HPE GreenLake Administration
- Community Home
- >
- Storage
- >
- Midrange and Enterprise Storage
- >
- HPE EVA Storage
- >
- Re: SAN switch configuration - migration to active...
HPE EVA Storage
1834662
Members
2761
Online
110069
Solutions
Forums
Categories
Company
Local Language
back
Forums
Discussions
Forums
- Data Protection and Retention
- Entry Storage Systems
- Legacy
- Midrange and Enterprise Storage
- Storage Networking
- HPE Nimble Storage
Discussions
Forums
Discussions
Discussions
Discussions
Forums
Discussions
back
Discussion Boards
Discussion Boards
Discussion Boards
Discussion Boards
- BladeSystem Infrastructure and Application Solutions
- Appliance Servers
- Alpha Servers
- BackOffice Products
- Internet Products
- HPE 9000 and HPE e3000 Servers
- Networking
- Netservers
- Secure OS Software for Linux
- Server Management (Insight Manager 7)
- Windows Server 2003
- Operating System - Tru64 Unix
- ProLiant Deployment and Provisioning
- Linux-Based Community / Regional
- Microsoft System Center Integration
Discussion Boards
Discussion Boards
Discussion Boards
Discussion Boards
Discussion Boards
Discussion Boards
Discussion Boards
Discussion Boards
Discussion Boards
Discussion Boards
Discussion Boards
Discussion Boards
Discussion Boards
Discussion Boards
Discussion Boards
Discussion Boards
Discussion Boards
Discussion Boards
Discussion Boards
Discussion Boards
Blogs
Information
Community
Resources
Community Language
Language
Forums
Blogs
Topic Options
- Subscribe to RSS Feed
- Mark Topic as New
- Mark Topic as Read
- Float this Topic for Current User
- Bookmark
- Subscribe
- Printer Friendly Page
- Mark as New
- Bookmark
- Subscribe
- Mute
- Subscribe to RSS Feed
- Permalink
- Report Inappropriate Content
05-07-2008 01:31 AM
05-07-2008 01:31 AM
SAN switch configuration - migration to active/active
Hi,
we're planning to migrate our SAN environment (MSA 1500 with 2 controllers, 2 switches) from a fail-over active/passive configuration to a performance enhancing active/active configuration. how complex are the changes that have to be made on the san switches (hp storageworks a-series)? can somebody please provide a basic overview?
thanks
alex
we're planning to migrate our SAN environment (MSA 1500 with 2 controllers, 2 switches) from a fail-over active/passive configuration to a performance enhancing active/active configuration. how complex are the changes that have to be made on the san switches (hp storageworks a-series)? can somebody please provide a basic overview?
thanks
alex
3 REPLIES 3
- Mark as New
- Bookmark
- Subscribe
- Mute
- Subscribe to RSS Feed
- Permalink
- Report Inappropriate Content
05-07-2008 04:51 AM
05-07-2008 04:51 AM
Re: SAN switch configuration - migration to active/active
Since you mentioned "fail-over active/passive" in your current setup, you should have two physical paths for each LUN in the array going upwards to each san switch and each server HBA with dual logical device paths in the server. In this case I don't think you have to change anything in the SAN switches. All the changes are in the array and the server OS.
- Mark as New
- Bookmark
- Subscribe
- Mute
- Subscribe to RSS Feed
- Permalink
- Report Inappropriate Content
05-07-2008 05:18 AM
05-07-2008 05:18 AM
Re: SAN switch configuration - migration to active/active
oh really? that would be great, because the only step in this migration proccess that we were struggling with was the changes which have to be made on our switches... all the other things are clear more or less.
ist it possible to guesstimate the performance boost this operation will bring?
thanks for your reply
alex
ist it possible to guesstimate the performance boost this operation will bring?
thanks for your reply
alex
- Mark as New
- Bookmark
- Subscribe
- Mute
- Subscribe to RSS Feed
- Permalink
- Report Inappropriate Content
05-07-2008 07:51 AM
05-07-2008 07:51 AM
Re: SAN switch configuration - migration to active/active
You did not mention what kind of servers/OS you have and how the LUNS are assigned right now. But in general, you can still get very good performance with active/passive setups if you have half of the LUNs assigned to one server HBA and array controller and the other half of the LUNs assigned to the other server HBA and array controller. The "other" HBA serves as the failover. By doing this you have a manual load balancing setup where the server HBAs are not doing the I/O at 50/50 exactly but it could be very close.
Moving to active/active in this case you will get minimal I/O improvment, I would guess around 5% maybe a little more depending on your LUN activity and how it is separated across each HBA.
On the other extreme if you have all your LUNs assigned to one HBA and one array controller, and the other HBA serves as failover, then you are running at half of the I/O potential. Moving to A/A would double the I/O.
Whatever the case is, check with the array and server vendors for a support mattrix with what you have for an a/a setup and see if they have any specific requirements for the SAN switches.
But in general if you have standard dual paths in the SAN you should be OK.
Moving to active/active in this case you will get minimal I/O improvment, I would guess around 5% maybe a little more depending on your LUN activity and how it is separated across each HBA.
On the other extreme if you have all your LUNs assigned to one HBA and one array controller, and the other HBA serves as failover, then you are running at half of the I/O potential. Moving to A/A would double the I/O.
Whatever the case is, check with the array and server vendors for a support mattrix with what you have for an a/a setup and see if they have any specific requirements for the SAN switches.
But in general if you have standard dual paths in the SAN you should be OK.
The opinions expressed above are the personal opinions of the authors, not of Hewlett Packard Enterprise. By using this site, you accept the Terms of Use and Rules of Participation.
Company
Events and news
Customer resources
© Copyright 2025 Hewlett Packard Enterprise Development LP