Subscribe

LUN os_type

I'm creating some new LUNs in a volume and want to create the LUNs as the same os_type as the existing LUNs.  When I use lun.os_type, I'm getting a null value.  I used Toad to examine the actual data in the WFA Cache and found that for all of my iSCSI LUNs, the os_type is listed as {null}.  I don't have any FC LUNs to see if there is a problem with that also.

 

I'm using a copy of the "Filter LUNs by key" with the lun.os_type returned, although I'm not sure at this point if I could have used the original filter.

 

Is WFA supposed to collecting the os_type for the LUN?  I'm using WFA 2.2.0.2.5RC1R1

 

Is there a better way to create LUNs using the same os_type as existing LUNs in a volume?

 

Thanks,

Roger

 

 

Re: LUN os_type

Hi,

 

Can you please provide details like:

 

- Is this for Clustered Data ONTAP or 7-mode ?

- Which is the data source you are using

 

Thanks,
Shailaja

Re: LUN os_type

[ Edited ]

Sorry about that.  We're running Clustered OnTap and the data source is OnCommand Unified Manager 5.2 for Clustered Data OnTap.  We're running dfm version:  dfm 5.2 (5.2R1) 

 

In doing a little more checking, I also can't get the igroup.os_type value, although this one is in the WFA cache.

 

Thanks, 

Roger

 

Re: LUN os_type

Hi,

 

As of now, when data is collected from OnCommand 5.2x for Clustered Data ONTAP, LUN os type is NULL. You can see that in the cache query written for cm_storage.LUN dictionary entry to collect from OnCommand 5.2.x

 

You can see that in this screenshot.

 

lun_ostype.png

 

 

 

We are looking into whether OnCommand 5.2.x collects this information or not. Will get back to you soon.

 

Thanks,

Shailaja

Re: LUN os_type

Hi, Just to add to shailaja's comment. We support this in OCUM 6.2 data source. Other work around is, in your command code, you can query for LUN os_type directly from ONTAP for a given LUN and pass it to new lun creation command. Hope this helps, Rajeev

Re: LUN os_type

Thanks Rajeev,

 

Unfortunately, doing a direct connect for as many filers as we have isn't realistic for us.  We'll look at upgrading to 6.2 when it become GA..

 

Thanks,

Roger