<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/" xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/" xmlns:rdf="http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#" xmlns:taxo="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/taxonomy/" version="2.0">
  <channel>
    <title>topic Re: lun latency increasing in Data Protection</title>
    <link>https://community.netapp.com/t5/Data-Protection/lun-latency-increasing/m-p/51235#M9625</link>
    <description>&lt;HTML&gt;&lt;HEAD&gt;&lt;/HEAD&gt;&lt;BODY&gt;&lt;P&gt;Hi Bren,&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Many thanks for posting the update - fingers crossed for the positive outcome on/after the 7th of April! &lt;SPAN __jive_emoticon_name="cool" __jive_macro_name="emoticon" class="jive_macro jive_emote" src="https://community.netapp.com/images/emoticons/cool.gif"&gt;&lt;/SPAN&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Regards,&lt;BR /&gt;Radek&lt;/P&gt;&lt;/BODY&gt;&lt;/HTML&gt;</description>
    <pubDate>Tue, 23 Mar 2010 12:51:57 GMT</pubDate>
    <dc:creator>radek_kubka</dc:creator>
    <dc:date>2010-03-23T12:51:57Z</dc:date>
    <item>
      <title>lun latency increasing</title>
      <link>https://community.netapp.com/t5/Data-Protection/lun-latency-increasing/m-p/51187#M9615</link>
      <description>&lt;HTML&gt;&lt;HEAD&gt;&lt;/HEAD&gt;&lt;BODY&gt;&lt;P&gt;I have a lun which holds the SQL data file and it is showing increased lun latency.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;IMG src="http://community.netapp.com/legacyfs/online/7658_lun_lat.JPG" width="450" /&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;The data is from this month's monthly report for storage, shows LUN latency increasing for the database data file LUNs.&amp;nbsp; Past experience has shown, users become affected at about the 11 ms mark and action should be taken to avoid this scenario.&amp;nbsp; So a NetApp support case was opened to try and address the performance issue.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;How do I show if this is a caching or fragmentation issue?&amp;nbsp; I have been looking through the prefstat reports and verything looks healthy apart from the latency.&amp;nbsp; Not sure what "cp_dirty_allocation_blks" is but it is 1000+&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;SPAN style="font-family: courier new,courier; font-size: 10pt;"&gt;Read Write&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp; Read&amp;nbsp; Write Average&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp; Queue&amp;nbsp; Lun&lt;BR /&gt;&amp;nbsp; Ops&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp; Ops&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp; kB&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp; kB Latency&amp;nbsp; Length&lt;BR /&gt;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp; 0&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp; 0&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp; 32&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp; 0&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp; 7.54&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp; 0.07 /vol/sqf02/diskf.lun&lt;BR /&gt;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp; 0&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp; 0&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp; 37&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp; 0&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp; 7.00&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp; 1.00 /vol/sqf02/diske.lun&lt;/SPAN&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;SPAN style="font-family: courier new,courier;"&gt;&lt;BR /&gt;&lt;/SPAN&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;SPAN style="font-family: courier new,courier;"&gt; Read Write&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp; Read&amp;nbsp; Write Average&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp; Queue&amp;nbsp; Lun&lt;BR /&gt;&amp;nbsp; Ops&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp; Ops&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp; kB&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp; kB Latency&amp;nbsp; Length&lt;BR /&gt;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp; 1&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp; 0&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp; 80&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp; 0&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp; 11.31&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp; 0.08 /vol/sqf02/diskf.lun&lt;BR /&gt;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp; 2&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp; 