2014-04-14 08:26 AM - edited 2015-12-18 12:24 AM
starting with V4.1 of SC a QBSM (qtree based snapmirror) is not working.
Error messages SCF-00017
[2014-04-14 15:53:56,779] DEBUG: <snapmirror-get-status/>
[2014-04-14 15:53:56,779] INFO: STORAGE-02074: Retrieving SnapMirror relationships on controller [auh2naf01] finished successfully
[2014-04-14 15:53:56,779] ERROR: SCF-00017: SnapMirror relationship for [auh2naf01]:[sapdata_BPP] does not exist, Exiting!
[2014-04-14 15:53:56,789] DEBUG: Workflow : backup_OnFailure started with workflow id : 36
[2014-04-14 15:53:56,789] DEBUG: Version: Snap Creator Framework 4.1.0
Snapmirror initalize ... is already done:
|auh2naf01:/vol/sapdata_BPP/pr1 dwc1naf01:/vol/sapdata_BPP/dr1 Source||02:56:27 Idle|
Testing same with volume based snapmirror is working without any issue.
2014-04-15 04:40 AM
Qtree SnapMirror is not supported in Snap Creator.
Traditionally it has worked, but it has never been a supported configuration.
Lots of changes to this code were needed for clustered Data ONTAP 8.2 support in Snap Creator 4.1.
Apparently one of these changes broke QSM.
Since it wasn't supported it wasn't in our group of test cases and we were not aware that it broke until after the 4.1 release.
Engineering and Product Management are evaluating the options at this time.
Sorry for the inconvenience.
2014-04-16 12:08 AM
thanks for the quick response.
We are using DATA ONTAP 8.1p3 7mode no CDOT. Fact of using qtree's is given by the application itself so we don't have the chance of easily change to volume base snapmirror.
I'm aware that no QBSM is supported with CDOT .....
I'm a little bit wondering, because SC 4.0 it's definitly working without any issues .... but SC 4.0 doesn't support HANA plugin ....
2014-06-16 02:14 AM
we have the same problem, we use Ontap 7mode and want to migrate from SC3.5.1 to 4.1 and we use qtree snapmirror too. With 3.5.1 it works, but in v4.1 it fails. Is there a plan, when we can use SC with qtree snapmirror?
2014-06-17 04:43 AM
Do you have a case open by chance?
I'm trying to get justification for having this fixed, but I'm having trouble finding open cases on this issue.
Community posts don't seem to count as much as I generally can't tie them back to customer names.
2014-06-17 05:02 AM
I´ve open a case for this problem, the number is: 2005082049.
Gesendet von meinem Fujitsu LIFEBOOK T901
Mit freundlichen Grüßen
FTS CE SC MIS SSC DCSC MD
Hildesheimer Strasse 25, 30880 Laatzen, Deutschland
Telefon: +49 (0)511 8489 1819
Telefax: +49 (0)511 8489 25 1819
Mobile: +49 (0)176 10423993
Firmenangaben: Fujitsu Technology Solutions GmbH / ts.fujitsu.com/imprint<http://ts.fujitsu.com/imprint.html>
This communication contains information that is confidential, proprietary in nature and/or privileged. It is for the exclusive use of the intended recipient(s). If you are not the intended recipient(s) or the person responsible for delivering it to the intended recipient(s), please note that any form of dissemination, distribution or copying of this communication is strictly prohibited and may be unlawful. If you have received this communication in error, please immediately notify the sender and delete the original communication. Thank you for your cooperation.
Please be advised that neither Fujitsu, its affiliates, its employees or agents accept liability for any errors, omissions or damages caused by delays of receipt or by any virus infection in this message or its attachments, or which may otherwise arise as a result of this e-mail transmission.
2014-08-11 06:14 PM
We have also been bitten by this. One of our customers used this, and had to script around it after I learned it was never officially supported.
Since you are interested in real case numbers I have just reported this in case 2005183088.