My question is about VMAX400K, so VMAX400K with 8-Engine conforms to the rule 17 convention right.
One more question:
Do we have any VMAX3 document which demonstrates best practice zoning from VMAX3. I checked in EMC online support and Everything VMAX3 from inside EMC. https://inside.emc.com/docs/DOC-109875 . But i am not able find any information.
The rule of 17 has really been more of a configuration convention, rather than a technical rule, since DMX -- but with VMAX3 the convention is dropped as well. Engines and Directors in VMAX3 begin at Engine/Director #1 and count up from there. Even a 4-engine 200k would not be able to conform to the convention of 17, as it would have directors 1 through 8 -- so there are no director pairs that add up to 17.
The only VMAX3 array that could still follow this convention is an 8-engine 400k, which has directors 1 through 16.
About rule 17, now you shouldn't follow for that, but I suppose it is just best behavior (not practices) I would say, because of new guy/or instead of you will understand your confifuration quicly, even in VMAX system you may zone/use dirs as you want, but as I know, almost all administartor try to follow for this rule.
You can find for VMAX2, I guess no any differences reagarding zoning you will have for 400k.
inside emc is an internal site not accessible so that link won't work for anyone who is not an EMC employee. I wrote a paper on the V3 and have some high level discussion on the new port numbering and approach to zoning to new array architecture. Note a new version of this paper will be published in the next few days to give a high level of the additional features coming in the Q4 release.
Anonymous
5 Practitioner
5 Practitioner
•
274.2K Posts
0
November 24th, 2014 18:00
Thanks a lot for your help Sean.
My question is about VMAX400K, so VMAX400K with 8-Engine conforms to the rule 17 convention right.
One more question:
Do we have any VMAX3 document which demonstrates best practice zoning from VMAX3. I checked in EMC online support and Everything VMAX3 from inside EMC. https://inside.emc.com/docs/DOC-109875 . But i am not able find any information.
Thanks,
Rajiv.
seancummins
226 Posts
3
November 24th, 2014 18:00
Rajiv,
No, it does not.
The rule of 17 has really been more of a configuration convention, rather than a technical rule, since DMX -- but with VMAX3 the convention is dropped as well. Engines and Directors in VMAX3 begin at Engine/Director #1 and count up from there. Even a 4-engine 200k would not be able to conform to the convention of 17, as it would have directors 1 through 8 -- so there are no director pairs that add up to 17.
The only VMAX3 array that could still follow this convention is an 8-engine 400k, which has directors 1 through 16.
Thanks,
- Sean
EvgenyM1
51 Posts
0
November 25th, 2014 05:00
Hello!
About rule 17, now you shouldn't follow for that, but I suppose it is just best behavior (not practices) I would say, because of new guy/or instead of you will understand your confifuration quicly, even in VMAX system you may zone/use dirs as you want, but as I know, almost all administartor try to follow for this rule.
You can find for VMAX2, I guess no any differences reagarding zoning you will have for 400k.
rawstorage
419 Posts
0
November 25th, 2014 07:00
Raj,
inside emc is an internal site not accessible so that link won't work for anyone who is not an EMC employee. I wrote a paper on the V3 and have some high level discussion on the new port numbering and approach to zoning to new array architecture. Note a new version of this paper will be published in the next few days to give a high level of the additional features coming in the Q4 release.
http://www.emc.com/collateral/technical-documentation/h13578-vmax3-family-new-features-wp.pdf
We’ve also published some papers on the SnapVX and FAST changes with the new SLO model.
Regards,
Paul Martin
Principal Corporate Systems Engineer
2 Attachments
image002.png
image001.png