Moving from POSIX ACLs + NIS to NFSv4 ACLs at Scale – Looking for Real-World guidance  I'm looking to move from POSIX ACLs with NIS to NFSv4 ACLs, and would appreciate some guidance to help avoid failure. Funny enough, the chatbots were fairly useless when faced this real-world scenario. and I have failed to find relevant publishments or any (stared) git repos for projects around it.   We have ~2PB of data, a few million files, and around 50 users. The environment is currently split across six NFS exports. Each night, a script applies in each export different POSIX permissions to individual files for individual users. The script also distinguishes between executable and non-executable files (using the file command) and only grants execute permissions to files that are actually executable.   Moving forward, I'd like to replace this with an inheritance-based NFSv4 ACL model using RO/RW/Full groups per export. Later, the plan is to move to AD and nest the per-export groups into role-based groups (e.g., Developers, Designers, Sales, etc.).   A few real-world questions: Do people simply set inheritance and leave it alone, or do you periodically enforce/reapply ACLs since inheritance only affects newly created files? Do you keep, remove, or modify the default OWNER@, GROUP@, and EVERYONE@ entries? Is there a practical reason to manage execute permissions separately? The main reason we currently do it seems to be cosmetic: preventing non-executable files from showing up in green when using ls --color. Would you simply grant execute permissions through inheritance to everything and stop worrying about it? (I suggested separate bin directories for executable content, but that idea didn't get much support). Any comments on the overall approach, lessons learned, sample real ACL/commands you are using, or any gotchas before starting this migration would be greatly appreciated.   p.s another taught I have as a windows engineer, is just to NTFS it all and use user-mapping... but I'm worried I'll be escorted out of the building (and that it's not very vendor-agnostic).   Thanks. ... View more

we migrated Netapp from A800 to A1K (9.16.1P12). Now during our epic/iris database backup, we are experiencing the reading performance on application. we are also seeing the high latency on disks from Netapp.   does anyone experiencing the same with a fix? thank you, ... View more

  We are using an asynchronous FPolicy engine to collect file audit events from ONTAP. As shown in the logs below, when FPolicy server goes down, ontap exhausts all 20 of its configured reconnect attempts in just 39 seconds (from 09:41:48 to 09:42:27). Once these retries are exhausted, the engine transitions to a permanent disconnected state (TCP Connection to FPolicy server failed) and  does not auto-reconnect when the server comes back online even after a minute.  Event logs in the diagnostic mode -  Time Node Severity Event ------------------- ------------------------- --------- --------------------------- 7/15/2026 09:42:27 FsxId04eda4994b6009ffe-01 ERROR fpolicy.server.connectError: Node failed to establish a connection with the FPolicy server "x.y.z.z" of policy "cloud_poc_policy" for Vserver ntfs-fsx (reason: "TCP Connection to FPolicy server failed."). 7/15/2026 09:42:27 FsxId04eda4994b6009ffe-02 ERROR fpolicy.server.connectError: Node failed to establish a connection with the FPolicy server "x.y.z.z" of policy "cloud_poc_policy" for Vserver ntfs-fsx (reason: "TCP Connection to FPolicy server failed."). 7/15/2026 09:41:48 FsxId04eda4994b6009ffe-01 ERROR fpolicy.server.disconnect: Connection to the FPolicy server "x.y.z.z" of policy "cloud_poc_policy" is broken for Vserver ntfs-fsx ( reason: "Connection to FPolicy server is broken(EPIPE) received." ). 7/15/2026 09:41:48 FsxId04eda4994b6009ffe-02 ERROR fpolicy.server.disconnect: Connection to the FPolicy server "x.y.z.z" of policy "cloud_poc_policy" is broken for Vserver ntfs-fsx ( reason: "Connection to FPolicy server is broken(EPIPE) received." ). Engine Config -  vserver fpolicy policy external-engine show -vserver ntfs-fsx -engine-name cloud_poc_engine -instance Vserver: ntfs-fsx Engine: cloud_poc_engine Primary FPolicy Servers: x.y.z.z Port Number of FPolicy Service: 32200 Secondary FPolicy Servers: - External Engine Type: asynchronous SSL Option for External Communication: no-auth Timeout for Canceling a Request: 20s Timeout for Aborting a Request: 40s Interval for Sending Status Requests: 30s Max Reconnect Attempt: 20 Maximum Outstanding Requests for FPolicy Server: 500 Timeout for Disconnecting Non-responsive Server: 100s Interval for Sending Keep-Alive Messages: 2m FQDN or Custom Common Name: - Serial Number of Certificate: - Certificate Authority: - Receive Buffer Size: 262144 Send Buffer Size: 1048576 Session ID Purge Timeout During Reconnection: 10s Is Resiliency Feature Enabled: true Maximum Notification Retention Duration: 10m Directory for Notification Storage: /data/ External Engine Format: xml Policy config -  Vserver: ntfs-fsx Policy: cloud_poc_policy Events to Monitor: cloud_poc_event FPolicy Engine: cloud_poc_engine Is Mandatory Screening Required: false Allow Privileged Access: no User Name for Privileged Access: - Is Passthrough Read Enabled: false Persistent Store Name: - Documentation https://docs.netapp.com/us-en/ontap/nas-audit/plan-fpolicy-external-engine-config-concept.html#what-the-advanced-external-engine-options-are  doesn't have any info on this.    ... View more

If you are a new NetApp customer or have colleagues who are, check out the Solution Series. These webinars with NetApp experts give you information on getting the most from your NetApp purchase. This month, the topics are:    October 5th 9am PST- ActiveIQ Unified Manager October 19th 9am PST - System Manager Demo   Use this handy link to register. Once you register, you'll get details on how to join the meeting.          ... View more