0&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp; 123&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp; 0&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp; 10.96&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp; 0.08 /vol/sqf02/diske.lun&lt;/SPAN&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;SPAN style="font-family: courier new,courier;"&gt;CPU&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp; NFS&amp;nbsp; CIFS&amp;nbsp; HTTP&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp; Total&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp; Net kB/s&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp; Disk kB/s&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp; Tape kB/s Cache Cache&amp;nbsp; CP&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp; CP Disk&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp; FCP iSCSI&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp; FCP&amp;nbsp; kB/s iSCSI&amp;nbsp; kB/s&lt;BR /&gt;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp; in&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp; out&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp; read&amp;nbsp; write&amp;nbsp; read write&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp; age&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp; hit time&amp;nbsp; ty util&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp; in&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp; out&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp; in&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp; out&lt;BR /&gt; 20%&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp; 0&amp;nbsp; 1541&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp; 0&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp; 2140&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp; 376&amp;nbsp; 5881&amp;nbsp; 12354&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp; 7140&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp; 0&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp; 0&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp; 19&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp; 94%&amp;nbsp; 16%&amp;nbsp; F&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp; 28%&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp; 595&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp; 2&amp;nbsp; 9228&amp;nbsp; 5290&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp; 1&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp; 0&lt;BR /&gt; 26%&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp; 0&amp;nbsp; 1162&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp; 0&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp; 2172&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp; 498&amp;nbsp; 3993&amp;nbsp; 14646&amp;nbsp; 20264&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp; 0&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp; 0&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp; 18&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp; 95%&amp;nbsp; 39%&amp;nbsp; 3f&amp;nbsp; 31%&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp; 1006&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp; 2 18393&amp;nbsp; 8112&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp; 1&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp; 0&lt;/SPAN&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;SPAN style="font-family: courier new,courier;"&gt;lun:sqf02/diske.lun-XXXXZZZZZ:display_name:/vol/sqf02/diske.lun&lt;BR /&gt;lun:sqf02/diske.lun-XXXXZZZZZ:read_ops:0/s&lt;BR /&gt;lun:sqf02/diske.lun-XXXXZZZZZ:write_ops:2/s&lt;BR /&gt;lun:sqf02/diske.lun-XXXXZZZZZ:other_ops:0/s&lt;BR /&gt;lun:sqf02/diske.lun-XXXXZZZZZ:read_data&amp;amp;colon;36798b/s&lt;BR /&gt;lun:sqf02/diske.lun-XXXXZZZZZ:write_data&amp;amp;colon;19872b/s&lt;BR /&gt;lun:sqf02/diske.lun-XXXXZZZZZ:queue_full:0/s&lt;BR /&gt;&lt;STRONG&gt;lun:sqf02/diske.lun-XXXXZZZZZ:avg_latency:22.17ms&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp; &amp;lt;-------------------- Why?