Solaris sd driver and lpfc - Storage

This is a discussion on Solaris sd driver and lpfc - Storage ; Just a quick question. I recall in years past that if sd.conf was pre- populated with entries that a boot time delay penalty would occur which was supposed to be something like 3 seconds per lun for luns that really ...

+ Reply to Thread
Results 1 to 2 of 2

Thread: Solaris sd driver and lpfc

  1. Solaris sd driver and lpfc

    Just a quick question. I recall in years past that if sd.conf was pre-
    populated with entries that a boot time delay penalty would occur
    which was supposed to be something like 3 seconds per lun for luns
    that really weren't available.

    My question is does solaris and the sd driver still behave this way?

    If the target supports REPORT LUNS will the solaris scsi layer still
    probe for every lun listed in sd.conf? I have a host in a test
    environment with several hundred luns configured in sd.conf for my
    lpfc target bindings. My array supports the REPORT LUNS command. Will
    the extra luns listed for an lpfc target in sd.conf cause a boot delay
    or is it a wash because all the lun information is retrieved via
    REPORT LUNS?

    Can anyone please clear this up for me.

    Regards,
    Vic


  2. Re: Solaris sd driver and lpfc

    If I'm not mistaken the advise is to keep sd.conf as small as possible,
    only entering the luns that really exist.

    On the other hand, booting Solaris can take ages, so a few more seconds
    who cares.

    If you're using that many luns, check your num-bufs and num-iocbs
    settings. I would set them to 2048 and 4096.

    If you're brave, and your Solaris version is ok, you can consider
    changing to the Solaris San Foundation Software V 4.4.12. It will be
    faster, and no need to use sd.conf anymore. You can find more
    information at the Emulex site.

    victor.engle@gmail.com wrote:
    > Just a quick question. I recall in years past that if sd.conf was pre-
    > populated with entries that a boot time delay penalty would occur
    > which was supposed to be something like 3 seconds per lun for luns
    > that really weren't available.
    >
    > My question is does solaris and the sd driver still behave this way?
    >
    > If the target supports REPORT LUNS will the solaris scsi layer still
    > probe for every lun listed in sd.conf? I have a host in a test
    > environment with several hundred luns configured in sd.conf for my
    > lpfc target bindings. My array supports the REPORT LUNS command. Will
    > the extra luns listed for an lpfc target in sd.conf cause a boot delay
    > or is it a wash because all the lun information is retrieved via
    > REPORT LUNS?
    >
    > Can anyone please clear this up for me.
    >
    > Regards,
    > Vic
    >


+ Reply to Thread