2013-02-20 12:05 AM
there are some discussion on PS- Clustered Ontap or on other DLs.
So we are starting on a green field with some new Clustered Ontap Systems which are built up. I want to know your opinions for a good naming.
Have somebody already implemented a bigger CDOT environment with WFA.
What do you suggest for naming the LIFs and the aggregates? Especially that WFA finders are working fine.
aggr01_1 --- aggregate 1 on Node 1
Also does it make sense to put the type of aggregate in the name. e.g. hyprid, ssd, sata ... or can we filter on the datasource fom UM 5.1 ?
vserver name + separator (n) + number
Thanks for any advice.
2013-02-20 05:56 AM
I would name node by the HA pair, 1a/1b and 2a/2b. I think that the node name should be in the aggr name. If you have a system with different type of drives I think adding the type would be useful for administration (ssd/scsi/sata). I'm sure the information is there in the display but sometime it's easier to have the this information there for admin. Just my 2 cents.
2015-10-20 11:09 AM
Hello. We are also in a green field project, and are deciding on naming conventions. Here's what I'm proposing to staff:
for our Aggregates:
Our current naming convention is
Problem with that is there's no description of speed or capacity of the disks. This is important for proper deployment of volumes fromt the Aggregates.
2015-10-21 02:27 AM
Good choice of naming convention, please go ahead.
What are you looking for WFA to do for you?