&lt;/STRONG&gt;&lt;BR /&gt;lun:sqf02/diske.lun-XXXXZZZZZ:total_ops:3/s&lt;BR /&gt;lun:sqf02/diske.lun-XXXXZZZZZ:scsi_partner_ops:0/s&lt;BR /&gt;lun:sqf02/diske.lun-XXXXZZZZZ:scsi_partner_data&amp;amp;colon;0b/s&lt;BR /&gt;lun:sqf02/diske.lun-XXXXZZZZZ:read_align_histo.0:98%&lt;BR /&gt;lun:sqf02/diske.lun-XXXXZZZZZ:read_align_histo.1:0%&lt;BR /&gt;lun:sqf02/diske.lun-XXXXZZZZZ:read_align_histo.2:0%&lt;BR /&gt;lun:sqf02/diske.lun-XXXXZZZZZ:read_align_histo.3:0%&lt;BR /&gt;lun:sqf02/diske.lun-XXXXZZZZZ:read_align_histo.4:0%&lt;BR /&gt;lun:sqf02/diske.lun-XXXXZZZZZ:read_align_histo.5:0%&lt;BR /&gt;lun:sqf02/diske.lun-XXXXZZZZZ:read_align_histo.6:0%&lt;BR /&gt;lun:sqf02/diske.lun-XXXXZZZZZ:read_align_histo.7:0%&lt;BR /&gt;lun:sqf02/diske.lun-XXXXZZZZZ:write_align_histo.0:86%&lt;BR /&gt;lun:sqf02/diske.lun-XXXXZZZZZ:write_align_histo.1:0%&lt;BR /&gt;lun:sqf02/diske.lun-XXXXZZZZZ:write_align_histo.2:0%&lt;BR /&gt;lun:sqf02/diske.lun-XXXXZZZZZ:write_align_histo.3:0%&lt;BR /&gt;lun:sqf02/diske.lun-XXXXZZZZZ:write_align_histo.4:0%&lt;BR /&gt;lun:sqf02/diske.lun-XXXXZZZZZ:write_align_histo.5:0%&lt;BR /&gt;lun:sqf02/diske.lun-XXXXZZZZZ:write_align_histo.6:0%&lt;BR /&gt;lun:sqf02/diske.lun-XXXXZZZZZ:write_align_histo.7:0%&lt;BR /&gt;lun:sqf02/diske.lun-XXXXZZZZZ:read_partial_blocks:1%&lt;BR /&gt;lun:sqf02/diske.lun-XXXXZZZZZ:write_partial_blocks:13%&lt;/SPAN&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Thanks ifyou know the answer&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Bren&lt;/P&gt;&lt;/BODY&gt;&lt;/HTML&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Thu, 05 Jun 2025 07:17:33 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.netapp.com/t5/Data-Protection/lun-latency-increasing/m-p/51187#M9615</guid>
      <dc:creator>BrendonHiggins</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2025-06-05T07:17:33Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: lun latency increasing</title>
      <link>https://community.netapp.com/t5/Data-Protection/lun-latency-increasing/m-p/51192#M9616</link>
      <description>&lt;HTML&gt;&lt;HEAD&gt;&lt;/HEAD&gt;&lt;BODY&gt;&lt;P&gt;Sorry better image of graph...&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;IMG src="http://community.netapp.com/legacyfs/online/7659_lun_lat.JPG" width="450" /&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;/BODY&gt;&lt;/HTML&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Mon, 08 Mar 2010 12:49:42 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.netapp.com/t5/Data-Protection/lun-latency-increasing/m-p/51192#M9616</guid>
      <dc:creator>BrendonHiggins</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2010-03-08T12:49:42Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: lun latency increasing</title>
      <link>https://community.netapp.com/t5/Data-Protection/lun-latency-increasing/m-p/51195#M9617</link>
      <description>&lt;HTML&gt;&lt;HEAD&gt;&lt;/HEAD&gt;&lt;BODY&gt;&lt;P&gt;Hi Bren,&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Not saying this is definitely the case of fragmentation, but can you check the LUN in question against this issue first?&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;EM&gt;&lt;STRONG&gt;reallocate measure [-l logfile] [-t threshold] [-i inter_val] [-o] pathname | /vol/volname&lt;/STRONG&gt;&lt;BR /&gt;Start a measure-only reallocation on the LUN, large file or volume.&lt;BR /&gt;A measure-only reallocation job is similar to a normal reallocation job except that only the check phase is performed. This allows the optimization of the LUN, large file or volume to be tracked over time, or measured ad-hoc.&lt;/EM&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Regards,&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Radek&lt;/P&gt;&lt;/BODY&gt;&lt;/HTML&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Mon, 08 Mar 2010 14:22:35 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.netapp.com/t5/Data-Protection/lun-latency-increasing/m-p/51195#M9617</guid>
      <dc:creator>radek_kubka</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2010-03-08T14:22:35Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: lun latency increasing</title>
      <link>https://community.netapp.com/t5/Data-Protection/lun-latency-increasing/m-p/51199#M9618</link>
      <description>&lt;HTML&gt;&lt;HEAD&gt;&lt;/HEAD&gt;&lt;BODY&gt;&lt;P&gt;What sort of load does it put on the filer, can I run it during the day?  I have a snapmirror of this volume.  Can I run it on the remote site and still get a valid result?&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Thanks&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Bren&lt;/P&gt;&lt;/BODY&gt;&lt;/HTML&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Mon, 08 Mar 2010 14:32:32 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.netapp.com/t5/Data-Protection/lun-latency-increasing/m-p/51199#M9618</guid>
      <dc:creator>BrendonHiggins</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2010-03-08T14:32:32Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: lun latency increasing</title>
      <link>https://community.netapp.com/t5/Data-Protection/lun-latency-increasing/m-p/51204#M9619</link>
