2009-01-23 06:02 AM
I created a test dataset and put a volume in it. I then applied a backup policy to the dataset and had the Ops Mgr system auto create/provision the secondary out of a resource pool.
The data protection was running fine.
I then went into the FAS controller and renamed the primary volume. Ops/Prot mgr picked up the change and the protection policy still worked just fine.
I then went into the other FAS controller and renamed the destination volume. Again Ops/Prot mgr picked up the change and protection ran just fine....also the dataset still shows the resource pool for the secondary location (as opposed to if I manually picked a destination, in which case the resource pool would be blank)
My question is:
Is renaming volumes considered supported? I have a number of customers that don't like the naming convention that auto-provisioning provides, but if they can still use that feature to have ops mgr manage the space (or grow the volume or provision more storage) and they can just 'after the fact' rename the volume they would be very happy.
2009-01-30 01:19 PM
I'm not aware of any additional testing beyond what you have done so I'm reluctant to comment
on the supportability of these actions.
I will mention that the next version of DFM, schedule for release mid-2009, will have a new
feature that gives users some control over the names of volumes, qtrees and snapshots
provisioned by Protection Manager.