MIDRANGE dot COM Mailing List Archive



Home » MIDRANGE-L » April 2014

Re: 70GB load source and 5 other drives



fixed

Pete,

For VIOS it seems the preferred choice is for it to be on a physical drive on the blade itself. That is not required though, you can put it on a virtual drive that is in your SAN. In your case the SAN is the collection of drives in the chassis.

- Larry "DrFranken" Bolhuis

www.frankeni.com
www.iDevCloud.com
www.iInTheCloud.com

On 4/25/2014 9:59 AM, Pete Helgren wrote:

Adding another Pete to the mix.... I am at the front end of a change in
my drive configuration. Paul - I think it depends on the virtualization
technology used although I have forgotten what a "normal" IBM i looks
like (6 years on the JS12). My JS12 in the Bladecenter had access to a
single storage module with 6, 146GB drives and it doesn't have a RAID
SAS module so each individual drive needed to be allocated to a blade in
the chassis. In my case, all six were allocated to a single blade (the
JS12) and as I create partitions, I used a full drive, mirrored, for my
i partition, a drive for VIOS and then I have a single drive allocated
to a scratch IBM i partition and one to Power Linux. But I am living
life on the edge because all that should be RAID'ed.

So, as an alternative, I could (and will) get a RAID module that I can
run all the drives through. Using that I will take all 6 drives
(actually, it will be 12 because I just bought another storage module
and 6, 300GB drives) and allocate them to one big volume and then create
as many and as different sized LUN's as needed that I can then use as
virtual drives for the all the blades and VM's. Mixing and matching.

This went past me the first time I did it because I thought of HW
drives, not virtual drives. So, making the change now to a RAID SAS
module and and a fully virtualized environment when it comes to I/O
makes life much simpler. As Larry, Pete and Rob said: "More arms is
good" even if they are virtual. Again, something I didn't appreciate
initially and had to wrap my head around.

Curious about VIOS though...will it need it's own physical drives or can
I just carve out a couple of LUN's and allocate them to VIOS when I
rebuild this thing?

Pete Helgren
www.petesworkshop.com
GIAC Secure Software Programmer-Java

On 4/25/2014 7:39 AM, Steinmetz, Paul wrote:
Rob and Pete,

I'm confused. When you create a network server storage for a guest LPAR, you only give it the size, no where do you tell it the number of drives. If the host lpar has 8 drives, 8 will be used. If the host lpar has24 drives all 24 will be used. The guest storage will be evenly spread across the number of drives of the host.
Is this correct?

Paul

-----Original Message-----
From: midrange-l-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:midrange-l-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Pete Massiello - ML
Sent: Friday, April 25, 2014 7:42 AM
To: Midrange Systems Technical Discussion
Subject: RE: 70GB load source and 5 other drives

Rob,

7.2 will need a 70GB load source, and that means when you create it on the guest side you have to create it larger than 70 to get 70 on the hosted (or client) side. I have been using approximately 79GB when I create them, and they have worked fine for 7.2. Then if the others are significantly smaller, I end allocations on that drive to keep the I/Os more balanced on the spread of the I/Os across the drives

Pete

--
Pete Massiello
iTech Solutions
http://www.itechsol.com
http://www.iInTheCloud.com





-----Original Message-----
From: midrange-l-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:midrange-l-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of rob@xxxxxxxxx
Sent: Friday, April 25, 2014 7:18 AM
To: midrange-l@xxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: 70GB load source and 5 other drives

I know that we covered this in a thread but I'm having a devil of a time finding it. I found it alluded to in http://archive.midrange.com/midrange-l/201401/msg00542.html

I have a guested system that is currently 279GB. And it's only 30% utilized. I am doing an unload/reload and I want the 6 "luns".

I figured that I'd make the first one slightly over 70GB (like 75 or 80).
The reason being that it is a very hard halt with the next version of OS, especially with virtualized disks, and IBM will publish the 'pad' needed for VIOS, etc.

~300GB - 80GB = 220GB
220GB/(5drives/GB) = 44GB/Drive
So am I better off having 5 'luns' of 44GB each, or,
220GB/(35GB/drive)~=6 drives of 35GB each and having 6 drives of a somewhat standard size?

Or refigure the whole thing since it's only 30% utilized.
279 * .3 = 81GB

80GB load source and how many of what size additional CRTNWSSTG spaces?
Cause you can see just how much wasted space I'll have with 6 drives of 80GB.


Rob Berendt
--
IBM Certified System Administrator - IBM i 6.1 Group Dekko Dept 1600 Mail to: 2505 Dekko Drive
Garrett, IN 46738
Ship to: Dock 108
6928N 400E
Kendallville, IN 46755
http://www.dekko.com

--
This is the Midrange Systems Technical Discussion (MIDRANGE-L) mailing list To post a message email: MIDRANGE-L@xxxxxxxxxxxx To subscribe, unsubscribe, or change list options,
visit: http://lists.midrange.com/mailman/listinfo/midrange-l
or email: MIDRANGE-L-request@xxxxxxxxxxxx Before posting, please take a moment to review the archives at http://archive.midrange.com/midrange-l.

--
This is the Midrange Systems Technical Discussion (MIDRANGE-L) mailing list To post a message email: MIDRANGE-L@xxxxxxxxxxxx To subscribe, unsubscribe, or change list options,
visit: http://lists.midrange.com/mailman/listinfo/midrange-l
or email: MIDRANGE-L-request@xxxxxxxxxxxx Before posting, please take a moment to review the archives at http://archive.midrange.com/midrange-l.







Return to Archive home page | Return to MIDRANGE.COM home page

This mailing list archive is Copyright 1997-2014 by MIDRANGE dot COM and David Gibbs as a compilation work. Use of the archive is restricted to research of a business or technical nature. Any other uses are prohibited. Full details are available here. If you have questions about this, please contact