Including Disk Unit in Device Parity Protection - IBM AS400

This is a discussion on Including Disk Unit in Device Parity Protection - IBM AS400 ; Today I added a disk unit to my system using concurrent maintenance, then added it to the ASP then included the unit in the Raid-5 array which took FOREVER (about 4 hrs) and my system practically ground to a halt ...

+ Reply to Thread
Results 1 to 4 of 4

Thread: Including Disk Unit in Device Parity Protection

  1. Including Disk Unit in Device Parity Protection

    Today I added a disk unit to my system using concurrent maintenance,
    then added it to the ASP then included the unit in the Raid-5 array
    which took FOREVER (about 4 hrs) and my system practically ground to a
    halt until it was done.

    I have added disk units before and dont remember it taking that long or
    having such an impact on system performance.

    Should I have included the disk unit in the array BEFORE adding it to
    the ASP ? can someone give a warm fuzzy feeling that if i do it that
    way I will not experience the delay and performance degradation ?


  2. Re: Including Disk Unit in Device Parity Protection

    ozz666@yahoo.com wrote:
    > Today I added a disk unit to my system using concurrent maintenance,
    > then added it to the ASP then included the unit in the Raid-5 array
    > which took FOREVER (about 4 hrs) and my system practically ground to a
    > halt until it was done.
    >
    > I have added disk units before and dont remember it taking that long or
    > having such an impact on system performance.
    >
    > Should I have included the disk unit in the array BEFORE adding it to
    > the ASP ? can someone give a warm fuzzy feeling that if i do it that
    > way I will not experience the delay and performance degradation ?
    >

    AFAIK you cannot start any protection unless you already added a disk to
    the current disk configuration. What you could do was to start the
    protection before starting the operating system, in other words in
    dedicated mode vs. concurrent mode as you did.

    --
    Dr.Ugo Gagliardelli,Modena,ItalyCertifiedUindoscrasherAñe joAlcoolInside
    Spaccamaroni andate a cagare/Spammers not welcome/Spammers vão à merda
    Spamers iros a la mierda/Spamers allez vous faire foutre/Spammers loop
    schijten/Spammers macht Euch vom Acker/Spamerzy wypierdalac'

  3. Re: Including Disk Unit in Device Parity Protection


    Dr.UgoGagliardelli wrote:
    > ozz666@yahoo.com wrote:
    > > Today I added a disk unit to my system using concurrent maintenance,
    > > then added it to the ASP then included the unit in the Raid-5 array
    > > which took FOREVER (about 4 hrs) and my system practically ground to a
    > > halt until it was done.
    > >
    > > I have added disk units before and dont remember it taking that long or
    > > having such an impact on system performance.
    > >
    > > Should I have included the disk unit in the array BEFORE adding it to
    > > the ASP ? can someone give a warm fuzzy feeling that if i do it that
    > > way I will not experience the delay and performance degradation ?
    > >

    > AFAIK you cannot start any protection unless you already added a disk to
    > the current disk configuration. What you could do was to start the
    > protection before starting the operating system, in other words in
    > dedicated mode vs. concurrent mode as you did.
    >
    > --
    > Dr.Ugo Gagliardelli,Modena,ItalyCertifiedUindoscrasherAñe joAlcoolInside
    > Spaccamaroni andate a cagare/Spammers not welcome/Spammers vão à merda
    > Spamers iros a la mierda/Spamers allez vous faire foutre/Spammers loop
    > schijten/Spammers macht Euch vom Acker/Spamerzy wypierdalac'


    When you add/insert the disk it becomes non-configured. At that point
    you should include to the array. The disk is still non-configured. Then
    you add the disk to the ASP. This is the normal process. Based on the
    release you can do under SST. I prefer to do all disk operations under
    DST, time and schedules permitting.


  4. Re: Including Disk Unit in Device Parity Protection

    Thanks for the reply, i just did the include and then added to the ASP
    (reverse of how I did it before) and it only took about 30min with no
    noticable impact on performance.

    GORT400 wrote:
    > Dr.UgoGagliardelli wrote:
    > > ozz666@yahoo.com wrote:
    > > > Today I added a disk unit to my system using concurrent maintenance,
    > > > then added it to the ASP then included the unit in the Raid-5 array
    > > > which took FOREVER (about 4 hrs) and my system practically ground to a
    > > > halt until it was done.
    > > >
    > > > I have added disk units before and dont remember it taking that long or
    > > > having such an impact on system performance.
    > > >
    > > > Should I have included the disk unit in the array BEFORE adding it to
    > > > the ASP ? can someone give a warm fuzzy feeling that if i do it that
    > > > way I will not experience the delay and performance degradation ?
    > > >

    > > AFAIK you cannot start any protection unless you already added a disk to
    > > the current disk configuration. What you could do was to start the
    > > protection before starting the operating system, in other words in
    > > dedicated mode vs. concurrent mode as you did.
    > >
    > > --
    > > Dr.Ugo Gagliardelli,Modena,ItalyCertifiedUindoscrasherAñe joAlcoolInside
    > > Spaccamaroni andate a cagare/Spammers not welcome/Spammers vão à merda
    > > Spamers iros a la mierda/Spamers allez vous faire foutre/Spammers loop
    > > schijten/Spammers macht Euch vom Acker/Spamerzy wypierdalac'

    >
    > When you add/insert the disk it becomes non-configured. At that point
    > you should include to the array. The disk is still non-configured. Then
    > you add the disk to the ASP. This is the normal process. Based on the
    > release you can do under SST. I prefer to do all disk operations under
    > DST, time and schedules permitting.



+ Reply to Thread