<?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 Data ONTAP 8.x 16TB LUN Size Limitation in Network and Storage Protocols</title>
    <link>https://community.netapp.com/t5/Network-and-Storage-Protocols/Data-ONTAP-8-x-16TB-LUN-Size-Limitation/m-p/55420#M5121</link>
    <description>&lt;HTML&gt;&lt;HEAD&gt;&lt;/HEAD&gt;&lt;BODY&gt;&lt;P&gt;I just ran into the Datat ONTAP 8.x 16TB LUN limit within my own environment and thought I'd start a thread to discuss how customers are handling requirements for LUNs greater then 16TB in size?&amp;nbsp; As NetApp has indicated that LUNs greater then 16TB will not be supported in the near future I ask what are my alternatives. I am limited to using Windows has my host OS and am also limited due to snapdrive not supporting backups of dynamic disks.&amp;nbsp; I'm guessing I'll end up having to write a script to snapshot a consistency group. &lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;In my mind it makes no sense that I can do all of the following but create a 16TB+ LUN&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Aggregate 100TB Size Limit (6280)&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Volume&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp; 100TB Size Limit&lt;/P&gt;&lt;/BODY&gt;&lt;/HTML&gt;</description>
    <pubDate>Thu, 05 Jun 2025 06:54:09 GMT</pubDate>
    <dc:creator>chriszurich</dc:creator>
    <dc:date>2025-06-05T06:54:09Z</dc:date>
    <item>
      <title>Data ONTAP 8.x 16TB LUN Size Limitation</title>
      <link>https://community.netapp.com/t5/Network-and-Storage-Protocols/Data-ONTAP-8-x-16TB-LUN-Size-Limitation/m-p/55420#M5121</link>
      <description>&lt;HTML&gt;&lt;HEAD&gt;&lt;/HEAD&gt;&lt;BODY&gt;&lt;P&gt;I just ran into the Datat ONTAP 8.x 16TB LUN limit within my own environment and thought I'd start a thread to discuss how customers are handling requirements for LUNs greater then 16TB in size?&amp;nbsp; As NetApp has indicated that LUNs greater then 16TB will not be supported in the near future I ask what are my alternatives. I am limited to using Windows has my host OS and am also limited due to snapdrive not supporting backups of dynamic disks.&amp;nbsp; I'm guessing I'll end up having to write a script to snapshot a consistency group. &lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;In my mind it makes no sense that I can do all of the following but create a 16TB+ LUN&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Aggregate 100TB Size Limit (6280)&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Volume&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp; 100TB Size Limit&lt;/P&gt;&lt;/BODY&gt;&lt;/HTML&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Thu, 05 Jun 2025 06:54:09 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.netapp.com/t5/Network-and-Storage-Protocols/Data-ONTAP-8-x-16TB-LUN-Size-Limitation/m-p/55420#M5121</guid>
      <dc:creator>chriszurich</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2025-06-05T06:54:09Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Data ONTAP 8.x 16TB LUN Size Limitation</title>
      <link>https://community.netapp.com/t5/Network-and-Storage-Protocols/Data-ONTAP-8-x-16TB-LUN-Size-Limitation/m-p/55424#M5122</link>
      <description>&lt;HTML&gt;&lt;HEAD&gt;&lt;/HEAD&gt;&lt;BODY&gt;&lt;P&gt;are volume mount points an option for you?&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;eg have a 16TB disk E:&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Then add several more 16TB LUNs as&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;E:\files1&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;E:\files2&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;E:\files3&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;so the directorys can store additional 16TB each?&lt;/P&gt;&lt;/BODY&gt;&lt;/HTML&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Tue, 24 May 2011 20:54:42 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.netapp.com/t5/Network-and-Storage-Protocols/Data-ONTAP-8-x-16TB-LUN-Size-Limitation/m-p/55424#M5122</guid>
      <dc:creator>thomas_glodde</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2011-05-24T20:54:42Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Data ONTAP 8.x 16TB LUN Size Limitation</title>
      <link>https://community.netapp.com/t5/Network-and-Storage-Protocols/Data-ONTAP-8-x-16TB-LUN-Size-Limitation/m-p/55428#M5123</link>
      <description>&lt;HTML&gt;&lt;HEAD&gt;&lt;/HEAD&gt;&lt;BODY&gt;&lt;P&gt;I discussed this option with the customer and they explained that this won't work due to an application constraint.&amp;nbsp; For now it's back to the drawing board.&amp;nbsp; I'm looking at their performance and I/O requirements now to see if CIFs is a viable option.&amp;nbsp; Although based on the partition size requirement and their data change rate I'm guessing CIFs will fall short on the performance side.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;/BODY&gt;&lt;/HTML&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Wed, 25 May 2011 14:12:11 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.netapp.com/t5/Network-and-Storage-Protocols/Data-ONTAP-8-x-16TB-LUN-Size-Limitation/m-p/55428#M5123</guid>
