PS6210xs and PS6210x in same pool?

The default Pool can be empty.  We use the "Default" as Maintenance pool and also for new member to become 100% production ready (creating read, setup all IPs and tesing)

I would suggent to place the two PS6210X together in one pool and the hybrid into another. If you dont care about the ssd you can group all three together. Keep in mind that the ALB use a capacitly placing first. You havent told us the disk space from your members.

I have move volumes and members between pool... but in there is in the GUI also "Merge Pool" and maybe some of the Dell guys from here can tell you how it works.

Regards
Joerg

OK, thanks to both of you for the replies.

Pool1 is my hybrid pool. Pool2 and Default are my non-hybrid pools. Merge apparently deletes the pool being merged from, so I'll have to move the member from default to Pool2 rather than merge since default can't be deleted, right? I want to empty default for the same reason Joerg has done, so that new members can be more easily initialized and configured.

Is the hybrid functionality on the XS is limited to only that XS member, even if the X members are in the same pool? All of the HDDs are 10k RPM. I'm not sure if any are NL-SAS. The X models each have about 1.5 TB more space than the XS. Would we lose 3 TB of usable space if we had all of them in the same pool?

You can rename the "Default" pool is that bothers you.  Or set another pool to "default"  It will show up as PoolName (default)     The "default" function isn't really used anymore.  It was created so that if a pool was not specified it would create it in the "Default" pool.   So there's no downside to it. 

 If you put any model member in a pool with other members, it will be used.   The data will be striped across the members in proportion to their relative sizes.  So if one member is 2x the size of the other, by default it will have 2/3rd of all the data for that pool.  

 It's that fact that can lessen the benefit of the Hybrid array.  WIth 10K or 15K members that affect is lessened.  

 Don 

You dont loose any kind of space when grouping different EQLs together. All capacity will be available within the pool. When i say "if you dont care about the ssd" i meas the performance and not the capacity.

Having a SSD  or Hybrid you bought it for as a special solution for a special problem ie. workload right?. If you have 2 different EQLs in one pool you cannot exactly place your workload on the member you would like.

If your  group contains a 10TB and a 20TB EQL in one pool and you create a 3TB volume the ALB place the volume with 1 TB on the smaler unit and with 2TB on the larger one. So you have less control about your data and when there is a need that this workload it placed on the fastet storage you have it isnt a good solution to group a hybrid/ssd together with hdd only unit.

Yes there  is "Raid preference" but thats also not a 100% solution for pin point your data.

Regards
Joerg

OK, I understand what both of you are saying. We'll put the 2 HDD units in one pool and leave the hybrid in it's own. We don't have a ton of LUNs that need the SSDs, so we'll place the ones we need on it and eeny meeny miney mo others if we need to.

Thanks.

Great! 

 SANHQ can really help you here.   You can monitor the individual volumes for IOPs, R/W percentages, etc.. 

 Good luck. 

Don 

They may have removed it in recent versions of firmware. 

As I mentioned it doesn't really have a purpose.

 Don 

Yes, I'm looking at SAN HQ now. The SSDs appear to be writing about 3x faster than the next fastest HDDs for the current load. I'll continue to monitor that over the next couple of days to see how much it changes, then I'll merge the non-hybrid pools and see what the change is on those disks. I'll alos create an archive that includes pre and post change data.

You said that a different pool can be set as default, right? If so, is that a CLI option only? I don't see anything in the GUI to do that.

Fair enough. Thanks.