Mailing List Archive: Netapp: toasters

vmware ESX and volumes/aggrs

Index | Next | Previous | View Threaded

klises at caminomedical

Mar 5, 2009, 10:44 AM

Post #1 of 12 (3401 views)
Permalink

vmware ESX and volumes/aggrs

I was always under the impression you wanted to put as many disks into an
aggr, then setup the volumes inside the aggr.

Here is what we are doing, and I am just trying to see what others are
doing, best practices, etc.

We have an AGGR that we use for VMware sitting on a 6030 running 7.2.4 FCP.
The aggr is ~ 9TB or so, usable and we have 1 volume that is ~ 5TB or so.
We do not currenlty use SMVI (waiting for the budget to open) :) but we
will use SMVI and hopefully snapmirror over to another filer. All VM's are
windows (for the most part)
The primary storage is still on 7.2.4, so no dedupe, or thin provisioning
until we upgrade to 7.3.2 sometime this year. This is coming btw to a store
near you...

Pros/cons to creating smaller/bigger volumes:
potentially easier to snapmirror
less dedupe % if we create smaller volumes (less vm's, less dedupe)

Is there anything wrong with creating 1 volume to 1 aggr and grow the volume
to 80%? Am I missing something here?

We are thinking of reducing our snap reserve as well.

Yes, I have read the vmware best practices doc. VERY GOOD BTW.

Thanks in advance
--
View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/vmware-ESX-and-volumes-aggrs-tp22357882p22357882.html
Sent from the Network Appliance - Toasters mailing list archive at Nabble.com.

Darren.Sykes at csr

Mar 5, 2009, 11:17 AM

Post #2 of 12 (3294 views)
Permalink

Re: vmware ESX and volumes/aggrs [In reply to]

Steve,

That's really an ESX question, not storage.

Using FC, the volume design with be based on how locks are implemented in
VMFS. VMWare do offer best practice numbers which, along with your VMDK
sizes, will determine the optimum size of your volumes.

When we used FC, I think we aimed for 12VM's per store, and 150GB vols.

You'll obviously get potentially better dedup savings on larger volumes.
Have you considered using NFS rather than FC (which uses it's own locking
mechanism so the same constraints do not apply)?

Having said all that, I think SMVI generally works better with non-NFS
stores; we're still having occasional issues due to NFS related issues.

Darren

On 05/03/2009 18:44, "steve klise" <klises [at] caminomedical> wrote:

>
> I was always under the impression you wanted to put as many disks into an
> aggr, then setup the volumes inside the aggr.
>
> Here is what we are doing, and I am just trying to see what others are
> doing, best practices, etc.
>
> We have an AGGR that we use for VMware sitting on a 6030 running 7.2.4 FCP.
> The aggr is ~ 9TB or so, usable and we have 1 volume that is ~ 5TB or so.
> We do not currenlty use SMVI (waiting for the budget to open) :) but we
> will use SMVI and hopefully snapmirror over to another filer. All VM's are
> windows (for the most part)
> The primary storage is still on 7.2.4, so no dedupe, or thin provisioning
> until we upgrade to 7.3.2 sometime this year. This is coming btw to a store
> near you...
>
> Pros/cons to creating smaller/bigger volumes:
> potentially easier to snapmirror
> less dedupe % if we create smaller volumes (less vm's, less dedupe)
>
> Is there anything wrong with creating 1 volume to 1 aggr and grow the volume
> to 80%? Am I missing something here?
>
> We are thinking of reducing our snap reserve as well.
>
> Yes, I have read the vmware best practices doc. VERY GOOD BTW.
>
> Thanks in advance

tvance at burtsbees

Mar 5, 2009, 1:39 PM

Post #3 of 12 (3292 views)
Permalink

RE: vmware ESX and volumes/aggrs [In reply to]

I run Ontap 7.2.4 with thin provisioning, dedupe, on FC and SMVI works
like a charm. We have VM per lun so that we backup and restore at the
lun level.

Thanks,
Tres

-----Original Message-----
From: owner-toasters [at] mathworks [mailto:owner-toasters [at] mathworks]
On Behalf Of Darren Sykes
Sent: Thursday, March 05, 2009 2:18 PM
To: steve klise; toasters [at] mathworks
Subject: Re: vmware ESX and volumes/aggrs

Steve,

That's really an ESX question, not storage.

