<?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: Post SnapMirror Best Practices in VMware Solutions Discussions</title>
    <link>https://community.netapp.com/t5/VMware-Solutions-Discussions/Post-SnapMirror-Best-Practices/m-p/35585#M3490</link>
    <description>&lt;HTML&gt;&lt;HEAD&gt;&lt;/HEAD&gt;&lt;BODY&gt;&lt;P&gt;Radek&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Thanks for the responses. I am still a bit unconvinced about b), since I'll be moving snapmirror volumes between aggregates of different types and sizes. I've always been a fan of VSM but want to ensure that the data will be spread equally among all disks - if I need to run reallocate, I can. Will read up more and update this post.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;/BODY&gt;&lt;/HTML&gt;</description>
    <pubDate>Mon, 15 Mar 2010 21:15:37 GMT</pubDate>
    <dc:creator>rkaramchedu1</dc:creator>
    <dc:date>2010-03-15T21:15:37Z</dc:date>
    <item>
      <title>Post SnapMirror Best Practices</title>
      <link>https://community.netapp.com/t5/VMware-Solutions-Discussions/Post-SnapMirror-Best-Practices/m-p/35576#M3488</link>
      <description>&lt;HTML&gt;&lt;HEAD&gt;&lt;/HEAD&gt;&lt;BODY&gt;&lt;P&gt;Environment&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Source: DS14 144GB&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Destination: DS4243 450GB SAS&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Data&amp;amp;colon; VMware data with deduplication on with SMVI snapshots&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;When considering SnapMirror for migrating data from the DS14 to DS4243 (for that matter, between disparate disk size aggregates), I have couple of questions around best practices&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;a) What are the dedupe recommendations/best practices - turn it on on the destination while SM is running and set it to auto? or perform dedup after SM baseline is done?&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;b) Since the # of drives and size of the drives are going to be different on Source and Destination, is it a best practice/recommendation to run wafl reallocate on the destination?&amp;nbsp; If so, I am guessing that the dedup should be off?&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;c) Given the block transfer nature of VSM and b), should we use QSM instead? any preference?&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Looking for an optimal order of things.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Thanks for your help in advance!&lt;/P&gt;&lt;/BODY&gt;&lt;/HTML&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Thu, 05 Jun 2025 07:17:13 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.netapp.com/t5/VMware-Solutions-Discussions/Post-SnapMirror-Best-Practices/m-p/35576#M3488</guid>
      <dc:creator>rkaramchedu1</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2025-06-05T07:17:13Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: Post SnapMirror Best Practices</title>
      <link>https://community.netapp.com/t5/VMware-Solutions-Discussions/Post-SnapMirror-Best-Practices/m-p/35581#M3489</link>
      <description>&lt;HTML&gt;&lt;HEAD&gt;&lt;/HEAD&gt;&lt;BODY&gt;&lt;P&gt;Hi,&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;a) Run de-dupe first on the source, establish VSM relationship, do the baseline &amp;amp; normally there is no need to worry about destination&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;b) Reallocate shouldn't be needed, but here is some interesting reading about swizzling &amp;amp; deswizzling (which should run automatically in the background):&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;A class="jive-link-message-small" href="http://communities.netapp.com/message/18936#18936" target="_blank"&gt;http://communities.netapp.com/message/18936#18936&lt;/A&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;c) To me VSM is an obvious winner&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;SPAN&gt;Have a look at TR-3505 though (&lt;/SPAN&gt;&lt;A class="jive-link-external-small" href="http://www.netapp.com/us/library/technical-reports/tr-3505.html" target="_blank"&gt;http://www.netapp.com/us/library/technical-reports/tr-3505.html&lt;/A&gt;&lt;SPAN&gt;) - dedupe &amp;amp; SnapMirror is nicely described on page 24 and further.&lt;/SPAN&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Regards,&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Radek&lt;/P&gt;&lt;/BODY&gt;&lt;/HTML&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Mon, 15 Mar 2010 20:42:54 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.netapp.com/t5/VMware-Solutions-Discussions/Post-SnapMirror-Best-Practices/m-p/35581#M3489</guid>
      <dc:creator>radek_kubka</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2010-03-15T20:42:54Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: Post SnapMirror Best Practices</title>
      <link>https://community.netapp.com/t5/VMware-Solutions-Discussions/Post-SnapMirror-Best-Practices/m-p/35585#M3490</link>
      <description>&lt;HTML&gt;&lt;HEAD&gt;&lt;/HEAD&gt;&lt;BODY&gt;&lt;P&gt;Radek&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Thanks for the responses. I am still a bit unconvinced about b), since I'll be moving snapmirror volumes between aggregates of different types and sizes. I've always been a fan of VSM but want to ensure that the data will be spread equally among all disks - if I need to run reallocate, I can. Will read up more and update this post.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;/BODY&gt;&lt;/HTML&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Mon, 15 Mar 2010 21:15:37 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.netapp.com/t5/VMware-Solutions-Discussions/Post-SnapMirror-Best-Practices/m-p/35585#M3490</guid>
      <dc:creator>rkaramchedu1</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2010-03-15T21:15:37Z</dc:date>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>

