OnCommand Storage Management Software Articles and Resources

Protection Manager 3.8 Default Provisioning Explained

This document attempts to give a clear picture on how the 3.8 version of Protection Manager does secondary and tertiary volume provisioning using its default provisioning feature and Resource Pools. In particular, it explains the various size and space variables that will cause an aggregate to be disqualified from use for provisioning a secondary or tertiary volume.


This NetApp Community is public and open website that is indexed by search engines such as Google. Participation in the NetApp Community is voluntary. All content posted on the NetApp Community is publicly viewable and available. This includes the rich text editor which is not encrypted for https.

In accordance to our Code of Conduct and Community Terms of Use DO NOT post or attach the following:

  • Software files (compressed or uncompressed)
  • Files that require an End User License Agreement (EULA)
  • Confidential information
  • Personal data you do not want publicly available
  • Another’s personally identifiable information
  • Copyrighted materials without the permission of the copyright owner

Files and content that do not abide by the Community Terms of Use or Code of Conduct will be removed. Continued non-compliance may result in NetApp Community account restrictions or termination.


The first version of this document had a typo in the last example. In one instance it had 150% when it should have been 250%. The actual text is

PotentialCommittedPercentage (199%) does not exceed AggrNearlyOvercommittedThreshold (150%) so aggr. aggr_GHI is qualifed

Of course the 150% should be 250%. The latest version of the doc has fixed this typo.

This Document is just perfect, it is clear, each thing is deeply explained and the last but not the least we can understand how PM is working for the space calculation....Do you know if something has changed on the calculation rules with OncOmmand/ PM 5.0




Hi Florent,

Thanks for the compliment. I believe the document is still accurate for OnCommand 5.0. I'm not aware of any changes in 5.0 that would affect the behaviour discribed in the doc.