<?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 SVM LIF Performance Bottlenecks Possible? in ONTAP Discussions</title>
    <link>https://community.netapp.com/t5/ONTAP-Discussions/SVM-LIF-Performance-Bottlenecks-Possible/m-p/108551#M22462</link>
    <description>&lt;P&gt;&lt;FONT size="3"&gt;Hi,&lt;/FONT&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;FONT size="3"&gt;We have several large, performance intensive NFS vols that are part of a new project, and were thinking of putting them all into the same SVM (named after the project) but are concerned that by doing so we will be performance bound by the single LIF of the SVM. &amp;nbsp;Would it make more sense to have break the vols up into separate SVMs, each with their own LIF, to prevent any sort of network contention?&lt;/FONT&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;FONT size="3"&gt;Thanks,&lt;BR /&gt;&lt;BR /&gt;~ Jon&lt;/FONT&gt;&lt;/P&gt;</description>
    <pubDate>Wed, 04 Jun 2025 23:32:39 GMT</pubDate>
    <dc:creator>hellojon</dc:creator>
    <dc:date>2025-06-04T23:32:39Z</dc:date>
    <item>
      <title>SVM LIF Performance Bottlenecks Possible?</title>
      <link>https://community.netapp.com/t5/ONTAP-Discussions/SVM-LIF-Performance-Bottlenecks-Possible/m-p/108551#M22462</link>
      <description>&lt;P&gt;&lt;FONT size="3"&gt;Hi,&lt;/FONT&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;FONT size="3"&gt;We have several large, performance intensive NFS vols that are part of a new project, and were thinking of putting them all into the same SVM (named after the project) but are concerned that by doing so we will be performance bound by the single LIF of the SVM. &amp;nbsp;Would it make more sense to have break the vols up into separate SVMs, each with their own LIF, to prevent any sort of network contention?&lt;/FONT&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;FONT size="3"&gt;Thanks,&lt;BR /&gt;&lt;BR /&gt;~ Jon&lt;/FONT&gt;&lt;/P&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Wed, 04 Jun 2025 23:32:39 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.netapp.com/t5/ONTAP-Discussions/SVM-LIF-Performance-Bottlenecks-Possible/m-p/108551#M22462</guid>
      <dc:creator>hellojon</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2025-06-04T23:32:39Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: SVM LIF Performance Bottlenecks Possible?</title>
      <link>https://community.netapp.com/t5/ONTAP-Discussions/SVM-LIF-Performance-Bottlenecks-Possible/m-p/108572#M22466</link>
      <description>&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Jon -&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;You could assign multiple LIFs on different physical ports to the SVM, and access the volumes using those multiple LIFs.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;BR /&gt;I hope this response has been helpful to you.&lt;BR /&gt;&lt;BR /&gt;At your service,&lt;BR /&gt;&lt;BR /&gt;Eugene E. Kashpureff, Sr.&lt;BR /&gt;Independent NetApp Consultant &lt;A href="http://www.linkedin.com/in/eugenekashpureff" target="_blank"&gt;http://www.linkedin.com/in/eugenekashpureff&lt;/A&gt;&lt;BR /&gt;Senior NetApp Instructor, IT Learning Solutions &lt;A href="http://sg.itls.asia/netapp" target="_blank"&gt;http://sg.itls.asia/netapp&lt;/A&gt;&lt;BR /&gt;(P.S. I appreciate 'kudos' on any helpful posts.)&lt;/P&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Thu, 13 Aug 2015 08:40:10 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.netapp.com/t5/ONTAP-Discussions/SVM-LIF-Performance-Bottlenecks-Possible/m-p/108572#M22466</guid>
      <dc:creator>ekashpureff</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2015-08-13T08:40:10Z</dc:date>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>

