[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread] 

List:       toasters
Subject:    Re: Number of flexvols ?
From:       Blake Golliher <thelastman () gmail ! com>
Date:       2006-01-27 19:51:41
Message-ID: 71aecba40601271151t5a4c7933lf7a5bb4db465c50e () mail ! gmail ! com
[Download RAW message or body]

The story I know is that total number of aggregates, FlexVols, and
TradVols can't be more then 200 per system.  Before 7.0.1R1 there was
a limit of only 50 FlexVols per system because of the speed of cfo in
taking over that number of volumes, which is bug 149737.  The eventual
promise of FlexVols is to replace qtree's, but NetApp is still in the
process of doing this, and there is still a long time before this is
possible in larger environments.

Sorry, this is getting kinda of off topic.. moving right along.

-Blake

On 1/27/06, John Stoffel <john.stoffel@taec.toshiba.com> wrote:
>
> Premanshu> We are ready to roll out flex-vols and are discussing about
> Premanshu> the possible performance impact of having lot of flex-vols
> Premanshu> on a aggregate. We are talking about having 20-30 flex-vols
> Premanshu> per aggregate.
>
> Premanshu> Please share your experience/recommendations ?
>
> As I recall, NetApp limits you to 100 (or is it 200?) FlexVols total.
> Though that might be per-aggregate.  And traditional volumes are less
> than that, since they take up two slots, one for the private
> aggregate, and one for the volume itself.
>
> But you have upto 4995 qtrees per-volume.
>
> My question would be why not use qtrees instead of volumes?
>
> In any case, 20-30 flex vols isn't a big deal.
>
> John
>
[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread]