<?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: Recommended data model for basic capacity reporting in Active IQ Unified Manager Discussions</title>
    <link>https://community.netapp.com/t5/Active-IQ-Unified-Manager-Discussions/Recommended-data-model-for-basic-capacity-reporting/m-p/80464#M16727</link>
    <description>&lt;HTML&gt;&lt;HEAD&gt;&lt;/HEAD&gt;&lt;BODY&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P class="MsoNormal"&gt;&lt;SPAN lang="EN" style="mso-ascii-font-family: Calibri; mso-hansi-font-family: Calibri; mso-bidi-font-family: Calibri; mso-ansi-language: EN;"&gt;We had some situations where the reports from the different data models were not matching. We have a diverse environment with a lot of legacy hardware and tools (some bad, and some not so good). So as you can imagine, it can be a bit tricky and tedious to calculate at the Tier level (just one of the reasons OCI has been such a great help in this environment). Before we went too far down that road, we wanted validate whether there was a recommended data model for our situation. Sounds like it just depends… &lt;/SPAN&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P class="MsoNormal"&gt;&lt;SPAN lang="EN" style="mso-ascii-font-family: Calibri; mso-hansi-font-family: Calibri; mso-bidi-font-family: Calibri; mso-ansi-language: EN;"&gt;&lt;BR /&gt;&lt;/SPAN&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P class="MsoNormal"&gt;&lt;SPAN lang="EN" style="mso-ascii-font-family: Calibri; mso-hansi-font-family: Calibri; mso-bidi-font-family: Calibri; mso-ansi-language: EN;"&gt;We are doing some testing/calculations now, and I will report back what are results are...&lt;/SPAN&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P class="MsoNormal"&gt;&lt;SPAN lang="EN" style="mso-ascii-font-family: Calibri; mso-hansi-font-family: Calibri; mso-bidi-font-family: Calibri; mso-ansi-language: EN;"&gt;Thank you for your help.&lt;/SPAN&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;/BODY&gt;&lt;/HTML&gt;</description>
    <pubDate>Fri, 18 Jul 2014 20:53:19 GMT</pubDate>
    <dc:creator>campbels</dc:creator>
    <dc:date>2014-07-18T20:53:19Z</dc:date>
    <item>
      <title>Recommended data model for basic capacity reporting</title>
      <link>https://community.netapp.com/t5/Active-IQ-Unified-Manager-Discussions/Recommended-data-model-for-basic-capacity-reporting/m-p/80453#M16723</link>
      <description>&lt;HTML&gt;&lt;HEAD&gt;&lt;/HEAD&gt;&lt;BODY&gt;&lt;P&gt;We are trying to run some simple capacity reporting as follows: &lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;-capacity in each tier&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;-raw capacity in each tier&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;-total capacity of each array &lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;-total raw capacity of each array&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Our environment has NetApp, HDS, and AMS HDS arrays being front ended by HDS VSP's and V-series. We are wondering what the recommended data model would be for our reporting needs.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;In the past we have used the Capacity&amp;gt;Storage Capacity data model (using Current Capacity Fact), but the 6.4 Reporting guide seems to suggest using the Capacity&amp;gt;Storage and Storage Pool Capacity&amp;gt;Physical Capacity data model for these types of reports (using a date or the like to get only current data).&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;The output between the two reports is different enough to question which one is the correct data model to use in our environment.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Hoping someone out there has some words of wisdom for our situation. Thanks for any help/advice.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;/BODY&gt;&lt;/HTML&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Thu, 05 Jun 2025 05:32:31 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.netapp.com/t5/Active-IQ-Unified-Manager-Discussions/Recommended-data-model-for-basic-capacity-reporting/m-p/80453#M16723</guid>
      <dc:creator>campbels</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2025-06-05T05:32:31Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: Recommended data model for basic capacity reporting</title>
      <link>https://community.netapp.com/t5/Active-IQ-Unified-Manager-Discussions/Recommended-data-model-for-basic-capacity-reporting/m-p/80457#M16725</link>
