I have a new AFF A250 running ONTAP 9.13.1P10 it has 24 x 7.68TB NVME SSDs When I go to create the new aggregates, the system proposes : Two aggregates each of 23 x 3.48TB = 65.8TB ( 2 disks lost to raid so 21 x 3.48 = 73.08 ) 65.80TB is 10% less than 73.08TB - Typically this would be the 10% WAFL overhead, however as I am running out of the box ONTAP 9.13.1 I would expect the WAFL overhead to be 5% and the usable aggregate to be 69.42TB My question is : when a new aggregate is created does it a by default have a 5% Aggregate Snap Reserve factored in, therefore I am seeing 5% WAFL overhead + 5 SnapReserve or do I have an issue with the AFF where it is not setting the WAFL reserve to 5% It may seem a small amount of space for that aggregate example but over the whole cluster its around 40-50 TB we are missing. ( other nodes on the cluster are C400 which much larger disks ) Thank you.
... View more
We are using a EX4550-32F x 2 switches stack with a QSFP+ Juniper modules in PIC 1 on both switches for connecting an A700s Netapp to the Data network. For the sake of the question I will address only one of the connections we currently have to the switches. We are using the following setup as advised by Netapp: Node B is currently connected with only e0e to the 2nd EX4550-32F QSFP+ module, with a QSFP+-40G-CU3M cable (recognized by the Juniper switch) but shown on the Netapp as "CISCO-JPC", and configured on et-1/1/0 with access mode. A LIF is configured with an IP on e0e directly. The current status is that network port show command shows healthy status on e0e for Node B, right duplex, mtu etc. Same is on the et-1/1/0 interface on Juniper. But if I run the ifstat e0e command on Node B I see CRC errors accumulating on e0e (I don't see any errors on et-1/1/0 interface on the Juniper). My question is - what can be the reason for the CRC errors (that are probably the reason for the fact we don't have any connectivity on this LIF that uses this port) and what additional things should we check? Our vendor states that all the hdw is compatible. Thank you.
... View more
Hello, We try to configure Fpolicy throught Ansible to facilitate updates of exclude extension list content manage by security team. In the extension list we have numeric extension like 000 but when ansible try to activate the fpolicy it failed : "msg": "calling: /private/cli/vserver/fpolicy/policy/scope: got Expecting json, got: b'{ n \"records\": [ n {\\n \"vserver\": \"BASNASCIFS\",\\n \"policy_name\": \"blockext_cifs_v1.50\",\\n \"file_extensions_to_include\": [\\n 000,\\n \"kkk\",\\n \"kkkjj\"\\n ],\\n \"is_file_extension_check_on_directories_enabled\": true,\\n \"is_monitoring_of_objects_with_no_extension_enabled\": false\\n } n ], n \"num_records\": 1 n}'." For your information the scope is created successfully : Vserver Policy Extensions Extensions Name Name Included Excluded ----------------- ------------------- -------------------- ------------------- abcd blockext_cifs_v1.50 000, kkk, kkkjj - And if we enable the fpolicy throught the cli, it work ! Have you got an idea ? It seems that ansible use the value as integer and not as string, we tried to add single au double quote, same issue Thanks Jc
... View more
Hi, We have a AFF-A250 and upon setting up the cluster we keep getting this error message which appears when we try to add in the second node to the cluster. Unused cluster ports exist in the cluster. One or more ports may not be in the "healthy" state, or may be incorrectly assigned to the "Cluster" Ipspace. Correct any issues, and then try the operation again. e0M is for management and e0c & e0d are used for the cluster interconnect. No other ports are used as yet. Any ideas ? Thanks,
... View more
hi all i hvae system AFF c800 I went to created Broadcast Domain and add port managment to it with type Node1:e0M and SP/BMC Node2: e0M and SP/BMC i want to be same broadcast >> can i do that or not ? if not can add only port > Node1:e0M ,Node2:e0M with one Broadcast Domain? thank you for assistance
... View more
