The transition to NetApp MS Azure AD B2C is complete. If you missed the pre-registration, you will be invited to reigister at next log in.
Please note that access to your NetApp data may take up to 1 hour.
To learn more, read the FAQ and watch the video.
Need assistance? Complete this form and select “Registration Issue” as the Feedback Category.

Active IQ Unified Manager Discussions

OCUM Space Alerts Based on Potential Totals With Autogrow?

TMADOCTHOMAS

I am implementing a mass change in alert thresholds for volumes based on their size, and then turning AutoGrow on for all of them. As I've been updating thresholds, I suddenly noticed an unexpected result on a volume that already has AutoGrow enabled.

 

Specifically: OCUM (6.3, for cdot) shows the "nearly full" and "full" thresholds in the Capacity tab based on the potential size of the volume if it AutoSized to it's maximum size, not based on it's actual size. Does anyone know if this is a bug in OCUM or if it is accurate? If it is accurate, is there a way to override this behaviour? And does it work the same way in OCUM 5.x for 7-mode?

6 REPLIES 6

TMADOCTHOMAS

I guess this is progress. There is now a KB article:

 

https://kb.netapp.com/app/answers/answer_view/a_id/1085055

 

And a bug:

 

https://mysupport.netapp.com/NOW/cgi-bin/bol?Type=Detail&Display=1015085

 

I confess I don't understand how OCUM 9.5 is coming out and there is still no fix for this bug. At least it is documented now, but no list of versions where it will be fixed. This is such a basic feature of a storage product that I would have thought it would be corrected around 2 1/2 years ago when it was first reported.

TMADOCTHOMAS

One other note - the actual point at which AutoGrow occurs is still based on the actual volume size.

TMADOCTHOMAS

Amazed this hasn't been corrected/changed yet. Just read release notes for 7.3 and still no change. When will NetApp fix this?

TMADOCTHOMAS

Thanks membit.

 

Just to update this thread, I have been informed that this is the expected behavior of OCUM 6.x! This is not considered a bug. They have changed the alerting mechanism so it alerts based on the potential size of a volume with AutoSize turned on, not based on the actual size. To say this least, this is unintuitive, especially since it wasn't documented anywhere, and considering the fact that OCUM 5.x did not operate this way. I just verified this morning that OCUM 5.x works as you would expect - it alerts based on actual volume size. I have requested in my NetApp ticket that OCUM 6.x be updated to allow this new "feature" to be turned off. It has completely messed up a project I was in the middle of to turn Autogrow on system-wide and change alert thresholds.

membit

I've been struggling with exactly the same issue and I've asked this from our Netapp support partner. No exact answer yet.

TMADOCTHOMAS

To give a specific example: I have a volume that is 500GB in size with AutoGrow turned on. Max potential size via AutoGrow is 600GB.

 

The Nearly Full Threshold, set at 92%, shows as 552 GB, 52 GB larger than the volume's current size! The Full Threshold is set at 96% and shows as 576 GB. Clearly it is basing the % on the potential size and not actual.

 

I am hoping this is an OCUM bug and that in reality it bases the thresholds on the actual size. Anyone know for sure?

Announcements
NetApp on Discord Image

We're on Discord, are you?

Live Chat, Watch Parties, and More!

Explore Banner

Meet Explore, NetApp’s digital sales platform

Engage digitally throughout the sales process, from product discovery to configuration, and handle all your post-purchase needs.

NetApp Insights to Action
I2A Banner
Public