AW: Config Advisor 6.1 Misleading Information?

6.2 fixed all these issues, JFTR.

Alexander Griesser
Head of Systems Operations

ANEXIA Internetdienstleistungs GmbH

E-Mail: [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>
Web: http://www.anexia-it.com<http://www.anexia-it.com/>

Anschrift Hauptsitz Klagenfurt: Feldkirchnerstraße 140, 9020 Klagenfurt
Geschäftsführer: Alexander Windbichler
Firmenbuch: FN 289918a | Gerichtsstand: Klagenfurt | UID-Nummer: AT U63216601

Von: Tim McCarthy <[email protected]>
Gesendet: Montag, 9. November 2020 11:52
An: Alexander Griesser <[email protected]>; Toasters <[email protected]>
Betreff: Re: Config Advisor 6.1 Misleading Information?

I found 6.x too buggy
Went back to 5.8.1

Get Outlook for iOS<https://aka.ms/o0ukef>
________________________________
From: Toasters <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> on behalf of Alexander Griesser <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>>
Sent: Monday, November 9, 2020 3:24:20 AM
To: Toasters <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>>
Subject: Config Advisor 6.1 Misleading Information?


Hey there,



we just deployed CA 6.1 and had it running against some of our clusters.

Some of the findings here are "interesting", f.ex.:



Warning:

A minimum of 2 Cluster LIFs should be configured and active.

This storage appliance has 0 cluster LIFs defined but only 0 is active. Cluster Interconnect Bandwidth is compromised and cluster LIF redundancy is unavailable.



vs:

CLUSTER::> net int show -role cluster

  (network interface show)

            Logical    Status     Network            Current       Current Is

Vserver     Interface  Admin/Oper Address/Mask       Node          Port    Home

----------- ---------- ---------- ------------------ ------------- ------- ----

Cluster

            Node1_clus1  up/up    169.254.221.243/16 node1         e0a     true

            Node1_clus2  up/up    169.254.71.9/16    node1         e0b     true

            Node2_clus1

                         up/up    169.254.111.202/16 node2       e0a     true

            node2_clus2

                         up/up    169.254.213.249/16 node2       e0b     true

4 entries were displayed.



What exactly is it checking here? Do I need to assign a new flag to those LIFs in order for CA to recognize them properly?





Informational:

Thin provisioning features are not enabled.

Thin Provisioning features are not enabled on following volumes: node1:node1_root Until "Volume Guarantees" are removed, thin provisioning is not enabled, therefore storage efficiency cannot be guaranteed.



Vs:

https://library.netapp.com/ecmdocs/ECMP1196981/html/GUID-38F008C4-3CAA-4C81-954D-C7B00EDC7A5D.html

"You should not use thin provisioning for root volumes."





Informational:

The node is configured as a single node cluster and is not saving configuration backups remotely.

Single node cluster configurations should save backup configuration files remotely to allow for recovery in the event of a node/root volume failure. In the event of a node failure, the cluster configuration will not be able to be recovered.



Vs:

CLUSTER::> cluster show

Node                  Health  Eligibility

--------------------- ------- ------------

Node1                 true    true

Node2               true    true

2 entries were displayed.

-> It also failed to recognize a two-node cluster, is there a flag it checks which I missed to set?



Anyone else experiencing issues like these?



Thanks,



Alexander Griesser

Head of Systems Operations



ANEXIA Internetdienstleistungs GmbH



E-Mail: [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>

Web: http://www.anexia-it.com<http://www.anexia-it.com/>



Anschrift Hauptsitz Klagenfurt: Feldkirchnerstraße 140, 9020 Klagenfurt

Geschäftsführer: Alexander Windbichler

Firmenbuch: FN 289918a | Gerichtsstand: Klagenfurt | UID-Nummer: AT U63216601

_______________________________________________
Toasters mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.teaparty.net/mailman/listinfo/toasters