Yeah it’s interesting that they aren’t created automatically.
It could have something to do with issues it causes. Especially if you are using SRM \ SRA within an NFS VMWare environment.
From: Toasters <email@example.com> On Behalf Of André M. Clark
Sent: 30 April 2021 14:20
To: Scott M Gelb <firstname.lastname@example.org>; Parisi, Justin <email@example.com>; Scott M Gelb via Toasters <firstname.lastname@example.org>; John Stoffel <email@example.com>
One thing that I have always thought about with SVM root vol protection is, if it is an operational recommendation, why aren’t they automatically created in a System Manager workflow when a NAS SVM is created? Things to make you say, Hmmmmmmmn
From: Scott M Gelb via Toasters <firstname.lastname@example.org><mailto:email@example.com>
Reply: Scott M Gelb <firstname.lastname@example.org><mailto:email@example.com>
Date: April 28, 2021 at 16:46:47
To: Parisi, Justin <firstname.lastname@example.org><mailto:email@example.com>, John Stoffel <firstname.lastname@example.org><mailto:email@example.com>
Cc: firstname.lastname@example.org<mailto:email@example.com> <firstname.lastname@example.org><mailto:email@example.com>
I have used both DP and LS over the years and am back to using LS more often for reasons Justin wrote, and also for an NAE/NVE workaround where DP make-vsroot had some hoops to jump through to re-create the mirrors after a failover test. LS mirror promote and recreate after had no issues with NAE/NVE in my testing. In all the years doing this, I've never had to recover svm root, but to follow best practices for NAS, still implement them. I don't create mirrors on all nodes and use 1-2 copies depending on cluster size.
An interesting test in mirror activation, is that the mirror picks up the existing SVM junctions regardless of the state of SVM root mirror. For example:
1) An SVM has 4 junction paths
2) SVM root mirror LS or DP to protect SVM root
3) unmount 3 of the junction paths leaving 1 junction path
4) failover to the root mirror (promote LS or break/make-vsroot DP)
5) SVM root running on the failed over volume has the 1 junction path, not the 4 that existed at the time of the mirror... there was no real failure, and the procedure with the SVM running keeps the current state. If a real disaster, I would expect recovery to what was in the mirror, but have never had to recover svm root.
An RFE on my wish list is to have the SVM root virtualized in the RDB, then we don't need to manage, replicate or ever move SVM root. I know this isn't an easy task and would use mroot/vol0, and cause more cluster traffic, but still would welcome seeing a change to do this if feasible. Not a show stopper or requirement, nor high priority.
On Wednesday, April 28, 2021, 11:24:12 AM PDT, John Stoffel <firstname.lastname@example.org<mailto:email@example.com>> wrote: Justin> Another pretty major difference between LS and DP methods;
Justin> DP method requires manual intervention when a failover/restore is needed.
This is fine in my case, because I'm really trying to protect against
a shipping failure, though it's tempting to do more to protect against
root volume failures as well. Though I've honestly never had one, nor
had a netapp fail so badly in 22+ years of using them that I lost data
from hardware failures.
Closest I came was on a F740 (I think) using the DEC StorageWorks
canisters and shelves. I had a two disk failure in an aggregate. One
disk you could hear scrapping the heads on the platter, the other was
a controller board failure. Since I had nothing to lose, I took the
good controller board off the head crash drive and put it onto the
other disk. System came up and found the data and started
rebuilding. Whew! Raid-DP is a good thing today for sure. Justin> LS Mirrors are running in parallel and incoming reads/access
Justin> requests (other than NFSv4) hit the LS mirrors rather than the
Justin> source volume, so if one fails, you don’t have to do anything
Justin> right away; you’d just need to resolve the issue at some
Justin> point, but no interruption to service.
That's a decent reason to use them. Justin> LS mirrors can also have a schedule to run to avoid needing to
Justin> update them regularly. And, if you need to write to the SVM
Justin> root for some reason, you’d need to access the .admin path in
Justin> the vsroot; LS mirrors are readonly (like DP mirrors).
The default for 9.3 seems to be 1 hour, but I bumped it to every 5
minutes, because I have Netbackup backups which use snapshots and 'vol
clone ...' to mount Oracle volumes for backups. I had to hack my
backuppolicy.sh script to put in a 'sleep 305' to make it work
Trying to make it work generically with 'snapmirror update-ls-set
<vserver>:<source>' wasn't working for some reason, so the quick hack
of a sleep got me working.
But I am thinking of dropping the LS mirrors and just going with DP
mirrors of all my rootvols instead, just because of this issue.
But let's do a survey, how many people on here are using LS mirrors of
your rootvols on your clusters? I certainly wasn't across multiple
Toasters mailing list
Toasters mailing list
This email is being sent by a subsidiary of Arthur J. Gallagher Holdings (UK) Limited, part of the Arthur J. Gallagher & Co. global group of companies. For details of the registered office, company number and, where applicable, regulated status of our subsidiaries, please visit https://www.ajginternational.com/legal-regulatory-information/.
We are the data controller of any personal information you provide to us or personal information that has been provided to us by a third party. We collect and process information about you in order to arrange insurance policies and to process claims. Your information is also used for business purposes such as fraud prevention and detection and financial management. This may involve sharing your information with third parties such as insurers, reinsurers, other brokers, claims handlers, loss adjusters, credit reference agencies, service providers, professional advisors, our regulators, police and government agencies or fraud prevention agencies.
We may record telephone calls to help us monitor and improve the service we provide. For further information on how your information is used and your rights in relation to your information please see our privacy notice at https://www.ajginternational.com/Privacy-Policy/.
If you are providing personal data of another individual to us, you must tell them you are providing their information to us and show them a copy of this notice.
Where you are obtaining a non-consumer policy of (re)insurance, or cover for additional risks or renewal under an existing policy, you are required to make a fair presentation of the risk to a (re)insurer which discloses every material circumstance which you know or ought to know relating to the risk to be insured. A circumstance is material if it would influence the judgment of a prudent insurer in determining whether to provide insurance for the risk and, if so, on what terms. Disclosure must be reasonably clear and accessible to a prudent insurer and made in good faith. The aforementioned duty of disclosure is the applicable duty under the laws of England and Wales. If your policy is not subject to English law you are expected to disclose risk information in accordance with the requirements of the applicable law. In such circumstances we expect you will disclose risk information at least equal to the standard required under English law and where the applicable law requires you to disclose information over and above the level required under English law you will provide such information in accordance with that law.
Where you are obtaining a consumer policy of insurance, you must read each question and answer honestly and fully and must take reasonable care to not make a misrepresentation.
Failure to comply with the above disclosure requirements, as they apply to you, could mean that your policy of (re)insurance is void, its terms are materially altered or that (re)insurers are not liable to pay all or part of your claim(s). If you are in any doubt as to your obligations you should ask your usual contact.
This e-mail and any attachments are CONFIDENTIAL and may contain legally privileged information. If you are not the intended recipient of this e-mail message, please telephone or e-mail us immediately, delete this message from your system and do not read, copy, distribute, disclose or otherwise use this e-mail message and any attachments. Although the above company has taken reasonable precautions to ensure this e-mail and any attachments are free of any virus or other defect that may affect your computer, it is the responsibility of the recipient to ensure that it is virus free and the above company does not accept any responsibility for any loss or damage arising in any way from its use.