      <description>&lt;HTML&gt;&lt;HEAD&gt;&lt;/HEAD&gt;&lt;BODY&gt;&lt;P&gt;Yeah, as per this thread (which you're already familiar with) reallocation is rather poorly documented:&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;A class="jive-link-message-small" href="http://communities.netapp.com/message/20969#20969" target="_blank"&gt;http://communities.netapp.com/message/20969#20969&lt;/A&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;My (informed) guesses:&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;- reallocate should be run on the original LUN, not its mirror, as logical to physical layout may be different at the destination, hence different results are likely in my opinion&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;- arguably there is some additional load on the filer (actual reads are undertaken), so running reallocate outside of peak ours seems to be a reasonable approach&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Regards,&lt;BR /&gt;Radek&lt;/P&gt;&lt;/BODY&gt;&lt;/HTML&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Mon, 08 Mar 2010 14:45:50 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.netapp.com/t5/Data-Protection/lun-latency-increasing/m-p/51204#M9619</guid>
      <dc:creator>radek_kubka</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2010-03-08T14:45:50Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: lun latency increasing</title>
      <link>https://community.netapp.com/t5/Data-Protection/lun-latency-increasing/m-p/51211#M9620</link>
      <description>&lt;HTML&gt;&lt;HEAD&gt;&lt;/HEAD&gt;&lt;BODY&gt;&lt;P&gt;If 1 is good and 5 is very bad:&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;"Allocation check on '/vol/test/diske.lun' is 5, hotspot 0 (threshold&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;4), consider running reallocate."&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;I think that is a fair clue as at to what is wrong....&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Thanks&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Bren&lt;/P&gt;&lt;/BODY&gt;&lt;/HTML&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Mon, 08 Mar 2010 14:57:02 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.netapp.com/t5/Data-Protection/lun-latency-increasing/m-p/51211#M9620</guid>
      <dc:creator>BrendonHiggins</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2010-03-08T14:57:02Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: lun latency increasing</title>
      <link>https://community.netapp.com/t5/Data-Protection/lun-latency-increasing/m-p/51215#M9621</link>
      <description>&lt;HTML&gt;&lt;HEAD&gt;&lt;/HEAD&gt;&lt;BODY&gt;&lt;P&gt;The actual scale goes up to 10:&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;A class="jive-link-external-small" href="http://now.netapp.com/NOW/knowledge/docs/ontap/rel732_vs/html/ontap/cmdref/man1/na_reallocate.1.htm" target="_blank"&gt;http://now.netapp.com/NOW/knowledge/docs/ontap/rel732_vs/html/ontap/cmdref/man1/na_reallocate.1.htm&lt;/A&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;EM&gt;The threshold when a LUN, file or volume is considered unoptimized enough that a reallocation should be performed is given as a number from 3 (moderately optimized) to 10 (very unoptimized). [...].The default threshold is 4.&lt;/EM&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Having said that, I've heard stories from people getting fairly low numbers during measurement, yet when they actually run reallocation, their performance vastly improved &lt;SPAN __jive_emoticon_name="cool" __jive_macro_name="emoticon" class="jive_macro jive_emote" src="https://community.netapp.com/images/emoticons/cool.gif"&gt;&lt;/SPAN&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Regards,&lt;BR /&gt;Radek&lt;/P&gt;&lt;/BODY&gt;&lt;/HTML&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Mon, 08 Mar 2010 15:07:39 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.netapp.com/t5/Data-Protection/lun-latency-increasing/m-p/51215#M9621</guid>
      <dc:creator>radek_kubka</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2010-03-08T15:07:39Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: lun latency increasing</title>
      <link>https://community.netapp.com/t5/Data-Protection/lun-latency-increasing/m-p/51220#M9622</link>
      <description>&lt;HTML&gt;&lt;HEAD&gt;&lt;/HEAD&gt;&lt;BODY&gt;&lt;P&gt;Hi Bren,&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Did you by any chance manage to verify that fragmentation was an issue, indeed?&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Did you do actual reallocation &amp;amp; did it reduce latency?&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Kind regards,&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Radek&lt;/P&gt;&lt;/BODY&gt;&lt;/HTML&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Fri, 19 Mar 2010 21:25:39 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.netapp.com/t5/Data-Protection/lun-latency-increasing/m-p/51220#M9622</guid>
