Secure Path and MPIO

[Barry Devillier]

I am looking for information about migrating from SCSIport to Storport and using MPIO.

We currently have EVA5000's and are using Storport with SecurePath 4.0C. We have heard rumors about the new EVA's having active/active controllers and requiring MPIO. We are hoping that Secure Path will support active/active due to MPIO being so new. So far we feel like we are the pioneers of Storport. Any info would be greatly appriciated.

[Richard Perez]

Barry
EVA does support active/active since many VCSs ago, isn't a new feature.
STorport support was added in Securepath 4.0C Service PAck1.

[Barry Devillier]

Richard, Im not sure that i understand. Are you saying the EVA controllers are Active/Active?

My question is, does Secure Path support a storage array that has active/active controllers?

[Richard Perez]

Yes, the controllers are active-active: you can access some LUN using one controller and the other LUNs using the other controller.

[Richard Perez]

and Securepath supports active-active

[Steven Clementi]

Barry:

HSV110 controllers operate only in an Active/Active configuration. Unlike previous HSx models that could operate multibus/transparent failover or single controller, the EVA is always configured as 4 path Multibus Failover with both controllers being active.

This has been this way since VCS1.x.

Secure path supports active/active storage controller arrays. SP supports Load Balancing of Paths as well.

MPIO supports Active/active storage controllers as well, there is a MPIO manager though like there is a SP Manager (Unless that has changed in the past 4 months).


Steven

[Barry Devillier]

I think my terminology might not be correct. I am comparing the EVA controllers to say the XP controllers being active/active.

[Steven Clementi]

Also, Secure Path has been around for 4+ years (at least). MPIO has been talked about since 2002 and finally more available with the Release of Windows Server 2003. The proplem is that the storage companies needed to write the dsm's for their particular storage subsystems and have only recently been getting around to it. Until recently, there was not much support from Microsoft since they are the "Software" company. MS did their job in making the functionality available in the OS, but dropped the real task in the hardware vendors laps. (Which is understandable since the engineer's at MS don't know the specifics about all the different storage arrays available.)


Steven

[Steven Clementi]

<--- does not know how the XP works (unfortunately, maybe soon though)

[David Tapper_1 · Accepted solution]

Hi,

The EVA is not active/active.
A virtual disk is only accessed from one controller at the time. In a real active/active configuration the virtual disk can be accessed from both controllers at the same time. The XP-systems are real active/active.

You can use secure path or preferred path to load balance between the controllers, but it is not a "real" active/active configuration.

Best regards,
David Tapper

[Christian Schwartz-Søre]

It's obviously a matter of definition.

The same story applies to clustering concepts with active/active or active/passive configurations.
It's a matter of definition. People are using the terms randomly sometimes thinking they are saying one thing when they infact are relaying a different message.

The EVA's are active/active in the sense that both controllers are active. The MSA1K/15K are active/passive since only 1 controller is active at a time.

Merry Xmas.
Christian

[Uwe Zessin]

For the MSA1000 / MSA1500 it is called 'active/standby' - sounds better ;-)

The standby controller is still presenting LUNs so that the multipath software 'knows' there are redundant paths. It is just that, unlike the EVA, *all* LUNs are either 'ready' or 'not ready' on a single controller.

[Derek_31]

The terms that I think are more accurate are:

active/passive: MSA-1000/1500
active/active non-concurrent: EVA
active/active concurrent: XP

I hear the next version of the EVA due in 05 will be active/active concurrent.