Dell Powervault 220s Backend Storage

[gmatteson]

I have two dell servers configured in cluster mode for access to a dpv220s. i have two of these setups, one works great, the other one i just finished installing and received the following error when bootting up the second server into the backend storage.

vmbha2:0:0:1 may be a snapshot: disable access. see resignaturing in san config guide.

For ESX servers sharing and seeing the same LUN. do they mean that the vmfs3 storage must have the same scsi/device ID? e.g. vmhba1:0:0:1 on both servers? i would assume this was the case but on my first (esx powervault cluster) these are different, server one see's the pv as vmhba:2:0:0:1 and server two sees it as vmhba:3:0:0:2.... can someone explain this to me? i am new to the 'backend' storage sharing... Thanks!!

[christianZ · Accepted solution]

I have two dell servers configured in cluster mode

for access to a dpv220s. i have two of these setups,

one works great, the other one i just finished

installing and received the following error when

bootting up the second server into the backend

storage.

vmbha2:0:0:1 may be a snapshot: disable access. see

resignaturing in san config guide.

I'm afraid your system (dpv220s) isn't supported and therefore you can maybe attach one host to it but by 2 hosts you gets the error because the 2 hosts couldn't share the same lun (lun id must be the same).

In addition I saw this error on my raid controller (perc) and after fw update the error went away.

[happyhammer]

have you set the scsi ID in the PV220 controller setup to to initiator ID 7 on node 1 and initiator ID 6 on node 2

[gmatteson]

thanks, yes i have. server 1 is set to 6 server 2 is set to 7. server 2 can see the powervault vmfs3 if i select "add storage" and server 1 is already using it.. for some reason i can't get it to actually add it.. is it because server 1 scsi lun is 5:0:0:1 and server 2 is 2:0:0:0?... any way I can change server 2 so that it would be 2:0:0:1?

[gmatteson]

I can send screenshots if any one needs it. I think it would explain what I am seeing-

[gmatteson]

what was throwing me for a loop was that it was all set up right!!! did a firmware downgrade to 351x for the perc/4dc and there we have it, works just like it should be decided to take christianZ option