<?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: FAS2820 ONTAP 9.14 maximize data aggregate sizing in ONTAP Discussions</title>
    <link>https://community.netapp.com/t5/ONTAP-Discussions/FAS2820-ONTAP-9-14-maximize-data-aggregate-sizing/m-p/454820#M43907</link>
    <description>&lt;P&gt;First, verify all disks are split evenly. (24 per node)&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Can check with&lt;FONT face="courier new,courier" size="2"&gt; {disk show -owner node-01 ;&amp;nbsp;disk show -owner node-02} &lt;/FONT&gt;making sure each has 24&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Then manually create the aggregates&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;FONT face="courier new,courier" size="2"&gt;aggr create -diskcount 22 -maxraidsize 22 -raidtype raid_tec -node node-01 -aggregate sata_01&lt;/FONT&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;FONT face="courier new,courier" size="2"&gt;aggr create -diskcount 22 -maxraidsize 22 -raidtype raid_tec -node node-02 -aggregate sata_02&lt;/FONT&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;By default, ONTAP allows up to 20 disks with Raid-DP. Moving to raid-tec allows up to 29 in the raid group.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;You should end up with all drives ultimately being partition (root-Data), maximizing your capacity.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;In my example, I left 2 spares per node. You could increase the "22" above to be "23" and get a little more capacity.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;FONT face="courier new,courier" size="2"&gt;aggr create -diskcount 23 -maxraidsize 23 -raidtype raid_tec -node node-01 -aggregate sata_01&lt;/FONT&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;FONT face="courier new,courier" size="2"&gt;aggr create -diskcount 23 -maxraidsize 23 -raidtype raid_tec -node node-02 -aggregate sata_02&lt;/FONT&gt;&lt;/P&gt;</description>
    <pubDate>Mon, 02 Sep 2024 19:27:48 GMT</pubDate>
    <dc:creator>TMACMD</dc:creator>
    <dc:date>2024-09-02T19:27:48Z</dc:date>
    <item>
      <title>FAS2820 ONTAP 9.14 maximize data aggregate sizing</title>
      <link>https://community.netapp.com/t5/ONTAP-Discussions/FAS2820-ONTAP-9-14-maximize-data-aggregate-sizing/m-p/454818#M43906</link>
      <description>&lt;P&gt;Hello.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;We have a FAS2820 HA pair with 12 internal drives + 36 external drives (4TB NLSAS drives).&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;We are trying to figure out the best approach to maximize the available size of the aggregates in a symmetric configuration.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;The internal shelf (12 drives) is using ADP.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Root aggregates have 5 ADP root partitions (1 raid group using RAID_DP).&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Our main concern is whether we can create 2 data aggregates (1 per node) with the following config (would leave 4 entire drives as spare and 2 partitioned drives also):&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;- rg0: 16 entire disks (RAID_DP &amp;gt; 14 data drives + 2 parity drives)&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;- rg1: 5 data partitions (RAID _DP &amp;gt; 2 parity partitions + 3 data partitions)&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;I wonder if we will break any best practices if we create this aggregate layout.&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Any help is appreciated.&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Best regards.&amp;nbsp;&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>Mon, 02 Sep 2024 15:06:12 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.netapp.com/t5/ONTAP-Discussions/FAS2820-ONTAP-9-14-maximize-data-aggregate-sizing/m-p/454818#M43906</guid>
      <dc:creator>jessango</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2024-09-02T15:06:12Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: FAS2820 ONTAP 9.14 maximize data aggregate sizing</title>
      <link>https://community.netapp.com/t5/ONTAP-Discussions/FAS2820-ONTAP-9-14-maximize-data-aggregate-sizing/m-p/454820#M43907</link>
      <description>&lt;P&gt;First, verify all disks are split evenly. (24 per node)&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Can check with&lt;FONT face="courier new,courier" size="2"&gt; {disk show -owner node-01 ;&amp;nbsp;disk show -owner node-02} &lt;/FONT&gt;making sure each has 24&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Then manually create the aggregates&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;FONT face="courier new,courier" size="2"&gt;aggr create -diskcount 22 -maxraidsize 22 -raidtype raid_tec -node node-01 -aggregate sata_01&lt;/FONT&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;FONT face="courier new,courier" size="2"&gt;aggr create -diskcount 22 -maxraidsize 22 -raidtype raid_tec -node node-02 -aggregate sata_02&lt;/FONT&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;By default, ONTAP allows up to 20 disks with Raid-DP. Moving to raid-tec allows up to 29 in the raid group.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;You should end up with all drives ultimately being partition (root-Data), maximizing your capacity.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;In my example, I left 2 spares per node. You could increase the "22" above to be "23" and get a little more capacity.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;FONT face="courier new,courier" size="2"&gt;aggr create -diskcount 23 -maxraidsize 23 -raidtype raid_tec -node node-01 -aggregate sata_01&lt;/FONT&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;FONT face="courier new,courier" size="2"&gt;aggr create -diskcount 23 -maxraidsize 23 -raidtype raid_tec -node node-02 -aggregate sata_02&lt;/FONT&gt;&lt;/P&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Mon, 02 Sep 2024 19:27:48 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.netapp.com/t5/ONTAP-Discussions/FAS2820-ONTAP-9-14-maximize-data-aggregate-sizing/m-p/454820#M43907</guid>
      <dc:creator>TMACMD</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2024-09-02T19:27:48Z</dc:date>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>

