toasters@teaparty.netmailto:Toasters@teaparty.net> <Toasters@teaparty.netmailto:Toasters@teaparty.net> Subject: vol clone split

Hi Toasters,

I have a number of volumes running from a common snapshot and would like to split them out. All these volumes are snapmirrored to our DR site.

However, when I try to perform a vol clone split, it complains about an in-use snapshot. Reading further, it appears that the split will delete all snapshots, so doesn't like the snapmirror snap.

What is the best way to split these volumes? Ideally without having to re-baseline \ lose my snapmirror destination volume \ snaps.

ONTAP v9.1P2

Error below; Time Node Severity Event ------------------- ---------------- ------------- --------------------------- 8/30/2017 09:02:17 filer1 INFORMATIONAL mgmtgwd.jobmgr.jobcomplete.failure: Job "Clone Split" [id 6716] (Split vol1) completed unsuccessfully: Volume has locked snapshots (1). 8/30/2017 09:02:17 filer1 DEBUG wafl.config.req.error: Config request 'VV_CONFIG_REQ_CLONE_SPLIT_START' by WAFL for volume vol1 is not being processed because of the error: '387 - CR_VV_VOLUME_SNAPSHOTS'. 8/30/2017 09:02:17 filer1 NOTICE wafl.vv.clone.splitBusySnap: Volume 'vol1 has locked snapshots, not splitting.

KR, Chris.

This email is being sent by a subsidiary of Arthur J. Gallagher Holdings (UK) Limited, part of the Arthur J. Gallagher & Co. global group of companies. For details of the registered office, company number and, where applicable, regulated status of our subsidiaries, please visit https://www.ajginternational.com/legal-regulatory-information/.

We are the data controller of any personal information you provide to us or personal information that has been provided to us by a third party. We collect and process information about you in order to arrange insurance policies and to process claims. Your information is also used for business purposes such as fraud prevention and detection and financial management. This may involve sharing your information with third parties such as insurers, reinsurers, other brokers, claims handlers, loss adjusters, credit reference agencies, service providers, professional advisors, our regulators, police and government agencies or fraud prevention agencies.

We may record telephone calls to help us monitor and improve the service we provide. For further information on how your information is used and your rights in relation to your information please see our privacy notice at https://www.ajginternational.com/Privacy-Policy/. If you are providing personal data of another individual to us, you must tell them you are providing their information to us and show them a copy of this notice.

Where you are obtaining a non-consumer policy of (re)insurance, or cover for additional risks or renewal under an existing policy, you are required to make a fair presentation of the risk to a (re)insurer which discloses every material circumstance which you know or ought to know relating to the risk to be insured. A circumstance is material if it would influence the judgment of a prudent insurer in determining whether to provide insurance for the risk and, if so, on what terms. Disclosure must be reasonably clear and accessible to a prudent insurer and made in good faith. The aforementioned duty of disclosure is the applicable duty under the laws of England and Wales. If your policy is not subject to English law you are expected to disclose risk information in accordance with the requirements of the applicable law. In such circumstances we expect you will disclose risk information at least equal to the standard required under English law and where the applicable law requires you to disclose information over and above the level required under English law you will provide such information in accordance with that law.

Where you are obtaining a consumer policy of insurance, you must read each question and answer honestly and fully and must take reasonable care to not make a misrepresentation.

Failure to comply with the above disclosure requirements, as they apply to you, could mean that your policy of (re)insurance is void, its terms are materially altered or that (re)insurers are not liable to pay all or part of your claim(s). If you are in any doubt as to your obligations you should ask your usual contact.

This e-mail and any attachments are CONFIDENTIAL and may contain legally privileged information. If you are not the intended recipient of this e-mail message, please telephone or e-mail us immediately, delete this message from your system and do not read, copy, distribute, disclose or otherwise use this e-mail message and any attachments. Although the above company has taken reasonable precautions to ensure this e-mail and any attachments are free of any virus or other defect that may affect your computer, it is the responsibility of the recipient to ensure that it is virus free and the above company does not accept any responsibility for any loss or damage arising in any way from its use.