New to NetApp and need some setup advise. When I asked my pre-sales SE about getting the optimum space from our storage he suggested:
Yes, a couple of options are (FAS2240 w/24 disks):
- 22 disks assigned to controller A and 2 assigned to controller B. Highest capacity, and partner is failover over, no spare. Most aggressive config.
- Controller A: 21 Disk raid group / Raid-DP Aggregate + 1 spare.
- Controller B: 2 disk Raid-4 Aggregate, no spare.
- 21 disks assigned to controller A and 3 assigned to controller B. More conservative with spare on failover partner, slightly less capacity.
- Controller A: 20 Disk raid group / Raid-DP Aggregate + 1 spare.
- Controller B: 2 disk Raid-4 Aggregate + 1 spare.
- 20 disks assigned to controller A and 4 assigned to controller B. Most balanced with spares (2 per), but lowest usable capacity config of the three options.
- Controller A: 20 Disk raid group / Raid-DP Aggregate + 2 spare.
- Controller B: 2 disk Raid-4 Aggregate + 2 spare.
Looking at doing #2. Currently configured as a 7-mode, HA pair. Each controller has 12 disks. I'm unable to create an aggregate containing the partners disks.
I'm assuming I would need to create a new aggr on Cont B, move vol0 to that. But how do I get the partners disks into Cont A's Aggregate. Also assuming I would use/expand Controller A's aggr0?
Any insights would be greatly appreciated!
3 REPLIES 3
Have you got more than a single workload? If yes, why not create a more symmetrical setup (12 disks on each head) to load balance both controllers?
You won't be losing that much capacity comparing with an "asymmetrical" setup, where 3 disks are practically lost for a root aggregate.
Total capacity vs overall optimal disk layout, I tend to build out 2240's a little differently
Also, depends on how far away you are from a PFE to come onsite and replace a disk. That also plays into the picture...
I tend to go on the side of less risk.
18 + 2 spares on A side, and B side is 3 disk aggr0 + 1 spare. I usually sleep better at night that way