ONTAP Discussions
ONTAP Discussions
Gurus,
We have our client running a bunch of NetApps FAS3070 in single image mode (as clustered pairs).
But in one of the pairs, we noticed that they have adapters which share the same Node WWN (which is expected), but I also see that the port WWN's are the **same** for both the Filers. How could this be? I saw a simillar complaint by another person on a VMWare forum. By having same Port WWN's for the both the filersin a cluster, wont it cause confusion at the OS level (OS Handles that is), as to where the disks really are?
Also note that both filers have all ports as local, with parner-adapter 'none'. Is this setup even valid?
Please explain?
Thanks
Sundar Ramamoorthy
FC Adapter Information on Filer 1
<results status="passed">
<fcp-config-adapters>
<fcp-config-adapter-info>
<adapter>0c</adapter>
<node-name>50:0a:09:80:87:89:68:1d</node-name>
<port-name>50:0a:09:81:97:89:68:1d</port-name>
<port-address>6375955</port-address>
<adapter-type>Local</adapter-type>
<media-type>auto</media-type>
<partner-adapter>None</partner-adapter>
<state>online</state>
<standby>false</standby>
<speed>auto</speed>
</fcp-config-adapter-info>
<fcp-config-adapter-info>
<adapter>0d</adapter>
<node-name>50:0a:09:80:87:89:68:1d</node-name>
<port-name>50:0a:09:82:97:89:68:1d</port-name>
<port-address>0</port-address>
<adapter-type>Local</adapter-type>
<media-type>auto</media-type>
<partner-adapter>None</partner-adapter>
<state>link not connected</state>
<standby>false</standby>
<speed>auto</speed>
</fcp-config-adapter-info>
<fcp-config-adapter-info>
<adapter>0a</adapter>
<node-name>50:0a:09:80:87:89:68:1d</node-name>
<port-name>50:0a:09:83:97:89:68:1d</port-name>
<port-address>6441491</port-address>
<adapter-type>Local</adapter-type>
<media-type>auto</media-type>
<partner-adapter>None</partner-adapter>
<state>online</state>
<standby>false</standby>
<speed>auto</speed>
</fcp-config-adapter-info>
<fcp-config-adapter-info>
<adapter>0b</adapter>
<node-name>50:0a:09:80:87:89:68:1d</node-name>
<port-name>50:0a:09:84:97:89:68:1d</port-name>
<port-address>0</port-address>
<adapter-type>Local</adapter-type>
<media-type>auto</media-type>
<partner-adapter>None</partner-adapter>
<state>link not connected</state>
<standby>false</standby>
<speed>auto</speed>
</fcp-config-adapter-info>
</fcp-config-adapters>
</results>
FC Adapter Information on Filer 2
<results status="passed">
<fcp-config-adapters>
<fcp-config-adapter-info>
<adapter>0c</adapter>
<node-name>50:0a:09:80:87:89:68:1d</node-name>
<port-name>50:0a:09:81:97:89:68:1d</port-name>
<port-address>6821888</port-address>
<adapter-type>Local</adapter-type>
<media-type>auto</media-type>
<partner-adapter>None</partner-adapter>
<state>online</state>
<standby>false</standby>
<speed>auto</speed>
</fcp-config-adapter-info>
<fcp-config-adapter-info>
<adapter>0d</adapter>
<node-name>50:0a:09:80:87:89:68:1d</node-name>
<port-name>50:0a:09:82:97:89:68:1d</port-name>
<port-address>6822912</port-address>
<adapter-type>Local</adapter-type>
<media-type>auto</media-type>
<partner-adapter>None</partner-adapter>
<state>online</state>
<standby>false</standby>
<speed>auto</speed>
</fcp-config-adapter-info>
<fcp-config-adapter-info>
<adapter>0a</adapter>
<node-name>50:0a:09:80:87:89:68:1d</node-name>
<port-name>50:0a:09:83:97:89:68:1d</port-name>
<port-address>6623251</port-address>
<adapter-type>Local</adapter-type>
<media-type>auto</media-type>
<partner-adapter>None</partner-adapter>
<state>online</state>
<standby>false</standby>
<speed>auto</speed>
</fcp-config-adapter-info>
<fcp-config-adapter-info>
<adapter>0b</adapter>
<node-name>50:0a:09:80:87:89:68:1d</node-name>
<port-name>50:0a:09:84:97:89:68:1d</port-name>
<port-address>6644499</port-address>
<adapter-type>Local</adapter-type>
<media-type>auto</media-type>
<partner-adapter>None</partner-adapter>
<state>online</state>
<standby>false</standby>
<speed>auto</speed>
</fcp-config-adapter-info>
</fcp-config-adapters>
</results>
Hey Sundar,
I am going to guess.... But I think that maybe the shared loop for the disk connections.
Is this a Metrocluster?
Anthony Feigl
This not a metro cluster, and they have different LUNs on each of the Filer (ie.they are not mirrored).
I see simillar problems discussed here
http://communities.netapp.com/message/5124#5124Re: 'Single Image' Clusters with same PWWN's?
http://communities.vmware.com/thread/94172
In each case, the concise reason for this pheomenon is not explained clearly. It is however clear that this is wrong.
Checkout this bug from netapp;
Bug ID | 268320 |
---|---|
Title | WWPN's are identical on both heads of a single_image cluster |