HI,
I now been told that its also a Scale license violation to mix Lenovo DSS with 
IBM ESS in same cluster

Mvh Roger Eriksson
--------------------------------------------------------
IBM Partner Technical Specialist Storage
Phone: +46-70-7933518
E-mail: roger_eriks...@se.ibm.com<mailto:roger_eriks...@se.ibm.com>
IBM Storage User Group Sweden next live meeting 29-30 May 2024 @IBM Innovation 
Studio Kista, Sweden
Registration links and agenda to be avail in April 24

From: gpfsug-discuss <gpfsug-discuss-boun...@gpfsug.org> on behalf of ROGER 
ERIKSSON <roger_eriks...@se.ibm.com>
Date: Monday, 15 January 2024 at 11:32
To: gpfsug main discussion list <gpfsug-discuss@gpfsug.org>, Dorigo Alvise 
<alvise.dor...@psi.ch>
Subject: [EXTERNAL] Re: [gpfsug-discuss] Merge of IBM and Lenovo building 
blocks: issue with topology discover
Hi, Even if this would work technically, as far as Im aware its not supported 
to have Lenovo GSS and IBM ESS in same cluster, for support reasons. If you go 
ahead anyway, you might get into problems if you ever need to call for support. 
Mvh
ZjQcmQRYFpfptBannerStart
This Message Is From an External Sender
This message came from outside your organization.
<https://us-phishalarm-ewt.proofpoint.com/EWT/v1/PjiDSg!1e-trJ5zRvm6FYv7uYFFbjHNG_VRoc1Roosj_ErEmH-GSznRojzv28buUTfopz7AYMXFf0AVgsP9o3csPOf2c4Gqx6rRHVO3drmaZyZMwz5Vmlp1wG2w4HDXGoS9pA7RI1O7hmR-BfpQhgc$>
Report Suspicious 
<https://us-phishalarm-ewt.proofpoint.com/EWT/v1/PjiDSg!1e-trJ5zRvm6FYv7uYFFbjHNG_VRoc1Roosj_ErEmH-GSznRojzv28buUTfopz7AYMXFf0AVgsP9o3csPOf2c4Gqx6rRHVO3drmaZyZMwz5Vmlp1wG2w4HDXGoS9pA7RI1O7hmR-BfpQhgc$>


ZjQcmQRYFpfptBannerEnd
Hi,
Even if this would work technically, as far as Im aware its not supported to 
have Lenovo GSS and IBM ESS in same cluster, for support reasons.
If you go ahead anyway, you might get into problems if you ever need to call 
for support.

Mvh Roger Eriksson
--------------------------------------------------------
IBM Partner Technical Specialist Storage
Phone: +46-70-7933518
E-mail: roger_eriks...@se.ibm.com<mailto:roger_eriks...@se.ibm.com>
IBM Storage User Group Sweden next live meeting 29-30 May 2024 @IBM Innovation 
Studio Kista, Sweden
Registration links and agenda to be avail in April 24

From: gpfsug-discuss <gpfsug-discuss-boun...@gpfsug.org> on behalf of Dorigo 
Alvise <alvise.dor...@psi.ch>
Date: Monday, 15 January 2024 at 10:29
To: gpfsug-discuss@gpfsug.org <gpfsug-discuss@gpfsug.org>
Subject: [EXTERNAL] [gpfsug-discuss] Merge of IBM and Lenovo building blocks: 
issue with topology discover
Dear All, Happy new year to everyone! My goal here at the Paul Scherrer 
Institut is to merge two different GPFS building blocks. In partucular, these 
are not the same technology or not even the same brand: - an IBM ESS-3500 (a 
NVMe/Performance
Dear All,
Happy new year to everyone!

My goal here at the Paul Scherrer Institut is to merge  two different GPFS 
building blocks. In partucular, these are not the same technology or not even 
the same brand:
- an IBM ESS-3500 (a NVMe/Performance storage system) consisting of a Power9 
confluent node and two AMD canisters, and 12 NVMe drives
- a Lenovo G242 "hybrid" consisting of 4 HDD enclosures, 2 SSD enclosures, 1 
Intel support node and 2 Intel storage nodes.

The final configuration I would expect is a single building block with 4 IO 
nodes, 3 declustered array: 1 for HDDs, 1 for SSDs, 1 for NVMe (the last one to 
be used as a cache pool).

First of all, I would like to know if anyone has already tried this solution 
successfully.

Then, below is the description of what I have done.

