We have a volume primarily use for CIFS. It is growing too big therefore we want to migrate some of the content to another volume, however we cannot break the path, so I need to leave some kind of junction point. Will symbolic link achieve this?
You could do this and it will work using widelinks. We used this at customers when there were stricter dedup (asis) limits to have the ability to stitch together multiple volumes with dedup without exceeding the dedup limit on older ONTAP versions (not an issue now with 8.1 unlimited to max vol size and was not much of an issue with the 16TB limit in 8.0). You basically have a symbolic link created from a linux/unix client and use symlink.translations to map the location to another share and the users see the link as a folder within the same path.
You could do this and it will work using widelinks. We used this at customers when there were stricter dedup (asis) limits to have the ability to stitch together multiple volumes with dedup without exceeding the dedup limit on older ONTAP versions (not an issue now with 8.1 unlimited to max vol size and was not much of an issue with the 16TB limit in 8.0). You basically have a symbolic link created from a linux/unix client and use symlink.translations to map the location to another share and the users see the link as a folder within the same path.
Are you saying that in 8.1, flexible volume is not limited to 16TB anymore? This is actually the main reason we are trying to split the contents of the CIFS volume. We are in 8.0 and we are limited to 16Tb.
Use system manager or vol size to resize. Once on 8.1 you can grow and keep dedup. Max vol size on a 3240 is 50tb (64bit). If you are 32 bit 8.1 will convert to 64 when you grow over 16tb.
Just FYI, per TR-3978 you have to add enough disks to an existing 32 bit aggregate that you push it past 16TB to trigger the non-disruptive upgrade to 64 bit.
Good point to clarify. In place conversion didn't make it (hidden unsupported method has been posted on this site but I wouldn't go there since likely a qa issue).
How is San Antonio? Would be really interested to hear offline your thoughts/ideas/plans for cluster-mode. I am looking at vFiler to Vserver automation as well as a side project.