      <dc:creator>radek_kubka</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2010-03-19T21:25:39Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: lun latency increasing</title>
      <link>https://community.netapp.com/t5/Data-Protection/lun-latency-increasing/m-p/51225#M9623</link>
      <description>&lt;HTML&gt;&lt;HEAD&gt;&lt;/HEAD&gt;&lt;BODY&gt;&lt;P&gt;Still working on the issue with TSE.  Have not found the root problem yet.  Will post back with solution once it has been discovered.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Bren&lt;/P&gt;&lt;/BODY&gt;&lt;/HTML&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Mon, 22 Mar 2010 10:24:08 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.netapp.com/t5/Data-Protection/lun-latency-increasing/m-p/51225#M9623</guid>
      <dc:creator>BrendonHiggins</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2010-03-22T10:24:08Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: lun latency increasing</title>
      <link>https://community.netapp.com/t5/Data-Protection/lun-latency-increasing/m-p/51230#M9624</link>
      <description>&lt;HTML&gt;&lt;HEAD&gt;&lt;/HEAD&gt;&lt;BODY&gt;&lt;P&gt;TSE have said to run reallocate against the luns.&amp;nbsp; Have to wait until the 7th April due to change control to get the results.&amp;nbsp; Will post back if it is a success.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Thanks all for help&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Bren&lt;/P&gt;&lt;/BODY&gt;&lt;/HTML&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Tue, 23 Mar 2010 12:24:04 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.netapp.com/t5/Data-Protection/lun-latency-increasing/m-p/51230#M9624</guid>
      <dc:creator>BrendonHiggins</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2010-03-23T12:24:04Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: lun latency increasing</title>
      <link>https://community.netapp.com/t5/Data-Protection/lun-latency-increasing/m-p/51235#M9625</link>
      <description>&lt;HTML&gt;&lt;HEAD&gt;&lt;/HEAD&gt;&lt;BODY&gt;&lt;P&gt;Hi Bren,&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Many thanks for posting the update - fingers crossed for the positive outcome on/after the 7th of April! &lt;SPAN __jive_emoticon_name="cool" __jive_macro_name="emoticon" class="jive_macro jive_emote" src="https://community.netapp.com/images/emoticons/cool.gif"&gt;&lt;/SPAN&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Regards,&lt;BR /&gt;Radek&lt;/P&gt;&lt;/BODY&gt;&lt;/HTML&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Tue, 23 Mar 2010 12:51:57 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.netapp.com/t5/Data-Protection/lun-latency-increasing/m-p/51235#M9625</guid>
      <dc:creator>radek_kubka</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2010-03-23T12:51:57Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: lun latency increasing</title>
      <link>https://community.netapp.com/t5/Data-Protection/lun-latency-increasing/m-p/51241#M9626</link>
      <description>&lt;HTML&gt;&lt;HEAD&gt;&lt;/HEAD&gt;&lt;BODY&gt;&lt;P&gt;Early results are in.&amp;nbsp; Reallocate the lun in the volume does reduce LUN latency for SQL server my 20% in my system!&amp;nbsp; It is still to early to know that the process was a success but early results do look very good.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;A total of 7 luns where reallocated on a single 56x 300Gb 15k disk aggregate on a FAS3070&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;E:&amp;nbsp; 134Gb took 26 min&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;F:&amp;nbsp; 135Gb took 13 min&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;G:&amp;nbsp; 100Gb took 26 min&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;H:&amp;nbsp; 98Gb took 15 min&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;J:&amp;nbsp; 185Gb took 12 min&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;K:&amp;nbsp; 100Gb took 37 min - TL&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;i:&amp;nbsp; 395Gb took 7 min - TL&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Did not notice any issues with extra IO or CPU load on the filer during the work.&amp;nbsp; Still waiting to find out how big the snapshots will be.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Hope this post helps you plan your own reallocation work.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Bren&lt;/P&gt;&lt;/BODY&gt;&lt;/HTML&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Thu, 08 Apr 2010 11:48:11 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.netapp.com/t5/Data-Protection/lun-latency-increasing/m-p/51241#M9626</guid>
