Primary Storage

Hi everyone

According to this document: Implementation Guide for IBM Spectrum Virtualize Version 8.5

this would be the recommended distribution for 12-port nodes:

I cannot wrap my mind around the fact they are advising to place the two only inter-node ports in the same FC card. From where I see it, if the card #1 fails, the intracluster is gone for that node. Wouldn't it be advisable to place both inter-cluster ports in different cards to avoid SPOFs? 

Thanks in advance.

------------------------------
Sergio Pardos
------------------------------

Hi Sergio,

Inter-node communication, is used for heartbeat and metadata exchange between all nodes of all I/O groups in the cluster. Are you asking for SVC or FlashSystem?

Hi everyone

According to this document: Implementation Guide for IBM Spectrum Virtualize Version 8.5

this would be the recommended distribution for 12-port nodes:

I cannot wrap my mind around the fact they are advising to place the two only inter-node ports in the same FC card. From where I see it, if the card #1 fails, the intracluster is gone for that node. Wouldn't it be advisable to place both inter-cluster ports in different cards to avoid SPOFs? 

Thanks in advance.

------------------------------
Sergio Pardos
------------------------------

Hi Nezih, thanks for your reply, I am asking for SVC, the ports used for inter-node communication.

Hi Sergio,

Inter-node communication, is used for heartbeat and metadata exchange between all nodes of all I/O groups in the cluster. Are you asking for SVC or FlashSystem?

Hi everyone

According to this document: Implementation Guide for IBM Spectrum Virtualize Version 8.5

this would be the recommended distribution for 12-port nodes:

I cannot wrap my mind around the fact they are advising to place the two only inter-node ports in the same FC card. From where I see it, if the card #1 fails, the intracluster is gone for that node. Wouldn't it be advisable to place both inter-cluster ports in different cards to avoid SPOFs? 

Thanks in advance.

------------------------------
Sergio Pardos
------------------------------

Hi everyone

According to this document: Implementation Guide for IBM Spectrum Virtualize Version 8.5

this would be the recommended distribution for 12-port nodes:

I cannot wrap my mind around the fact they are advising to place the two only inter-node ports in the same FC card. From where I see it, if the card #1 fails, the intracluster is gone for that node. Wouldn't it be advisable to place both inter-cluster ports in different cards to avoid SPOFs? 

Thanks in advance.

------------------------------
Sergio Pardos
------------------------------

Sergio,

Documentation is distributing the intracluster ports over two adapters: https://www.ibm.com/docs/en/sanvolumecontroller/8.6.x?topic=pc-planning-more-than-four-fabric-ports-per-node

Hi everyone

According to this document: Implementation Guide for IBM Spectrum Virtualize Version 8.5

this would be the recommended distribution for 12-port nodes:

I cannot wrap my mind around the fact they are advising to place the two only inter-node ports in the same FC card. From where I see it, if the card #1 fails, the intracluster is gone for that node. Wouldn't it be advisable to place both inter-cluster ports in different cards to avoid SPOFs? 

Thanks in advance.

------------------------------
Sergio Pardos
------------------------------

Sergio,

Documentation is distributing the intracluster ports over two adapters: https://www.ibm.com/docs/en/sanvolumecontroller/8.6.x?topic=pc-planning-more-than-four-fabric-ports-per-node

Hi everyone

According to this document: Implementation Guide for IBM Spectrum Virtualize Version 8.5

this would be the recommended distribution for 12-port nodes:

I cannot wrap my mind around the fact they are advising to place the two only inter-node ports in the same FC card. From where I see it, if the card #1 fails, the intracluster is gone for that node. Wouldn't it be advisable to place both inter-cluster ports in different cards to avoid SPOFs? 

Thanks in advance.

------------------------------
Sergio Pardos
------------------------------

This was why am I asking :) 

We will update this Redbook for Spectrum Virtualize 8.7 and release it in July. It will be better to separate this table as FlashSystem and SVC and publish it as two tables. 

Sergio,

Documentation is distributing the intracluster ports over two adapters: https://www.ibm.com/docs/en/sanvolumecontroller/8.6.x?topic=pc-planning-more-than-four-fabric-ports-per-node

Hi everyone

According to this document: Implementation Guide for IBM Spectrum Virtualize Version 8.5

this would be the recommended distribution for 12-port nodes:

I cannot wrap my mind around the fact they are advising to place the two only inter-node ports in the same FC card. From where I see it, if the card #1 fails, the intracluster is gone for that node. Wouldn't it be advisable to place both inter-cluster ports in different cards to avoid SPOFs? 

Thanks in advance.

------------------------------
Sergio Pardos
------------------------------

Hi everyone

According to this document: Implementation Guide for IBM Spectrum Virtualize Version 8.5

this would be the recommended distribution for 12-port nodes:

I cannot wrap my mind around the fact they are advising to place the two only inter-node ports in the same FC card. From where I see it, if the card #1 fails, the intracluster is gone for that node. Wouldn't it be advisable to place both inter-cluster ports in different cards to avoid SPOFs? 

Thanks in advance.

------------------------------
Sergio Pardos
------------------------------

Hi everyone

According to this document: Implementation Guide for IBM Spectrum Virtualize Version 8.5

this would be the recommended distribution for 12-port nodes:

I cannot wrap my mind around the fact they are advising to place the two only inter-node ports in the same FC card. From where I see it, if the card #1 fails, the intracluster is gone for that node. Wouldn't it be advisable to place both inter-cluster ports in different cards to avoid SPOFs? 

Thanks in advance.

------------------------------
Sergio Pardos
------------------------------

Hello Sergio, 

these recommendations are also based on a mapping of FC-Ports to CPU-Cores. And I think it has also in mind that maybe some customers start with one HBA and add one or two HBA's later. So on the first 4 Ports you have all necessary connections. I would recommend to check the mapping of FC-Ports to CPU-Cores, because here it may be important to aviod bottlenecks and in the next step to spread the usage of the connections on at least 2 HBA's.

Hi everyone

According to this document: Implementation Guide for IBM Spectrum Virtualize Version 8.5

this would be the recommended distribution for 12-port nodes:

I cannot wrap my mind around the fact they are advising to place the two only inter-node ports in the same FC card. From where I see it, if the card #1 fails, the intracluster is gone for that node. Wouldn't it be advisable to place both inter-cluster ports in different cards to avoid SPOFs? 

Thanks in advance.

------------------------------
Sergio Pardos
------------------------------

Hello Sergio, 

these recommendations are also based on a mapping of FC-Ports to CPU-Cores. And I think it has also in mind that maybe some customers start with one HBA and add one or two HBA's later. So on the first 4 Ports you have all necessary connections. I would recommend to check the mapping of FC-Ports to CPU-Cores, because here it may be important to aviod bottlenecks and in the next step to spread the usage of the connections on at least 2 HBA's.

Hi everyone

According to this document: Implementation Guide for IBM Spectrum Virtualize Version 8.5

this would be the recommended distribution for 12-port nodes:

I cannot wrap my mind around the fact they are advising to place the two only inter-node ports in the same FC card. From where I see it, if the card #1 fails, the intracluster is gone for that node. Wouldn't it be advisable to place both inter-cluster ports in different cards to avoid SPOFs? 

Thanks in advance.

------------------------------
Sergio Pardos
------------------------------