Using FC, the volume design with be based on how locks are implemented
in
VMFS. VMWare do offer best practice numbers which, along with your VMDK
sizes, will determine the optimum size of your volumes.

When we used FC, I think we aimed for 12VM's per store, and 150GB vols.

You'll obviously get potentially better dedup savings on larger volumes.
Have you considered using NFS rather than FC (which uses it's own
locking
mechanism so the same constraints do not apply)?

Having said all that, I think SMVI generally works better with non-NFS
stores; we're still having occasional issues due to NFS related issues.

Darren

On 05/03/2009 18:44, "steve klise" <klises [at] caminomedical> wrote:

>
> I was always under the impression you wanted to put as many disks into
an
> aggr, then setup the volumes inside the aggr.
>
> Here is what we are doing, and I am just trying to see what others are
> doing, best practices, etc.
>
> We have an AGGR that we use for VMware sitting on a 6030 running 7.2.4
FCP.
> The aggr is ~ 9TB or so, usable and we have 1 volume that is ~ 5TB or
so.
> We do not currenlty use SMVI (waiting for the budget to open) :) but
we
> will use SMVI and hopefully snapmirror over to another filer. All
VM's are
> windows (for the most part)
> The primary storage is still on 7.2.4, so no dedupe, or thin
provisioning
> until we upgrade to 7.3.2 sometime this year. This is coming btw to a
store
> near you...
>
> Pros/cons to creating smaller/bigger volumes:
> potentially easier to snapmirror
> less dedupe % if we create smaller volumes (less vm's, less dedupe)
>
> Is there anything wrong with creating 1 volume to 1 aggr and grow the
volume
> to 80%? Am I missing something here?
>
> We are thinking of reducing our snap reserve as well.
>
> Yes, I have read the vmware best practices doc. VERY GOOD BTW.
>
> Thanks in advance

silkey at ece

Mar 6, 2009, 7:31 AM

Post #4 of 12 (3279 views)
Permalink

Re: vmware ESX and volumes/aggrs [In reply to]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

Darren Sykes wrote:
> Having said all that, I think SMVI generally works better with non-NFS
> stores; we're still having occasional issues due to NFS related issues.

Darren --

Can you elaborate on those issues for those of us eyeing both NFS for
datastores and SMVI for snap management/operations?

Thanks.

- --
Nick Silkey

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.8 (Darwin)

iEYEARECAAYFAkmxQcIACgkQrDQjhjXrMeI3swCeMtEBzZp/kM3Rk+2Qen33BSGU
ockAn3i5ZdQ73icMtcUttPzJ4scr0h5K
=yKLa
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

silkey at ece

Mar 6, 2009, 7:36 AM

Post #5 of 12 (3280 views)
Permalink

Re: vmware ESX and volumes/aggrs [In reply to]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

steve klise wrote:
> The primary storage is still on 7.2.4, so no dedupe, or thin provisioning
> until we upgrade to 7.3.2 sometime this year. This is coming btw to a store
> near you...

If youre on a 3xxx/6xxx FAS-series and running DOT >= 7.2.4, you can
take advantage of the special sauce. You will have to obtain one of
those no-cost NearStore licenses (made available as a free offering on
3/10/08) to get dedupe enabled. We went through a zero-dollar purchase
order route as an edu a year ago. Dont know if this process has changed
or not since; reach out to your NetApp contacts to touch base on this.

- --
Nick Silkey

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.8 (Darwin)

iEYEARECAAYFAkmxQuUACgkQrDQjhjXrMeKXdQCgrmjrzbIJq0YORVCgIdfJVs2z
TvoAni6o3Ivv6kjdUCbBORfVyD3imsK6
=IsOw
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

Darren.Sykes at csr

Mar 6, 2009, 9:27 AM

Post #6 of 12 (3281 views)
Permalink

RE: vmware ESX and volumes/aggrs [In reply to]

I thought the current minimum supported release if 7.2.5.1?

There's also the PITA NDMP backup issues on fat VMDKs which wasn't fixed
until 7.2.6.1.

