Email Subscription Notifications Suspended Temporarily
We are in the process of making navigation in the Servers and Operating Systems forums simpler and more direct. While doing this, we have to temporarily suspend email notifications for subscriptions. If you are subscribed to one or more discussion boards or blogs in the community, please check them daily to see new content. Notifications will be turned back on in a few days. We apologize for any inconvenience this may cause. Thanks, Warren_Admin
Disk Enclosures
cancel
Showing results for 
Search instead for 
Did you mean: 

EVA8100 and HP-UX 11.23

SOLVED
Go to solution
Adam Garsha
Valued Contributor

EVA8100 and HP-UX 11.23

Do you need to zone all 8 host ports to each host? i.e. can I select only 4 host ports from each controller to reduce number of consumed device files?

Assume bandwidth is not a concern. I am wondering if this is supported.
6 REPLIES
IBaltay
Honored Contributor

Re: EVA8100 and HP-UX 11.23

Hi,
usually the 8 ports are divided into the 2 redundant fabrics (2x4). If you reduce the number of paths, you are reducing the host performance and also the load balancing features and you can come into the performance or availability problems soon
the pain is one part of the reality
Adam Garsha
Valued Contributor

Re: EVA8100 and HP-UX 11.23

Assume there are two fabrics and that performance is not of concern. Supported?
IBaltay
Honored Contributor

Re: EVA8100 and HP-UX 11.23

Hi,
Yes it is supported, but from the FP point of view the downgrade of eva8100 to the eva4100/6100 is a strange idea
the pain is one part of the reality
IBaltay
Honored Contributor

Re: EVA8100 and HP-UX 11.23

Adam Garsha
Valued Contributor

Re: EVA8100 and HP-UX 11.23

Performance is about spindles... I hardly draw the parallel of using 4 host ports from each controller on an 8100 as a "downgrade" to a "6100"

It would not be ALL systems taht are limited to just 4 of the 8 ports, just hpux.

We are using HP's rebranded Veritas DMP on our DB systems. For LVM based systems, just pvlinks, no securepath-autopath.

I am trying to avoid burning up all my device files for bandwidth that I don't need. Just brainstorming.

I'll have to look up the device file limits rule again, but I remember I was concerned about it.
Bernd Reize
Trusted Contributor
Solution

Re: EVA8100 and HP-UX 11.23

The device file limits are quite high iirc, so this should not be any problem.
As for redundancy/performance: since PVLinks provides no load-balancing but only basic failover even only two paths per lun per server would be enough, one path to sp-A and one to sp-B.
Using four or all eight ports is only a performance issue and is only worth it when you can use the added performance on the server side (load balancing software)
Supported as in "it works and is allowed by hp" is even a single-path configuration, but this would lack redundancy of course.

regards,
bernd