VV space

Post Reply
tiger_woods
Posts: 12
Joined: Fri Oct 12, 2012 6:51 pm

VV space

Post by tiger_woods »

Hi,

After running the unmap command on the ESX host, the Used User size reduced significantly, however the Reserved space on the VV is still the same and has a higher value.

I tried to run a compactcpg, and Inserv came back saying the CPG is already compact. I'm assuming the compactcpg runs automatic as I have the DO and AO license installed?

Can I free up chunklets and reduce the Reserved User Space value? Or is this just best left alone?

Thanks!
Fastjack
Posts: 14
Joined: Wed Jun 20, 2012 5:55 am

Re: VV space

Post by Fastjack »

Hi,

the reserved space should be cleaned up by background process that is running automatically. In my experience this can take a very long time.
AFAIK there are no tuning commands or other tricks that would speed this up (we asked HP support as well). So if anybody knows another way or has more info on this I would be very interested as well.
User avatar
Richard Siemers
Site Admin
Posts: 1333
Joined: Tue Aug 18, 2009 10:35 pm
Location: Dallas, Texas

Re: VV space

Post by Richard Siemers »

I'm not at the version you guys are yet so I can't test myself, but is it possible the zero_detect policy needs to be enabled on the VV (LUN) inside the 3PAR?
Richard Siemers
The views and opinions expressed are my own and do not necessarily reflect those of my employer.
tiger_woods
Posts: 12
Joined: Fri Oct 12, 2012 6:51 pm

Re: VV space

Post by tiger_woods »

Fastjack wrote:Hi,

the reserved space should be cleaned up by background process that is running automatically. In my experience this can take a very long time.
AFAIK there are no tuning commands or other tricks that would speed this up (we asked HP support as well). So if anybody knows another way or has more info on this I would be very interested as well.


Ok, I'll keep an eye on it. Hopefully the space gets reclaimed eventually. Thanks.
tiger_woods
Posts: 12
Joined: Fri Oct 12, 2012 6:51 pm

Re: VV space

Post by tiger_woods »

Richard Siemers wrote:I'm not at the version you guys are yet so I can't test myself, but is it possible the zero_detect policy needs to be enabled on the VV (LUN) inside the 3PAR?


Hi Richard - Yes the VV is 'zero_detect' enabled.
Fastjack
Posts: 14
Joined: Wed Jun 20, 2012 5:55 am

Re: VV space

Post by Fastjack »

Richard Siemers wrote:I'm not at the version you guys are yet so I can't test myself, but is it possible the zero_detect policy needs to be enabled on the VV (LUN) inside the 3PAR?

All our volumes have zero detect enabled. Otherwise the used space within the volumes would not have shrunk leading to the large difference (used space vs. reserved space).
User avatar
Richard Siemers
Site Admin
Posts: 1333
Joined: Tue Aug 18, 2009 10:35 pm
Location: Dallas, Texas

Re: VV space

Post by Richard Siemers »

Fastjack wrote:All our volumes have zero detect enabled. Otherwise the used space within the volumes would not have shrunk leading to the large difference (used space vs. reserved space).


Good point.

I've seen similar "slow to shrink" behavior after manually zeroing out luns with sdelete, perhaps ESX and unmap are irrelevant details to the thin reclaim behavior you see. My hypothesis formed in my case was that there is an algorithm that prevents excessive allocation/deallocation work and to prevent excessive backend fragmentation of your luns.
Richard Siemers
The views and opinions expressed are my own and do not necessarily reflect those of my employer.
TinDog
Posts: 5
Joined: Fri Jan 25, 2013 7:15 am

Re: VV space

Post by TinDog »

Try running 'freespace' against the VV. You can't have snapshots when using this command.

AFAIK, compactcpg are not automatic but can be scheduled with createsched
Post Reply