Darren

-----Original Message-----
From: owner-toasters [at] mathworks [mailto:owner-toasters [at] mathworks]
On Behalf Of Nick Silkey
Sent: 06 March 2009 15:36
To: steve klise
Cc: toasters [at] mathworks
Subject: Re: vmware ESX and volumes/aggrs

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

steve klise wrote:
> The primary storage is still on 7.2.4, so no dedupe, or thin
provisioning
> until we upgrade to 7.3.2 sometime this year. This is coming btw to a
store
> near you...

If youre on a 3xxx/6xxx FAS-series and running DOT >= 7.2.4, you can
take advantage of the special sauce. You will have to obtain one of
those no-cost NearStore licenses (made available as a free offering on
3/10/08) to get dedupe enabled. We went through a zero-dollar purchase
order route as an edu a year ago. Dont know if this process has changed
or not since; reach out to your NetApp contacts to touch base on this.

- --
Nick Silkey

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.8 (Darwin)

iEYEARECAAYFAkmxQuUACgkQrDQjhjXrMeKXdQCgrmjrzbIJq0YORVCgIdfJVs2z
TvoAni6o3Ivv6kjdUCbBORfVyD3imsK6
=IsOw
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

To report this email as spam click
https://www.mailcontrol.com/sr/6c2S0J1yqkfTndxI!oX7Uj80y4Ou3KxpIJyK6yk3g
J3Ede4Yaq0oa3LaL3tNWGSDMbw0NZTqqAB6aunJTqVygQ== .

Darren.Sykes at csr

Mar 6, 2009, 9:50 AM

Post #7 of 12 (3278 views)
Permalink

RE: vmware ESX and volumes/aggrs [In reply to]

Yes, the issues we're seeing are that some machines lock up when
undergoing SMVI backups (and not the normal bug that affects removing
snapshots from VMs on NFS storage).

The latest theory is that the fixes in the latest version of VMWare
tools sorts it out. VMware don't have a firm idea of what's causing it
in our environment, but we've seen numerous bugs based on the locking
mechanism (which is different in NFS to iSCSI or FC).

Darren.

-----Original Message-----
From: Nick Silkey [mailto:silkey [at] ece]
Sent: 06 March 2009 15:31
To: Darren Sykes
Cc: steve klise; toasters [at] mathworks
Subject: Re: vmware ESX and volumes/aggrs

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

Darren Sykes wrote:
> Having said all that, I think SMVI generally works better with non-NFS
> stores; we're still having occasional issues due to NFS related
issues.

Darren --

Can you elaborate on those issues for those of us eyeing both NFS for
datastores and SMVI for snap management/operations?

Thanks.

- --
Nick Silkey

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.8 (Darwin)

iEYEARECAAYFAkmxQcIACgkQrDQjhjXrMeI3swCeMtEBzZp/kM3Rk+2Qen33BSGU
ockAn3i5ZdQ73icMtcUttPzJ4scr0h5K
=yKLa
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

To report this email as spam click
https://www.mailcontrol.com/sr/kh8Fd1nb5kHTndxI!oX7UqcUCtlg0TD8A1BaxxyeY
dpMmHvx8qkAiLQ5RK2G1tICMbw0NZTqqAAwyNC8RpgWkw== .

jeremy.page at gilbarco

Mar 6, 2009, 10:36 AM

Post #8 of 12 (3276 views)
Permalink

RE: vmware ESX and volumes/aggrs [In reply to]

I strongly recommend NOT using ASIS until you're at least at
7.2.6.1/7.3.1
Before 7.2.6.1 or 7.3.1 you'll run into a problem doing sequential reads
of large empty files (LUNs or VMDK files for instance). It's an ugly
situation, my snapvault initial transfers for 1 TB volumes where taking
a week+ to run when the 5 TB volume (not deduped) went overnight.

-----Original Message-----
From: owner-toasters [at] mathworks [mailto:owner-toasters [at] mathworks]
On Behalf Of Darren Sykes
Sent: Friday, March 06, 2009 12:28 PM
To: Nick Silkey; steve klise
Cc: toasters [at] mathworks
Subject: RE: vmware ESX and volumes/aggrs

I thought the current minimum supported release if 7.2.5.1?

There's also the PITA NDMP backup issues on fat VMDKs which wasn't fixed
until 7.2.6.1.

