FYI - You can run Veritas DMP on top of mpxio devices. DMP just sees a
device of one path and goes about its business.

Jason King wrote:
> Unofrtunately no, our standard is Veritas DMP.
>
> On 10/17/06, *yu larry liu* <[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>> wrote:
>
>     Jason,
>
>     One question for you. Is MPXIO enabled under your circumstance?
>
>     If MPXIO enabled, each lun should only be shown once when running
>     format.
>
>     Thanks,
>     Larry
>
>     Roger Dong 已写入:
>
>     > Thanks for the information. We will work on this issue and keep you
>     > updated.
>     >
>     > Best Regards,
>     > Roger
>     >
>     > Jason King 写道:
>     >
>     >> I don't know if I'll be able to redo the setup to get more details,
>     >> but basically it was most obvious with a large number of luns
>     >> (several hundred) + veritas DMP + multiple paths to a clariion
>     array.
>     >> Due to our setup, each lun on the Clariion showed up twice (one for
>     >> each controller) on every path to the array. Since DMP was being
>     >> used, this meant it looked like several thousand luns (a few
>     hundred
>     >> luns x 2 controllers x 4-5 paths to the luns) was visible to the
>     >> system. Also, all the paths that went through the standby
>     controller
>     >> showed up as offline, which probably contributed to the effect.
>     >>
>     >> On 10/15/06, *Roger Dong* <[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>     <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>     >> <mailto: [EMAIL PROTECTED] <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>>> wrote:
>     >>
>     >> Hi Jason,
>     >>
>     >> How many disk/lun in your system which take two hours to lunch
>     >> 'format'?
>     >>
>     >> We are aware of one performance issue in format. 'format' check
>     >> disk on-line status each time after S10U1. It will cost 2 minutes
>     >> for each disk/lun. We are investigate to improve this now.
>     >>
>     >> We are not aware of cfgadm issue. We will investigate it and
>     >> update you later.
>     >>
>     >> Thanks,
>     >> Roger
>     >>
>     >>>
>     >>>> *From: * Jason King <[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>     <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>     >>>> <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>     <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>>>
>     >>>> *Date: * October 11, 2006 9:01:24 PM MDT
>     >>>> *To: * [email protected]
>     <mailto:[email protected]>
>     >>>> <mailto:[email protected]
>     <mailto:[email protected]>>
>     >>>> *Subject: * *[storage-discuss] cfgadm & format performance*
>     >>>>
>     >>>> Unfortunately, I have no means to see if this is present in
>     >>>> Nevada, but on Solaris 10U1, we've encountered some issues where
>     >>>> cfgadm and/or format seems to suffer poor performance when the
>     >>>> number of luns and/or controllers increase.
>     >>>>
>     >>>> In one extreme case, it takes over two hours from the time
>     >>>> 'format' is launched to when it actually displays the list of
>     >>>> devices. cfgadm -al also takes a rather absurd amount of time.
>     >>>>
>     >>>> Are there any plans to possibly improve the responsiveness of
>     >>>> these commands?
>     >>>>
>     >>>>
>     >>>> This message posted from opensolaris.org
>     <http://opensolaris.org> <http://opensolaris.org>
>     >>>> _______________________________________________
>     >>>> storage-discuss mailing list
>     >>>> [email protected]
>     <mailto:[email protected]>
>     >>>> <mailto: [email protected]
>     <mailto:[email protected]>>
>     >>>> http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/storage-discuss
>     >>>> < http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/storage-discuss>
>     >>>
>     >>
>     >>
>     >
>
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> _______________________________________________
> storage-discuss mailing list
> [email protected]
> http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/storage-discuss
>   

_______________________________________________
storage-discuss mailing list
[email protected]
http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/storage-discuss

Reply via email to