      <dc:creator>BrendonHiggins</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2010-04-08T11:48:11Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: lun latency increasing</title>
      <link>https://community.netapp.com/t5/Data-Protection/lun-latency-increasing/m-p/51246#M9627</link>
      <description>&lt;HTML&gt;&lt;HEAD&gt;&lt;/HEAD&gt;&lt;BODY&gt;&lt;P&gt;Hi,&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Many thanks for posting the results. I reckon many folks will learn a nice lesson based on your experience (that includes some NetApp chaps who, hmm, tend to forget that fragmentation may be an issue &lt;SPAN __jive_emoticon_name="wink" __jive_macro_name="emoticon" class="jive_macro jive_emote" src="https://community.netapp.com/images/emoticons/wink.gif"&gt;&lt;/SPAN&gt;)&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Re snapshots growing - if they didn't balloon straight after the reallocate run, you are completely safe in my opinion.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Regards,&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Radek&lt;/P&gt;&lt;/BODY&gt;&lt;/HTML&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Thu, 08 Apr 2010 12:53:55 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.netapp.com/t5/Data-Protection/lun-latency-increasing/m-p/51246#M9627</guid>
      <dc:creator>radek_kubka</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2010-04-08T12:53:55Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: lun latency increasing</title>
      <link>https://community.netapp.com/t5/Data-Protection/lun-latency-increasing/m-p/51256#M9628</link>
      <description>&lt;HTML&gt;&lt;HEAD&gt;&lt;/HEAD&gt;&lt;BODY&gt;&lt;P&gt;Care to make a wager?  Next snap will run at 7 pm tonight.  I know what the average size is and think about 5% bigger than normal as my guess.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Bren&lt;/P&gt;&lt;/BODY&gt;&lt;/HTML&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Thu, 08 Apr 2010 13:17:08 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.netapp.com/t5/Data-Protection/lun-latency-increasing/m-p/51256#M9628</guid>
      <dc:creator>BrendonHiggins</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2010-04-08T13:17:08Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: lun latency increasing</title>
      <link>https://community.netapp.com/t5/Data-Protection/lun-latency-increasing/m-p/51260#M9629</link>
      <description>&lt;HTML&gt;&lt;HEAD&gt;&lt;/HEAD&gt;&lt;BODY&gt;&lt;P&gt;After 24 hours the lun latency is still average 20% faster and the snapshot size difference was &lt;!--[if gte mso 10]&gt;
&lt;style&gt;
 /* Style Definitions */
 table.MsoNormalTable
 {mso-style-name:"Table Normal";
 mso-tstyle-rowband-size:0;
 mso-tstyle-colband-size:0;
 mso-style-noshow:yes;
 mso-style-parent:"";
 mso-padding-alt:0cm 5.4pt 0cm 5.4pt;
 mso-para-margin:0cm;
 mso-para-margin-bottom:.0001pt;
 mso-pagination:widow-orphan;
 font-size:10.0pt;
 font-family:"Times New Roman";
 mso-ansi-language:#0400;
 mso-fareast-language:#0400;
 mso-bidi-language:#0400;}
&lt;/style&gt;
&lt;![endif]--&gt;negligible&amp;nbsp; .&amp;nbsp; So FREE upgrade.&amp;nbsp; &lt;SPAN __jive_emoticon_name="laugh" __jive_macro_name="emoticon" class="jive_macro jive_emote" src="https://community.netapp.com/images/emoticons/laugh.gif"&gt;&lt;/SPAN&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Recommend you try it.&amp;nbsp; We are going to wait for a month to confirm results and then look into trying on other SQL servers.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Bren&lt;/P&gt;&lt;/BODY&gt;&lt;/HTML&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Fri, 09 Apr 2010 09:23:20 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.netapp.com/t5/Data-Protection/lun-latency-increasing/m-p/51260#M9629</guid>
      <dc:creator>BrendonHiggins</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2010-04-09T09:23:20Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: lun latency increasing</title>
      <link>https://community.netapp.com/t5/Data-Protection/lun-latency-increasing/m-p/51264#M9630</link>
      <description>&lt;HTML&gt;&lt;HEAD&gt;&lt;/HEAD&gt;&lt;BODY&gt;&lt;P&gt;Hi Bren,&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;To make the story complete - did you run reallocate with -p option?&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;I reckon that was the case because your snapshots didn't grow, but just double-checking...&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Regards,&lt;BR /&gt;Radek&lt;/P&gt;&lt;/BODY&gt;&lt;/HTML&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Fri, 09 Apr 2010 09:43:27 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.netapp.com/t5/Data-Protection/lun-latency-increasing/m-p/51264#M9630</guid>