      <description>&lt;HTML&gt;&lt;HEAD&gt;&lt;/HEAD&gt;&lt;BODY&gt;&lt;P&gt;Looking at the question that way makes it hard to provide a meaningful answer.&amp;nbsp; &lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;If I were writing the report you describe from scratch, I'd use Public Folders &amp;gt; Capacity &amp;gt; Storage and Storage Pool Capacity.&amp;nbsp; And you would want to use Physical Capacity inside of that mart.&amp;nbsp; &lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;However, you already have a capacity report.&amp;nbsp; Is its output correct?&amp;nbsp; If so, why would you re-write it on another data mart?&amp;nbsp; Is it incorrect?&amp;nbsp; Then you might want to think about how much effort went into producing it, and how hard it would be to start from scratch.&amp;nbsp; Do you wonder whether it's correct?&amp;nbsp; The best way I've found to figure that out is to break the report down into a smaller test case (one array, for instance) and compare it to the data from your favorite array management tool.&amp;nbsp; This works particularly well if you've structured your reports to roll up from much detail to a summary level of detail.&amp;nbsp; &lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;I hope this helps.&amp;nbsp; &lt;/P&gt;&lt;/BODY&gt;&lt;/HTML&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Wed, 16 Jul 2014 04:21:12 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.netapp.com/t5/Active-IQ-Unified-Manager-Discussions/Recommended-data-model-for-basic-capacity-reporting/m-p/80457#M16725</guid>
      <dc:creator>moechnig</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2014-07-16T04:21:12Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: Recommended data model for basic capacity reporting</title>
      <link>https://community.netapp.com/t5/Active-IQ-Unified-Manager-Discussions/Recommended-data-model-for-basic-capacity-reporting/m-p/80464#M16727</link>
      <description>&lt;HTML&gt;&lt;HEAD&gt;&lt;/HEAD&gt;&lt;BODY&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P class="MsoNormal"&gt;&lt;SPAN lang="EN" style="mso-ascii-font-family: Calibri; mso-hansi-font-family: Calibri; mso-bidi-font-family: Calibri; mso-ansi-language: EN;"&gt;We had some situations where the reports from the different data models were not matching. We have a diverse environment with a lot of legacy hardware and tools (some bad, and some not so good). So as you can imagine, it can be a bit tricky and tedious to calculate at the Tier level (just one of the reasons OCI has been such a great help in this environment). Before we went too far down that road, we wanted validate whether there was a recommended data model for our situation. Sounds like it just depends… &lt;/SPAN&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P class="MsoNormal"&gt;&lt;SPAN lang="EN" style="mso-ascii-font-family: Calibri; mso-hansi-font-family: Calibri; mso-bidi-font-family: Calibri; mso-ansi-language: EN;"&gt;&lt;BR /&gt;&lt;/SPAN&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P class="MsoNormal"&gt;&lt;SPAN lang="EN" style="mso-ascii-font-family: Calibri; mso-hansi-font-family: Calibri; mso-bidi-font-family: Calibri; mso-ansi-language: EN;"&gt;We are doing some testing/calculations now, and I will report back what are results are...&lt;/SPAN&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P class="MsoNormal"&gt;&lt;SPAN lang="EN" style="mso-ascii-font-family: Calibri; mso-hansi-font-family: Calibri; mso-bidi-font-family: Calibri; mso-ansi-language: EN;"&gt;Thank you for your help.&lt;/SPAN&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;/BODY&gt;&lt;/HTML&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Fri, 18 Jul 2014 20:53:19 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.netapp.com/t5/Active-IQ-Unified-Manager-Discussions/Recommended-data-model-for-basic-capacity-reporting/m-p/80464#M16727</guid>
      <dc:creator>campbels</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2014-07-18T20:53:19Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: Recommended data model for basic capacity reporting</title>
      <link>https://community.netapp.com/t5/Active-IQ-Unified-Manager-Discussions/Recommended-data-model-for-basic-capacity-reporting/m-p/80468#M16728</link>
      <description>&lt;HTML&gt;&lt;HEAD&gt;&lt;/HEAD&gt;&lt;BODY&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P class="MsoNormal"&gt;After a quite a bit of testing, we did indeed have excellent results with the Capacity&amp;gt;Storage and Storage Pool Capacity&amp;gt;Physical Capacity data model in our environment. &lt;/P&gt;&lt;P class="MsoNormal"&gt;That’s what we will be using… thanks for the help.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;/BODY&gt;&lt;/HTML&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Thu, 07 Aug 2014 22:27:21 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.netapp.com/t5/Active-IQ-Unified-Manager-Discussions/Recommended-data-model-for-basic-capacity-reporting/m-p/80468#M16728</guid>
      <dc:creator>campbels</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2014-08-07T22:27:21Z</dc:date>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>

