<?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: Best practice? 2 HA-Pair Load Balancing in ONTAP Discussions</title>
    <link>https://community.netapp.com/t5/ONTAP-Discussions/Best-practice-2-HA-Pair-Load-Balancing/m-p/123843#M26541</link>
    <description>&lt;P&gt;that's right on track. maybe your ps team can help on planning this?&lt;/P&gt;</description>
    <pubDate>Wed, 05 Oct 2016 01:45:14 GMT</pubDate>
    <dc:creator>Jeff_Yao</dc:creator>
    <dc:date>2016-10-05T01:45:14Z</dc:date>
    <item>
      <title>Best practice? 2 HA-Pair Load Balancing</title>
      <link>https://community.netapp.com/t5/ONTAP-Discussions/Best-practice-2-HA-Pair-Load-Balancing/m-p/123711#M26507</link>
      <description>&lt;P&gt;G'day all&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Questions relating to;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;cdot-8.3.1p2&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;4 node cluster&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;2 x V6240 (high utilisation) 153%&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;2 x V3250&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Currently having some issues with load balancing and node over utilisation, looking at OCUM &amp;amp; monitoring "Statistics" at the Cli looks like it is the CPU/IOPS&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Question for you in your experiences what is the preffered/best options/config for load balancing both your individual HA pair's and cluster as a whole.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;I have done alot of reading in relation to DNS balancing and LIF Balancing, however I beleive I'm looking for a different method.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;So currently I have high utilisation on my 1st pair (V6240) nodes, i'm thinking at this stage i should just be migating the high IOP volumes to the "under-utilised" nodes 2nd pair (v3250) and balance the iops out across the 4 nodes more evenly.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;So from your experiences is this sounding along the lines of what should sort my issues or am i way off ?&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Any suggestions would be appreciated thanks&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Wed, 04 Jun 2025 18:50:35 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.netapp.com/t5/ONTAP-Discussions/Best-practice-2-HA-Pair-Load-Balancing/m-p/123711#M26507</guid>
      <dc:creator>PHILMEAGHER</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2025-06-04T18:50:35Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: Best practice? 2 HA-Pair Load Balancing</title>
      <link>https://community.netapp.com/t5/ONTAP-Discussions/Best-practice-2-HA-Pair-Load-Balancing/m-p/123843#M26541</link>
      <description>&lt;P&gt;that's right on track. maybe your ps team can help on planning this?&lt;/P&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Wed, 05 Oct 2016 01:45:14 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.netapp.com/t5/ONTAP-Discussions/Best-practice-2-HA-Pair-Load-Balancing/m-p/123843#M26541</guid>
      <dc:creator>Jeff_Yao</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2016-10-05T01:45:14Z</dc:date>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>