      <dc:creator>radek_kubka</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2010-04-09T09:43:27Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: lun latency increasing</title>
      <link>https://community.netapp.com/t5/Data-Protection/lun-latency-increasing/m-p/51267#M9631</link>
      <description>&lt;HTML&gt;&lt;HEAD&gt;&lt;/HEAD&gt;&lt;BODY&gt;&lt;P&gt;I used this command&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;reallocate start -f -p /vol/fasqf02/diskf.lun&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Did both database and TL luns.  Will look into setting up a scheduled&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;job to run the reallocate task automatically to stop the performance&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;tailing off with time.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Bren&lt;/P&gt;&lt;/BODY&gt;&lt;/HTML&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Fri, 09 Apr 2010 09:52:08 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.netapp.com/t5/Data-Protection/lun-latency-increasing/m-p/51267#M9631</guid>
      <dc:creator>BrendonHiggins</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2010-04-09T09:52:08Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: lun latency increasing</title>
      <link>https://community.netapp.com/t5/Data-Protection/lun-latency-increasing/m-p/51272#M9632</link>
      <description>&lt;HTML&gt;&lt;HEAD&gt;&lt;/HEAD&gt;&lt;BODY&gt;&lt;P&gt;Fantastic info....I've been using reallocate recently with a customer recently where a lot of Storage vMotion + dedup got the volumes extremely non-optimized. This is a pretty "mushy" topic right now so real-world examples are much appreciated.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;/BODY&gt;&lt;/HTML&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Mon, 19 Apr 2010 02:24:55 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.netapp.com/t5/Data-Protection/lun-latency-increasing/m-p/51272#M9632</guid>
      <dc:creator>amiller_1</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2010-04-19T02:24:55Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: lun latency increasing</title>
      <link>https://community.netapp.com/t5/Data-Protection/lun-latency-increasing/m-p/51277#M9633</link>
      <description>&lt;HTML&gt;&lt;HEAD&gt;&lt;/HEAD&gt;&lt;BODY&gt;&lt;P&gt;And....just curious if you use Performance Advisor? Great for this kind of stuff....&lt;/P&gt;&lt;/BODY&gt;&lt;/HTML&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Mon, 19 Apr 2010 02:25:39 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.netapp.com/t5/Data-Protection/lun-latency-increasing/m-p/51277#M9633</guid>
      <dc:creator>amiller_1</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2010-04-19T02:25:39Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: lun latency increasing</title>
      <link>https://community.netapp.com/t5/Data-Protection/lun-latency-increasing/m-p/51282#M9634</link>
      <description>&lt;HTML&gt;&lt;HEAD&gt;&lt;/HEAD&gt;&lt;BODY&gt;&lt;P&gt;Andrew, we are under the same condition due to migration using vMotion + Dedupe...I wonder how it is resolved.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;We need to undo sis and run reallocate in order to reduce fragmentation...We have around 12 volumes hosting 500+ VM OS volumes that are deduped heavily, we will run out of space in aggregate if we undo a-sis:( (thin on thin might work)&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Reallocate measure on those volumes gives the value as 4 and suggests for a reallocate&lt;SPAN __jive_emoticon_name="plain" __jive_macro_name="emoticon" class="jive_macro jive_emote" src="https://community.netapp.com/4.0.6/images/emoticons/plain.gif"&gt;&lt;/SPAN&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Added to it, we got some misaligned VMs(10% with moderate workload) as part of expediated migration from different storage vendor...It just killing 6080 even when the throughput/IOPs is pretty less...in process of fixing those.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;/BODY&gt;&lt;/HTML&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Mon, 19 Apr 2010 04:42:50 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.netapp.com/t5/Data-Protection/lun-latency-increasing/m-p/51282#M9634</guid>
      <dc:creator>anantha_dommeti</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2010-04-19T04:42:50Z</dc:date>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>

