Sounds to me that this will be a move from SVC Stretched cluster to Hyperswap config between 2 FS9500 (Stretched cluster topology only exists on SVC).
A year ago, I wanted to do a similar migration going from SVC Stretched Cluster (in my case only 4 nodes) to Hyperswap between 2 FS7200.
Although that even today I am still convinced that this would be a good approach, I received a lot of pushback from IBM because they literally told me several times that they could not guarantee same performance without the SVC and if performance issues would occur, it would be at own risk.
Only for that reason (valid or not), our management decided to put in place a stretched SVC cluster with 1 FS7200 backend storage at each site.
------------------------------
Hans Populaire
------------------------------
Original Message:
Sent: Sun July 10, 2022 02:34 PM
From: Somesekhar Banerjee
Subject: Replacing SVC with FS9500
Hello,
I would like to know the IBM best practice on the following infrastructure upgrade :
We have 6 node SVC stretched cluster (2145 - SV1) between two sites (20km distance).
We want to replace SVC with two new FS9500 (one for each site).
What is the best possible way to refresh/replace the SVC ?
I did SVC to SVC HW refresh by non-disruptive node replacement , but I suppose this will not be the case for FS9500.
Any Idea how to do it?
Thanks
Soba
------------------------------
Somesekhar Banerjee
------------------------------
#StorageAreaNetworks
#PrimaryStorage
#Storage