Darren

-----Original Message-----
From: owner-toasters [at] mathworks [mailto:owner-toasters [at] mathworks]
On Behalf Of Nick Silkey
Sent: 06 March 2009 15:36
To: steve klise
Cc: toasters [at] mathworks
Subject: Re: vmware ESX and volumes/aggrs

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

steve klise wrote:
> The primary storage is still on 7.2.4, so no dedupe, or thin
provisioning
> until we upgrade to 7.3.2 sometime this year. This is coming btw to a
store
> near you...

If youre on a 3xxx/6xxx FAS-series and running DOT >= 7.2.4, you can
take advantage of the special sauce. You will have to obtain one of
those no-cost NearStore licenses (made available as a free offering on
3/10/08) to get dedupe enabled. We went through a zero-dollar purchase
order route as an edu a year ago. Dont know if this process has changed
or not since; reach out to your NetApp contacts to touch base on this.

- --
Nick Silkey

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.8 (Darwin)

iEYEARECAAYFAkmxQuUACgkQrDQjhjXrMeKXdQCgrmjrzbIJq0YORVCgIdfJVs2z
TvoAni6o3Ivv6kjdUCbBORfVyD3imsK6
=IsOw
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

To report this email as spam click
https://www.mailcontrol.com/sr/6c2S0J1yqkfTndxI!oX7Uj80y4Ou3KxpIJyK6yk3g
J3Ede4Yaq0oa3LaL3tNWGSDMbw0NZTqqAB6aunJTqVygQ== .

Please be advised that this email may contain confidential information.
If you are not the intended recipient, please do not read, copy or
re-transmit this email. If you have received this email in error,
please notify us by email by replying to the sender and by telephone
(call us collect at +1 202-828-0850) and delete this message and any
attachments. Thank you in advance for your cooperation and assistance.

In addition, Danaher and its subsidiaries disclaim that the content of
this email constitutes an offer to enter into, or the acceptance of,
any
contract or agreement or any amendment thereto; provided that the
foregoing disclaimer does not invalidate the binding effect of any
digital or other electronic reproduction of a manual signature that is
included in any attachment to this email.

MDAVIES at generalatlantic

Mar 6, 2009, 1:09 PM

Post #9 of 12 (3259 views)
Permalink

RE: vmware ESX and volumes/aggrs [In reply to]

Darren,

Do you have any details on the bug that affects removing snapshots from
VM's on NFS ?

And do you have any details about which version of VM tools seems to
solve the problem, I thought we were upto date with versions and
patches, but still seem to seeing similar problems with smvi and NFS
datastores.

Thanks

Matt

-----Original Message-----
From: owner-toasters [at] mathworks [mailto:owner-toasters [at] mathworks]
On Behalf Of Darren Sykes
Sent: 06 March 2009 17:51
To: Nick Silkey
Cc: steve klise; toasters [at] mathworks
Subject: RE: vmware ESX and volumes/aggrs

Yes, the issues we're seeing are that some machines lock up when
undergoing SMVI backups (and not the normal bug that affects removing
snapshots from VMs on NFS storage).

The latest theory is that the fixes in the latest version of VMWare
tools sorts it out. VMware don't have a firm idea of what's causing it
in our environment, but we've seen numerous bugs based on the locking
mechanism (which is different in NFS to iSCSI or FC).

Darren.

-----Original Message-----
From: Nick Silkey [mailto:silkey [at] ece]
Sent: 06 March 2009 15:31
To: Darren Sykes
Cc: steve klise; toasters [at] mathworks
Subject: Re: vmware ESX and volumes/aggrs

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

Darren Sykes wrote:
> Having said all that, I think SMVI generally works better with non-NFS
> stores; we're still having occasional issues due to NFS related
issues.

Darren --

Can you elaborate on those issues for those of us eyeing both NFS for
datastores and SMVI for snap management/operations?

Thanks.

- --
Nick Silkey

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.8 (Darwin)

iEYEARECAAYFAkmxQcIACgkQrDQjhjXrMeI3swCeMtEBzZp/kM3Rk+2Qen33BSGU
ockAn3i5ZdQ73icMtcUttPzJ4scr0h5K
=yKLa
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

To report this email as spam click
https://www.mailcontrol.com/sr/kh8Fd1nb5kHTndxI!oX7UqcUCtlg0TD8A1BaxxyeY
dpMmHvx8qkAiLQ5RK2G1tICMbw0NZTqqAAwyNC8RpgWkw== .