      <dc:creator>chriszurich</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2011-05-25T14:12:11Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Data ONTAP 8.x 16TB LUN Size Limitation</title>
      <link>https://community.netapp.com/t5/Network-and-Storage-Protocols/Data-ONTAP-8-x-16TB-LUN-Size-Limitation/m-p/55433#M5124</link>
      <description>&lt;HTML&gt;&lt;HEAD&gt;&lt;/HEAD&gt;&lt;BODY&gt;&lt;P&gt;Is there any chance you could give us a few more clues about what the customer is trying to accomplish with these immensely huge filesystems?&amp;nbsp; Just if you are open to a little more of a "brainstorming" solution.&amp;nbsp; Sometimes one is too close to the trees to see the forest... &lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;For my part, I'm still trying to get my head around situations where such huge filesystems would be necessary.&amp;nbsp; The application is either hugely specific or terribly designed... at least from my initial gut feeling... &lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;span class="lia-unicode-emoji" title=":slightly_smiling_face:"&gt;🙂&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;/BODY&gt;&lt;/HTML&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Thu, 26 May 2011 13:55:48 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.netapp.com/t5/Network-and-Storage-Protocols/Data-ONTAP-8-x-16TB-LUN-Size-Limitation/m-p/55433#M5124</guid>
      <dc:creator>shaunjurr</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2011-05-26T13:55:48Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Data ONTAP 8.x 16TB LUN Size Limitation</title>
      <link>https://community.netapp.com/t5/Network-and-Storage-Protocols/Data-ONTAP-8-x-16TB-LUN-Size-Limitation/m-p/55437#M5125</link>
      <description>&lt;HTML&gt;&lt;HEAD&gt;&lt;/HEAD&gt;&lt;BODY&gt;&lt;P&gt;The application is the root cause of the problem and is poorly designed.&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp; &lt;/P&gt;&lt;/BODY&gt;&lt;/HTML&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Thu, 26 May 2011 15:38:50 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.netapp.com/t5/Network-and-Storage-Protocols/Data-ONTAP-8-x-16TB-LUN-Size-Limitation/m-p/55437#M5125</guid>
      <dc:creator>chriszurich</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2011-05-26T15:38:50Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Data ONTAP 8.x 16TB LUN Size Limitation</title>
      <link>https://community.netapp.com/t5/Network-and-Storage-Protocols/Data-ONTAP-8-x-16TB-LUN-Size-Limitation/m-p/55442#M5126</link>
      <description>&lt;HTML&gt;&lt;HEAD&gt;&lt;/HEAD&gt;&lt;BODY&gt;&lt;P&gt;Not that this is much help, but as a SANscreen guy I don't see metas that large - I happen to be looking at a environment with 1.5 PB raw DMX, and across the 15k or so luns carved, only one is &amp;gt; 1024GB usable. There are around 5k metas in this environment&lt;/P&gt;&lt;/BODY&gt;&lt;/HTML&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Thu, 26 May 2011 18:55:01 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.netapp.com/t5/Network-and-Storage-Protocols/Data-ONTAP-8-x-16TB-LUN-Size-Limitation/m-p/55442#M5126</guid>
      <dc:creator>ostiguy</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2011-05-26T18:55:01Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: Data ONTAP 8.x 16TB LUN Size Limitation</title>
      <link>https://community.netapp.com/t5/Network-and-Storage-Protocols/Data-ONTAP-8-x-16TB-LUN-Size-Limitation/m-p/55446#M5127</link>
      <description>&lt;HTML&gt;&lt;HEAD&gt;&lt;/HEAD&gt;&lt;BODY&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;SPAN&gt;Use stripping from OS level (e.g. for Windows it looks like it is defined here &lt;/SPAN&gt;&lt;A class="jive-link-external-small" href="http://www.techimo.com/articles/index.pl?photo=149" target="_blank"&gt;http://www.techimo.com/articles/index.pl?photo=149&lt;/A&gt;&lt;SPAN&gt;), this will theoritcally build you something like software RAID0 (or stripped LVM) - so you'll have one single disk with single filesystem on it.. but it opens a can of worms when it comes to scalability and performance.&lt;/SPAN&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;The LVM is typical solution used in the UNIX world.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;-J.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;/BODY&gt;&lt;/HTML&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Thu, 26 May 2011 19:07:46 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.netapp.com/t5/Network-and-Storage-Protocols/Data-ONTAP-8-x-16TB-LUN-Size-Limitation/m-p/55446#M5127</guid>
      <dc:creator>jakub_wartak</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2011-05-26T19:07:46Z</dc:date>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>

