<?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: Any issues with SSD and SAS drives shared the same stack in ONTAP Discussions</title>
    <link>https://community.netapp.com/t5/ONTAP-Discussions/Any-issues-with-SSD-and-SAS-drives-shared-the-same-stack/m-p/109731#M23206</link>
    <description>&lt;P&gt;Hello Friend,&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;I work for NetApp and have done many storage cluster architectures, and hope to answer this for you!&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;It is not a matter of "not recommended" but slight change - It is recommended if you mix the shelf types that you keep the SSDs at the beginning of the loop or at the end of the loop.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;This is because we purchase SSD shelves for the best performance, so you want the controller to have the most direct-direct-direct access to the SSD shelf.&amp;nbsp; Not Loop1 being SAS -&amp;gt; SSD -&amp;gt; SAS.&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;To make the message more simple, we say if you have extra SAS ports then to just dedicate the loop to SSD, since SSD IOPS can really push a SAS HBA hard.&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Hope this helps clarify!&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Hadrian&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;</description>
    <pubDate>Fri, 11 Sep 2015 18:31:27 GMT</pubDate>
    <dc:creator>hadrian</dc:creator>
    <dc:date>2015-09-11T18:31:27Z</dc:date>
    <item>
      <title>Any issues with SSD and SAS drives shared the same stack</title>
      <link>https://community.netapp.com/t5/ONTAP-Discussions/Any-issues-with-SSD-and-SAS-drives-shared-the-same-stack/m-p/109728#M23205</link>
      <description>&lt;P&gt;If SSD and SAS drives daisy chained together, and shared the same stack in a&amp;nbsp; shelve connection, why is it not recommeneded?&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;I heard it should be separated and using its own port, but what issue it could cause and why?&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Thanks for your sharing.&lt;/P&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Wed, 04 Jun 2025 23:19:38 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.netapp.com/t5/ONTAP-Discussions/Any-issues-with-SSD-and-SAS-drives-shared-the-same-stack/m-p/109728#M23205</guid>
      <dc:creator>netappmagic</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2025-06-04T23:19:38Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: Any issues with SSD and SAS drives shared the same stack</title>
      <link>https://community.netapp.com/t5/ONTAP-Discussions/Any-issues-with-SSD-and-SAS-drives-shared-the-same-stack/m-p/109731#M23206</link>
      <description>&lt;P&gt;Hello Friend,&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;I work for NetApp and have done many storage cluster architectures, and hope to answer this for you!&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;It is not a matter of "not recommended" but slight change - It is recommended if you mix the shelf types that you keep the SSDs at the beginning of the loop or at the end of the loop.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;This is because we purchase SSD shelves for the best performance, so you want the controller to have the most direct-direct-direct access to the SSD shelf.&amp;nbsp; Not Loop1 being SAS -&amp;gt; SSD -&amp;gt; SAS.&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;To make the message more simple, we say if you have extra SAS ports then to just dedicate the loop to SSD, since SSD IOPS can really push a SAS HBA hard.&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Hope this helps clarify!&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Hadrian&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Fri, 11 Sep 2015 18:31:27 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.netapp.com/t5/ONTAP-Discussions/Any-issues-with-SSD-and-SAS-drives-shared-the-same-stack/m-p/109731#M23206</guid>
      <dc:creator>hadrian</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2015-09-11T18:31:27Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: Any issues with SSD and SAS drives shared the same stack</title>
      <link>https://community.netapp.com/t5/ONTAP-Discussions/Any-issues-with-SSD-and-SAS-drives-shared-the-same-stack/m-p/109733#M23207</link>
      <description>&lt;P&gt;There are also tighter limits on stack&amp;nbsp;depth for stacks containiing SSD. &amp;nbsp;You don't want to go over 4 shelves in the stack if it contains SSD. &amp;nbsp;Should be covered in the storage subsystem faq.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Fri, 11 Sep 2015 19:01:10 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.netapp.com/t5/ONTAP-Discussions/Any-issues-with-SSD-and-SAS-drives-shared-the-same-stack/m-p/109733#M23207</guid>
      <dc:creator>shatfield</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2015-09-11T19:01:10Z</dc:date>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>