_____________________________________________________________
This e-mail (including all attachments) is confidential and may be privileged.
It is for the exclusive use of the addressee only. If you are not the addressee,
you are hereby notified that any dissemination of this communication is strictly
prohibited. If you have received this communication in error, please erase all
copies of the message and its attachments and notify us immediately at
help [at] generalatlantic <mailto:help [at] generalatlantic>. Thank You.

Peter.Learmonth at netapp

Mar 6, 2009, 1:56 PM

Post #10 of 12 (3272 views)
Permalink

RE: vmware ESX and volumes/aggrs [In reply to]

Hi Matt

This is ESX350-200808401-BG. The issue has to do with how locks are
handled during snapshot commits, and other functionality that uses delta
files. The fix has nothing to do with VMware tools. For ESX 3.5
updates 1 and 2, you need to install ESX350-200808401-BG (or a bundle
that includes it). For ESX 3.5 Update 3, the patch is already there and
you just need to activate it.

To activate it, add the following line to /etc/vmware/config
prefvmx.consolidateDeleteNFSLocks = "TRUE"
and reboot.

Details are in TR3428
http://www.netapp.com/us/library/technical-reports/tr-3428.html

Enjoy!

Peter

-----Original Message-----
From: Davies,Matt [mailto:MDAVIES [at] generalatlantic]
Sent: Friday, March 06, 2009 1:10 PM
To: Darren Sykes; Nick Silkey
Cc: steve klise; toasters [at] mathworks
Subject: RE: vmware ESX and volumes/aggrs

Darren,

Do you have any details on the bug that affects removing snapshots from
VM's on NFS ?

And do you have any details about which version of VM tools seems to
solve the problem, I thought we were upto date with versions and
patches, but still seem to seeing similar problems with smvi and NFS
datastores.

Thanks

Matt

-----Original Message-----
From: owner-toasters [at] mathworks [mailto:owner-toasters [at] mathworks]
On Behalf Of Darren Sykes
Sent: 06 March 2009 17:51
To: Nick Silkey
Cc: steve klise; toasters [at] mathworks
Subject: RE: vmware ESX and volumes/aggrs

Yes, the issues we're seeing are that some machines lock up when
undergoing SMVI backups (and not the normal bug that affects removing
snapshots from VMs on NFS storage).

The latest theory is that the fixes in the latest version of VMWare
tools sorts it out. VMware don't have a firm idea of what's causing it
in our environment, but we've seen numerous bugs based on the locking
mechanism (which is different in NFS to iSCSI or FC).

Darren.

-----Original Message-----
From: Nick Silkey [mailto:silkey [at] ece]
Sent: 06 March 2009 15:31
To: Darren Sykes
Cc: steve klise; toasters [at] mathworks
Subject: Re: vmware ESX and volumes/aggrs

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

Darren Sykes wrote:
> Having said all that, I think SMVI generally works better with non-NFS

> stores; we're still having occasional issues due to NFS related
issues.

Darren --

Can you elaborate on those issues for those of us eyeing both NFS for
datastores and SMVI for snap management/operations?

Thanks.

- --
Nick Silkey

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.8 (Darwin)

iEYEARECAAYFAkmxQcIACgkQrDQjhjXrMeI3swCeMtEBzZp/kM3Rk+2Qen33BSGU
ockAn3i5ZdQ73icMtcUttPzJ4scr0h5K
=yKLa
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

To report this email as spam click
https://www.mailcontrol.com/sr/kh8Fd1nb5kHTndxI!oX7UqcUCtlg0TD8A1BaxxyeY
dpMmHvx8qkAiLQ5RK2G1tICMbw0NZTqqAAwyNC8RpgWkw== .

_____________________________________________________________
This e-mail (including all attachments) is confidential and may be
privileged.
It is for the exclusive use of the addressee only. If you are not the
addressee, you are hereby notified that any dissemination of this
communication is strictly prohibited. If you have received this
communication in error, please erase all copies of the message and its
attachments and notify us immediately at help [at] generalatlantic
<mailto:help [at] generalatlantic>. Thank You.