I will preface by saying that I was able to configure the two storage clusters 
separately without any problem; therefore, I would exclude any inherent problem 
in each building block (which was installed from scratch). But when I try to 
have a single cluster, with different node classes, I have problems.
The steps I followed (based on documentation I found in IBM pages, 
https://www.ibm.com/docs/en/ess-p8/5.3.1?topic=command-outline-mmvdisk-use-case)
 are as follows:

1 access one of the 2 building blocks (that already has a storage cluster 
configured, with no recoverygroups defined)
2 run "mmaddnode -N <the_two_IO_nodes_to_add_from_the_other_BB>"
3 mmchlicense...
3 mmvdisk nodeclass create ... to isolate the two "new" IO nodes in a dedicated 
nodeclass for the purpose of differentiating configuration parameters, 
connected drive topology, and then recovery groups
4 perform topology discovery with: mmvdisk server list --node-class ess 
--disk-topology

In the following the cluster and node classes:




Node  Daemon node name  IP address      Admin node name  Designation
----------------------------------------------------------------------
  1   sfdssio1.psi.ch   129.129.241.67  sfdssio1.psi.ch  quorum-manager
  2   sfdssio2.psi.ch   129.129.241.68  sfdssio2.psi.ch  quorum-manager
  3   sfessio1.psi.ch   129.129.241.27  sfessio1.psi.ch  quorum-manager
  4   sfessio2.psi.ch   129.129.241.28  sfessio2.psi.ch  quorum-manager

Node Class Name       Members
--------------------- 
-----------------------------------------------------------
ess                   sfessio1.psi.ch,sfessio2.psi.ch
dss                   sfdssio1.psi.ch,sfdssio2.psi.ch

The "mmnodeadd" operation was performed while logged into sfdssio1 (which 
belongs to the Lenovo G242).
Then:



[root@sfdssio1 ~]# mmvdisk server list --node-class ess --disk-topology

node                                       needs    matching
number  server                            attention   metric   disk topology
------  --------------------------------  ---------  --------  -------------
    3  sfessio1.psi.ch                   yes               -  unmatched server 
topology
    4  sfessio2.psi.ch                   yes               -  unmatched server 
topology

mmvdisk: To see what needs attention, use the command:
mmvdisk:     mmvdisk server list -N sfessio1.psi.ch --disk-topology -L
mmvdisk:     mmvdisk server list -N sfessio2.psi.ch --disk-topology -L

[root@sfdssio1 ~]# mmvdisk server list -N sfessio1.psi.ch --disk-topology -L
Unable to find a matching topology specification for topology file 
'/var/mmfs/tmp/cmdTmpDir.mmvdisk.1468913/pdisk-topology.sfessio1.psi.ch'.

Topology component identification is using these CST stanza files:

   /usr/lpp/mmfs/data/compSpec-1304.stanza
   /usr/lpp/mmfs/data/compSpec-1400.stanza
   /usr/lpp/mmfs/data/cst/compSpec-Lenovo.stanza
   /usr/lpp/mmfs/data/cst/compSpec-topology.stanza

Server component: serverType 'ESS3500-5141-FN2' serverArch 'x86_64' serverName 
'sfessio1.psi.ch'

Enclosure components: 1 found connected to HBAs
Enclosure component: serialNumber '78E4395' enclosureClass 'unknown'

HBA components: none found connected to enclosures

Cabling: enclosure '78E4395' controller '' cabled to HBA slot 'UNKNOWN' port 
'unknown'

Disks: 12 SSDs 0 HDDs
NVRAM: 0 devices/partitions

Unable to match these components to a serverTopology specification.
mmvdisk: Command failed. Examine previous error messages to determine cause.



If I try to do a symmetric operation (I access an IO node of the IBM ESS3500 
and try to add Lenovo nodes, trying to discover their drive topology) I get the 
same error; but, of course, the topology involved this time is that of the 
Lenovo hardware.

Now, I suspect there is a (hidden?) step I would be supposed to know, but 
unfortunately I don't (this is my first experience with different and 
etherogenous building blocks merge). So I'd like to receive from you any 
suggestions, including a better documentation page (if any) covering this 
particular use case I have.

Hope the description of the context is clear enough, in case it is not I 
apologize and please just ask for any further details required to understand my 
environment.

Thank you very much,

    Alvise Dorigo

Unless otherwise stated above:

IBM Svenska AB
Organisationsnummer: 556026-6883
Address: 164 92 Stockholm

Unless otherwise stated above:

IBM Svenska AB
Organisationsnummer: 556026-6883
Address: 164 92 Stockholm
_______________________________________________
gpfsug-discuss mailing list
gpfsug-discuss at gpfsug.org
http://gpfsug.org/mailman/listinfo/gpfsug-discuss_gpfsug.org

Reply via email to