![]() When it's on an SSD, the simulator performance is very good.ģ. In my experience, the DOT8 simulator runs as fast as the disk on which the VM lives. While we haven't done a formal performance timing profile for the simulator, I doubt the vNVRAM is the bottleneck for the DOT8 sim. I say "whopping" with a bit of humor, but that level of vNVRAM is sufficient for very decent performance from a simulator. ![]() You can see some of that in some of the console messages when the simulator boots. The virtual NVRAM has been increased 1600% to a whopping 32MB. Now for my question: I'm not familiar with the Celerra simulator what are its capacity limits? That might help us better determine where we should move our limits.Ģ. We are very unlikely to release an updated simulator off-cycle from Data ONTAP. I can't discuss discuss details or dates on this forum right now, but will say that making the simulator available with larger capacity will be tied to a future release of Data ONTAP. I can say that we are definitely discussing increasing the capacity limit on the simulator to match modern capacities and requirements. This will help make better decisions before deployment.I'll address your questions below, and have a couple of questions of my own:ġ. It may be worth updating the Support Interoperability Matrix to show supportability for UNMAP/TRIM etc under "Host Feature" when one selects ONTAP & SAN Host to refine the results. It may be worth going forward, to point the backup target to new NTFS location and let the old backups retire, and then may be just get rid of the LUN to regain space. But, I guess no point in using ReFS as 'Backup target' with 3rd Party Storage Vendor unless it is NTFS. No wonder ReFS is an issue with other Storage Arrays as well.Ĭonsidering a huge locked up space in the LUN, and if that's pushing aggregate to risk then it is worth adding more disks. That sounds like the Microsoft designed the file-system for it's own Storage. Thin provisioning/UNMAP only supported on "Windows Storage Spaces". Interesting, didn't know ReFS does not support UNMAP with 3rd party storage vendors. For SANs, if features such as thin provisioning, TRIM/UNMAP, or Offloaded Data Transfer (ODX) are required, NTFS must be used. Please contact application and storage array vendors for support details on Fiber Channel and iSCSI SANs. If Space Allocation is required for a Windows LUN, it must be formatted using NTFS.īackup targets include the above supported configurations.Space Allocation can be enabled for LUNs formatted with ReFS but it will not work there.It would be better if someone from netapp could confirm it. Sorry I misunderstood the question, I didn't see that you were talking about REFS but according to several articles REFS does not support unmap. Its like there is a really old Snap out there locking the capacity but its just not showing up anywhere. NetApp side it thinks the volume is at capacity from the command line or from within On Command VEEAM UI thinks there is 11.9 Tb free NetApp only 2 Tb ** After Storage Snapshot removal However the adjustment hasnt carried through to the storage end When the mapped drive was browsed it could be seen there was a lot (TBs + TBs) of “Dead” VM backup files VEEAM advised these could be deleted which they were. So we cleared snapshots down and brought it back online. The client wrote a lot of data to this back up location and took it offline. These LUNS and volumes serve no other purpose or function. There are 16 Tb NetApp LUN and 16TB volumes mapped to Veeam backup servers. We have a large estate broken down in to areas which mirror the configuration of each other so a nice lot of reference points. Had a case open with VEEAM and NetApp neither of which is going anywhere pretty quickly, so will throw it out there and see if anyone has any ideas.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |