1) Is it possible to map metas to two additional FA directors?
You can map metas (and generally speaking, any volume) on every port if you want. There are limits (number of devices mapped on a processor, number of luns mapped on a port) but generally speaking you can -if you want- map all the volumes on all the ports.
2) After connecting two host HBAs to the switch and zoning & adding wwn to the LUN masking DB (to the existing FA dirs), would it work?
I don't see too many alternatives .. You need to map the volume on the FAs, zone the host (the HBAs) with the FAs, mask the volumes to the HBAs and discover the devices from the host point of view.
3) Which one will provide better performance and recommended? 1 or 2?
I think that steps 1 and 2 are not mutually exclusive. You can choose to either increase the connectivity from the host perspective (add more HBA to an already existing host) or expand the connectivity from the storage perspective (map the volume to additional FA) .. Or you can simply choose to apply BOTH of them
If you add more HBA or add more FA, you have however to zone the new paths and mask the devices you want to see.
Increasing host connectivity is usually needed only if you find that your HBA are too busy. Usually you have to increase storage connectivity (add more FA) since this gives more "queues" where to queue your IO operations. But it's a very complex chapter so please don't take my few words as a suggestion
As I usually say when I talk about performances .. IT DEPENDS !!
Talking about multiple paths to a DMX made me think about my speed record of copying data between 2 DMXs: I mapped 40 single symdevs and metas to as much as 14 FAs and copied 2TB withing the hour to the other DMX.....
Who said anything about unused ? All the mentioned ports used to be in use by hosts (through switches of course). It all happened in a Open Replicator migration from an old DMX2 to a new DMX3. The DMX2 was nearly empty and only 3 servers were still attached. 2 Windows and 1 Sun. The Sun still had 40 lun's and the 2 Windows machines shared the same FAs. So all the other ports were already emptied and we had 14 ports (2 times 7) attached to the SAN. Only 14... that's not much ! Only FAx0 ports, not a single FAx1 port !
xe2sdc
6 Operator
•
2831 Posts
290
0
Posted January 17th, 2008 15:00
You can map metas (and generally speaking, any volume) on every port if you want. There are limits (number of devices mapped on a processor, number of luns mapped on a port) but generally speaking you can -if you want- map all the volumes on all the ports.
zoning & adding wwn to the LUN masking DB (to the
existing FA dirs), would it work?
I don't see too many alternatives
recommended? 1 or 2?
I think that steps 1 and 2 are not mutually exclusive. You can choose to either increase the connectivity from the host perspective (add more HBA to an already existing host) or expand the connectivity from the storage perspective (map the volume to additional FA) .. Or you can simply choose to apply BOTH of them
If you add more HBA or add more FA, you have however to zone the new paths and mask the devices you want to see.
Increasing host connectivity is usually needed only if you find that your HBA are too busy. Usually you have to increase storage connectivity (add more FA) since this gives more "queues" where to queue your IO operations. But it's a very complex chapter so please don't take my few words as a suggestion
As I usually say when I talk about performances .. IT DEPENDS !!
Message was edited by:
Stefano Del Corno