topic Re: SnapCenter backups failing due to busy "SIS Clone" snapshot in Data Protection

SnapCenter backups failing due to busy "SIS Clone" snapshot

muzzy543 — Wed, 04 Jun 2025 09:55:50 GMT

My Oracle DBA's have reported issues using SnapCenter whereby following a restore subsequent backups fail due to an undeletable snapshot owned by "SIS Clone". This also results in no snapshots possible to be created (e.g. manual or scheduled SnapMirror snapshots). I have a case raised but thought I'd post here as well. I've looked through mgwd, ems, and sktrace logs but not spotted anything. From their testing it seems consistent that when they follow the scenario "backup->restore->backup" that they get this problem.

SnapCenter Server 4.6 P1 Build 4.6.0.7006

OnTap 9.7P17

Re: SnapCenter backups failing due to busy "SIS Clone" snapshot

Ontapforrum — Tue, 01 Nov 2022 11:55:24 GMT

As a workaround, could you try login to : System Manager ONTAP GUI or CLI.
1) Identify the cloned_volume under the SVM.
2) Unmap it (if still mapped)
3) Offline & Delete ?
4) Try backup again

As you mentioned, you have already logged a ticket with NetApp. They will require logs, so I am hoping all SC logs are uploaded.

Re: SnapCenter backups failing due to busy "SIS Clone" snapshot

muzzy543 — Tue, 01 Nov 2022 12:31:12 GMT

Hi, I don't have a clone? the restored volume is just a normal volume and I can't delete it as it has live data. I am a bit confused.

Re: SnapCenter backups failing due to busy "SIS Clone" snapshot

muzzy543 — Tue, 01 Nov 2022 12:48:48 GMT

The problem is occurring for every database we've tried so I wonder if this is a bug?

Re: SnapCenter backups failing due to busy "SIS Clone" snapshot

Ontapforrum — Tue, 01 Nov 2022 13:00:50 GMT

Ok, I see. SIS-Clone term applies to file/lun clone. Are you able to see any cloned_LUNs in the NetApp Storage side, under the volume?

Re: SnapCenter backups failing due to busy "SIS Clone" snapshot

muzzy543 — Tue, 01 Nov 2022 14:30:35 GMT

To clarify, "SIS Clone" is the owner of the permanently busy snapshot that I am unable to delete. There are no LUN's.

Re: SnapCenter backups failing due to busy "SIS Clone" snapshot

Ontapforrum — Tue, 01 Nov 2022 14:34:11 GMT

Could you share this output:

::> snapshot show -owners "SIS Clone"

Re: SnapCenter backups failing due to busy "SIS Clone" snapshot

muzzy543 — Tue, 01 Nov 2022 14:39:35 GMT

Not much to see! I've had to redact the svm and volume name.

::> snapshot show -owners "SIS Clone"

svm
volume
volume_10-21-2022_16.03.08.1080_0
507.2MB 1% 4%

Re: SnapCenter backups failing due to busy "SIS Clone" snapshot

Ontapforrum — Tue, 01 Nov 2022 14:57:54 GMT

Ok. Let NetApp investigate as they need to look at SC logs as well. Let us know.

Any chance that 'backups' ran while restore was in progress?

Re: SnapCenter backups failing due to busy "SIS Clone" snapshot

muzzy543 — Thu, 03 Nov 2022 14:18:01 GMT

This is gone to NetApp engineering to resolve . Something to do with "file clone split" and a split load that hasn't completed. The issue is only seen with volumes on a particular node. See below.

cluster0001::*> file clone split load show
Node Max Current Token Allowable
Split Load Split Load Reserved Load Split Load
------------------------------- ---------- ---------- ------------- ----------
node0101 54.84TB 0B 0B 54.84TB
node0102 54.84TB 0B 0B 54.84TB
node0103 54.84TB 0B 0B 54.84TB
node0104 54.84TB 0B 0B 54.84TB
node0105 109.7TB 0B 0B 109.7TB
node0106 109.7TB 28.66TB 0B 81.03TB <<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<< problem here
node0107 54.84TB 0B 0B 54.84TB
node0108 54.84TB 0B 0B 54.84TB
node0109 109.7TB 0B 0B 109.7TB
node0110 109.7TB 0B 0B 109.7TB
node0111 109.7TB 0B 0B 109.7TB
node0112 109.7TB 0B 0B 109.7TB
12 entries were displayed.

Re: SnapCenter backups failing due to busy "SIS Clone" snapshot

spooky — Fri, 24 Nov 2023 13:38:28 GMT

What was the final resolution? We are having a similar issue.

Thanks.

Re: SnapCenter backups failing due to busy "SIS Clone" snapshot

muzzy543 — Fri, 24 Nov 2023 14:00:26 GMT

We did a takeover/giveback of the node which cleared the "file clone split" issue.