[Search for users] [Overall Top Noters] [List of all Conferences] [Download this site]

Conference vaxaxp::vmsnotes

Title:VAX and Alpha VMS
Notice:This is a new VMSnotes, please read note 2.1
Moderator:VAXAXP::BERNARDO
Created:Thu Jan 23 1997
Last Modified:Fri Jun 06 1997
Last Successful Update:Fri Jun 06 1997
Number of topics:703
Total number of notes:3722

578.0. "Reconfiguration of shadow sets question." by SNOFS1::RASMUSSEN () Sat May 10 1997 06:21

    A major customer currently has a 3 disk shadow set over two sites. Both
    sites are OpenVMS 6.2 H3. 
                   
    In the main site they have two disks shadowed via host based shadowing
    through CI to 2xHSJ40s (one disk on each HSJ40). The third member is at
    a remote site but also on a HSJ40. All disks are therefore HSJ40 based
    and all are currently configured as JBOD (from HSJ40 perspective).
                                                               
    The first question posed is if the two main site disks are moved to one
    HSJ40 and made hardware RAID shadowed does the remote disk (JBOD) need
    to be forced into a single disk shadow set for compatibility with the
    main site? (Yes all disks will be of the same size).   
                                         
    The second question is, given they do a backup for safety sake, will
    they be required to restore any of the disks (either local or remote
    site) after the relevant HSJ40s are reconfigured? 
    
    The third question is if the 2xHSJ40s (in a HSJ42) are both connected to
    each of the the disks in the RAID set ie. multi-pathing of the RAID
    set, will the failure of either HSJ40 cause any likely problems in
    availability of the RAID set (assume HSOF 3.1, writeback cache etc)
    from OpenVMS perspective?                               
       
    Any related experience would be most welcome.
    
    Wayne
    
    
    Note: FYI the customer has two VAX 7800s on the main site and one at the
    remote conncected via fibre. Also they have 3xHJS42s, 2 at the main
    site and one at the  remote. The configuration used above was
    simplified to minimise the context for the questions. This paragraph
    was added to minimise the likelihood of getting a batch of "why do/don't
    they" & "have you thought about" questions in reply to this note. 
T.RTitleUserPersonal
Name
DateLines
578.1GODOWN::MARSHALLPaulG.Marshall, Systems Consultant, SPR_CSCSun May 11 1997 22:0411
    Wayne
    
    I have been following up the first point and talking with the customer,
    call me off line please.
    
    Looks like the first point may be possible but I'm unsure whether the
    customer will see any benefit...
    
    Regards
    Paul
    
578.2AMCFAC::RABAHYdtn 471-5160, outside 1-810-347-5160Mon May 12 1997 15:4814
re .0:

Good questions.  The VMS shadow driver will only care about geometry -- if the
geometry remains the same when you form the controller-based RAID 1 then you'll
be ok.  You need to ask the storage folks if they change the geometry presented
to the OS when they form such sets.

From the SHOW DEVICE /FULL command look for the following section;

    Total blocks              832527    Sectors per track                    62
    Total cylinders             1492    Tracks per cylinder                   9

Your third question depends on how the controller fails.  If it starts a fire
whilst failing that eventually takes out the other controller, well, then ...