MDAVIES at generalatlantic

Mar 6, 2009, 2:01 PM

Post #11 of 12 (3268 views)
Permalink

Re: vmware ESX and volumes/aggrs [In reply to]

Peter,

Thanks as always for the information.

Cheers

Matt

----- Original Message -----
From: Learmonth, Peter <Peter.Learmonth [at] netapp>
To: Davies,Matt; Darren Sykes <Darren.Sykes [at] csr>; Nick Silkey <silkey [at] ece>
Cc: steve klise <klises [at] caminomedical>; toasters [at] mathworks <toasters [at] mathworks>
Sent: Fri Mar 06 21:56:39 2009
Subject: RE: vmware ESX and volumes/aggrs

Hi Matt

This is ESX350-200808401-BG. The issue has to do with how locks are
handled during snapshot commits, and other functionality that uses delta
files. The fix has nothing to do with VMware tools. For ESX 3.5
updates 1 and 2, you need to install ESX350-200808401-BG (or a bundle
that includes it). For ESX 3.5 Update 3, the patch is already there and
you just need to activate it.

To activate it, add the following line to /etc/vmware/config
prefvmx.consolidateDeleteNFSLocks = "TRUE"
and reboot.

Details are in TR3428
http://www.netapp.com/us/library/technical-reports/tr-3428.html

Enjoy!

Peter

-----Original Message-----
From: Davies,Matt [mailto:MDAVIES [at] generalatlantic]
Sent: Friday, March 06, 2009 1:10 PM
To: Darren Sykes; Nick Silkey
Cc: steve klise; toasters [at] mathworks
Subject: RE: vmware ESX and volumes/aggrs

Darren,

Do you have any details on the bug that affects removing snapshots from
VM's on NFS ?

And do you have any details about which version of VM tools seems to
solve the problem, I thought we were upto date with versions and
patches, but still seem to seeing similar problems with smvi and NFS
datastores.

Thanks

Matt

-----Original Message-----
From: owner-toasters [at] mathworks [mailto:owner-toasters [at] mathworks]
On Behalf Of Darren Sykes
Sent: 06 March 2009 17:51
To: Nick Silkey
Cc: steve klise; toasters [at] mathworks
Subject: RE: vmware ESX and volumes/aggrs

Yes, the issues we're seeing are that some machines lock up when
undergoing SMVI backups (and not the normal bug that affects removing
snapshots from VMs on NFS storage).

The latest theory is that the fixes in the latest version of VMWare
tools sorts it out. VMware don't have a firm idea of what's causing it
in our environment, but we've seen numerous bugs based on the locking
mechanism (which is different in NFS to iSCSI or FC).

Darren.

-----Original Message-----
From: Nick Silkey [mailto:silkey [at] ece]
Sent: 06 March 2009 15:31
To: Darren Sykes
Cc: steve klise; toasters [at] mathworks
Subject: Re: vmware ESX and volumes/aggrs

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

Darren Sykes wrote:
> Having said all that, I think SMVI generally works better with non-NFS

> stores; we're still having occasional issues due to NFS related
issues.

Darren --

Can you elaborate on those issues for those of us eyeing both NFS for
datastores and SMVI for snap management/operations?

Thanks.

- --
Nick Silkey

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.8 (Darwin)

iEYEARECAAYFAkmxQcIACgkQrDQjhjXrMeI3swCeMtEBzZp/kM3Rk+2Qen33BSGU
ockAn3i5ZdQ73icMtcUttPzJ4scr0h5K
=yKLa
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

To report this email as spam click
https://www.mailcontrol.com/sr/kh8Fd1nb5kHTndxI!oX7UqcUCtlg0TD8A1BaxxyeY
dpMmHvx8qkAiLQ5RK2G1tICMbw0NZTqqAAwyNC8RpgWkw== .

_____________________________________________________________
This e-mail (including all attachments) is confidential and may be
privileged.
It is for the exclusive use of the addressee only. If you are not the
addressee, you are hereby notified that any dissemination of this
communication is strictly prohibited. If you have received this
communication in error, please erase all copies of the message and its
attachments and notify us immediately at help [at] generalatlantic
<mailto:help [at] generalatlantic>. Thank You.

