Active IQ Unified Manager Discussions

Unified Manager vs System Manager Overcommitted Different ?

GROOVE
5,292 Views

Can anybody shed light on why Unified Manager and System Manager show quite different numbers for how overcommitted an aggregate is ?

 

All of our aggregates exhibit the same behaviour with UM reporting quite a bit more overcommittment on every aggr.

 

 

THe Avaialble space , Used space and Total space are all the same. But UM shows an overcommit of 45% and System manager shows 30% in the exmple attached

 

Is this a reporting error in one ofe the tools or am I overlooking something ?

1 ACCEPTED SOLUTION

GROOVE
5,148 Views

Logged with support and got this reply if antbody else is interested - 

 

The following kb explains the difference in committed space in OCSM and OCUM:
https://kb.netapp.com/support/s/article/ka11A0000001IuBQAU/oncommand-unified-manager-aggregate-commitment-calculation

 

 

So UM calculates overcommit by volume level taking into account the Maximum Auto-Grow size set on all volumes with it enabled as well. SM does not do this.

 

Hence the difference between the two tools.

 

Now to decide which measurement to 'use' 😉

View solution in original post

3 REPLIES 3

Sahana
5,233 Views

Hi,

 

It maybe due to a bug in UM. Refer the links below:

http://mysupport.netapp.com/NOW/cgi-bin/bol?Type=Detail&Display=815326
https://kb.netapp.com/support/s/article/ka11A0000001Mwz/oncommand-unified-manager-observed-aggregate-over-commit-warnings (needs login)

If this post resolved your issue, help others by selecting ACCEPT AS SOLUTION or adding a KUDO.

GROOVE
5,196 Views

THanks for the reply

 

Unfortunately neither of those bugs seem to apply to what we are seeing,

 

All aggregates are showing is more overcomitted in UM compared to SM , but not by the sort of numbers eluded to in those bugs. It feels like UM is counting something else , or twice , or somthing odd as all the figures are showing about 20% or so more than SM.

GROOVE
5,149 Views

Logged with support and got this reply if antbody else is interested - 

 

The following kb explains the difference in committed space in OCSM and OCUM:
https://kb.netapp.com/support/s/article/ka11A0000001IuBQAU/oncommand-unified-manager-aggregate-commitment-calculation

 

 

So UM calculates overcommit by volume level taking into account the Maximum Auto-Grow size set on all volumes with it enabled as well. SM does not do this.

 

Hence the difference between the two tools.

 

Now to decide which measurement to 'use' 😉

Public