AFF

AFF8040 (9.6P3) to AFF A300 (9.6P3) head swap

Caleb_Meadows
2,851 Views

AFF8040 (9.6P3) to AFF A300 (9.6P3) head swap

 

The existing AFF8040 is not running 9.6P3 today but it will brought up to this release in advance.

 

One existing DS224C disk shelf with dual IOM 12's via x4 miniSAS HD to QSFP cables (X66020A-R6) and x2 12Gb SAS HBA's in the AFF8040 (X2069-R6) as the AFF8040's onboard SAS is only 6Gb.

 

I have sourced x4 miniSAS HD to miniSAS HD cables (X66031A) for connectivity between the existing DS224C and AFF A300. The X66020A-R6 12Gb SAS HBA's are no longer needed as the AFF A300's onboard SAS is 12Gb.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Minimum root aggregate and volume size per HWU - The AFF8040 and AFF A300 minimum's are both 431GB (root aggr) and 350GB (root vol); my AFF 8040 acutual today is as follows:

 

root aggr's - 368.42GB total, 350.57GB used, 17.85GB free

root vol's - 348.6GB total, 41.9GB used, 306.7GB free


How/why are my root aggr's/vol's less than the defined minimum today?

 

Anything to address here?

 

http://www.cosonok.com/2018/11/if-youre-headswapping-to-aff-a700-a700s.html Is what got me looking into this to begin with. Yes, I'm not going to a larger AFF A700 where the root aggr/vol size minimums increase but I would like to ensure I'm not going to face problems with my actual today and the required minimums.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Am I correct; without new storage or a swing kit, aggregate relocation is my only and best path for a nondisruptive upgrade?

 

https://library.netapp.com/ecm/ecm_download_file/ECMLP2848956

 

Aggregate relocation - nondisruptive, existing storage.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Am I correct; the following options are not applicable in my situation as I do not have new storage or a swing kit?

 

https://docs.netapp.com/platstor/topic/com.netapp.doc.hw-upgrade-controller/home.html?cp=12_2

 

Moving storage - disruptive, requires new storage.

 

Moving volumes - nondisruptive, requires new storage.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Regarding the aggregate relocation guide, can I safely ignore the following as my AFF8040 will be running 9.6?

 

https://library.netapp.com/ecm/ecm_download_file/ECMLP2848956

 

"Using Aggregate Relocation to Upgrade Controller Hardware Running ONTAP 9.5 or Later"

 

Page 7 - "Deciding whether to use the aggregate relocation guide"

 

"If you have a system that uses AFF80x0, AFF800, see Using Aggregate Relocation to Upgrade
Controller Hardware Running ONTAP 9.0 to 9.4 for detailed information about upgrading
ONTAP and relocating aggregates on those systems. https://library.netapp.com/ecm/ecm_get_file/ECMLP2659356"

 

Is this comment for any AFF80x0 or just AFF80x0's running 9.0 to 9.4 versions?

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I understand that the new aggregate relocation process for 9.5 and beyond has been improved and streamlined in comparison to the older process for 9.0 to 9.4:

 

https://library.netapp.com/ecm/ecm_download_file/ECMLP2848956 (9.5 or later) vs. https://library.netapp.com/ecm/ecm_get_file/ECMLP2659356 (9.0 to 9.4)

 

"This guide provides the steps for the new automated procedure."

 

"This process is largely automated"

 

"The manual process was lengthy and complex but in this simplified procedure you can implement a
controller update using aggregate relocation, allowing for more efficient nondisruptive upgrades for
HA pairs. There are significantly fewer manual steps, especially around validation, collection of
information, and post checks. "

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

After diving into the new guide, I'm feeling less overwhelmed and my confidence is growing. Accepting all institutional knowledge, gotchas, pointers, and hands on experience from all you seasoned head swappers.

 

TIA

2 REPLIES 2

AlexDawson
2,742 Views

Hi there Caleb!

 

We've (really @TMACMD ..) have reached out to our documentation team to verify the statement about those procedures for an AFF80x0.. seems a bit odd to me.

Caleb_Meadows
2,705 Views

I reached out to NetApp for confirmation, just received their response:

 

"Thanks again for alerting us to this discrepancy.

If you are using AFF8040 and its running ONTAP 9.6, use the 9.5 or later version (https://library.netapp.com/ecm/ecm_download_file/ECMLP2848956).

This issue will be fixed in the upcoming doc refresh."

 

"Thank you for taking the time to provide feedback on ARL documentation.

We have created  a ticket (*********) to track the issues. After your feedback has been researched internally, we will determine how best to address it.

Thanks again for writing to us."

 

 

 

Public