Darren.Sykes at csr

Mar 6, 2009, 11:14 PM

Post #12 of 12 (3248 views)
Permalink

RE: vmware ESX and volumes/aggrs [In reply to]

Peter,

As far as I know, there are 2 issues.

The first one is as you described.

The second is a bug in the VSS driver in VMWare tools.

However, the bugs seem to manifest in the same way i.e. snapshot removal
on NFS VMs hangs for a long period of time, during which the VM is dead
to the world.

Darren

-----Original Message-----
From: Learmonth, Peter [mailto:Peter.Learmonth [at] netapp]
Sent: 06 March 2009 21:57
To: Davies,Matt; Darren Sykes; Nick Silkey
Cc: steve klise; toasters [at] mathworks
Subject: RE: vmware ESX and volumes/aggrs

Hi Matt

This is ESX350-200808401-BG. The issue has to do with how locks are
handled during snapshot commits, and other functionality that uses delta
files. The fix has nothing to do with VMware tools. For ESX 3.5
updates 1 and 2, you need to install ESX350-200808401-BG (or a bundle
that includes it). For ESX 3.5 Update 3, the patch is already there and
you just need to activate it.

To activate it, add the following line to /etc/vmware/config
prefvmx.consolidateDeleteNFSLocks = "TRUE"
and reboot.

Details are in TR3428
http://www.netapp.com/us/library/technical-reports/tr-3428.html

Enjoy!

Peter

-----Original Message-----
From: Davies,Matt [mailto:MDAVIES [at] generalatlantic]
Sent: Friday, March 06, 2009 1:10 PM
To: Darren Sykes; Nick Silkey
Cc: steve klise; toasters [at] mathworks
Subject: RE: vmware ESX and volumes/aggrs

Darren,

Do you have any details on the bug that affects removing snapshots from
VM's on NFS ?

And do you have any details about which version of VM tools seems to
solve the problem, I thought we were upto date with versions and
patches, but still seem to seeing similar problems with smvi and NFS
datastores.

Thanks

Matt

-----Original Message-----
From: owner-toasters [at] mathworks [mailto:owner-toasters [at] mathworks]
On Behalf Of Darren Sykes
Sent: 06 March 2009 17:51
To: Nick Silkey
Cc: steve klise; toasters [at] mathworks
Subject: RE: vmware ESX and volumes/aggrs

Yes, the issues we're seeing are that some machines lock up when
undergoing SMVI backups (and not the normal bug that affects removing
snapshots from VMs on NFS storage).

The latest theory is that the fixes in the latest version of VMWare
tools sorts it out. VMware don't have a firm idea of what's causing it
in our environment, but we've seen numerous bugs based on the locking
mechanism (which is different in NFS to iSCSI or FC).

Darren.

-----Original Message-----
From: Nick Silkey [mailto:silkey [at] ece]
Sent: 06 March 2009 15:31
To: Darren Sykes
Cc: steve klise; toasters [at] mathworks
Subject: Re: vmware ESX and volumes/aggrs

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

Darren Sykes wrote:
> Having said all that, I think SMVI generally works better with non-NFS

> stores; we're still having occasional issues due to NFS related
issues.

Darren --

Can you elaborate on those issues for those of us eyeing both NFS for
datastores and SMVI for snap management/operations?

Thanks.

- --
Nick Silkey

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.8 (Darwin)

iEYEARECAAYFAkmxQcIACgkQrDQjhjXrMeI3swCeMtEBzZp/kM3Rk+2Qen33BSGU
ockAn3i5ZdQ73icMtcUttPzJ4scr0h5K
=yKLa
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

To report this email as spam click
https://www.mailcontrol.com/sr/kh8Fd1nb5kHTndxI!oX7UqcUCtlg0TD8A1BaxxyeY
dpMmHvx8qkAiLQ5RK2G1tICMbw0NZTqqAAwyNC8RpgWkw== .

_____________________________________________________________
This e-mail (including all attachments) is confidential and may be
privileged.
It is for the exclusive use of the addressee only. If you are not the
addressee, you are hereby notified that any dissemination of this
communication is strictly prohibited. If you have received this
communication in error, please erase all copies of the message and its
attachments and notify us immediately at help [at] generalatlantic
<mailto:help [at] generalatlantic>. Thank You.

Index | Next | Previous | View Threaded

Interested in having your list archived? Contact Gossamer Threads