moving VLAN between two interface groups

[MACAKIGO1]

Hi All

I didn't find anything about that so I'm going to ask you guys for help
Actually we are struggling with iSCSI performance of our FAS3270 (8.2P6 7-Mode) for  Hyper-V running Windows 2012 R1 on BL460 G7.
They are complaining about disk throughput (lun)
Let's say there is no issue from netapp side as we didn't find any issue/missconfiguration.

Currently we have two interface group on our FAS3270 :
1. group e2a, e3a -> Dual 10G Ethernet Controller T320E-SFP+ -> MTU 1500
2. group e2b, e3b -> Dual 10G Ethernet Controller T320E-SFP+ -> MTU 9000

Vlan which belongs to Hyper-V is in 1.group using MTU 1500
Same configuration is in host interface running HYPER-V.
Between our FAS and Hyper-V host is just L2 network with MTU size 9000 on switches
We'd like to switch to jumbo frames to "tune up" a  performance

So my question is if can non-disruptively switch vlan from one interface group to another one with MTU 9000.
Thanks

[ekashpureff]

Macakigo1 -

I haven't tried this in a lab, but I think you might be able to do it.

Is multipath enabled on the host ?

Create the vlan tagged interface on the second ifgrp.

Enable jumbo frames on the new vlan tagged interface.

Configure a new IP address on the new vlan interface.

Look for the new initiator to target connection on the host and on the NetApp.

Configure the old interface down.

See also the San Administration Guide documentation:

https://library.netapp.com/ecmdocs/ECMP1196995/html/frameset.html

I'd try to lab this out on simulators before trying it out in production !

Performance can be complicated, there may be other issues involved.

We do teach offer a 3 day 7-mode performance class from NetApp U...

I hope this response has been helpful to you.

At your service,

Eugene E. Kashpureff, Sr.

Independent NetApp Consultant, K&H Research http://www.linkedin.com/in/eugenekashpureff

Senior NetApp Instructor, IT Learning Solutions http://sg.itls.asia/netapp

(P.S. I appreciate points for helpful or correct answers.)

[MACAKIGO1]

Thanks for answer...currently I'm just deploying test environment so I might be able to test your suggested action plan
Maybe I'll just perform takeover then I'll update RC file and do giveback.

[DOMINIC_WYSS]

besides MTU size, the following options may also give some performance improvements (if you didn't already try that):

vol options <vol> no_atime_update on

vol options <vol> read_realloc space_optimized

formatting the LUNs with NTFS allocation size of 64k can also give a performance boost.