And after thinking about it, I even get the idea. C'mon guys, you gotta do better than that. I can find no documentation about this behavior in any of the standard docs - only in articles I stumble across after I run into the problem. I can never get rid of it because I don't have anywhere to put the new merged virtual disk.Īnd it gets worse. If I am low on SAN space, I'm stuck with this snapshot forever. And this only works if I have enough SAN space to handle something like 2.5X of what I'm actually using. ![]() And I may need to do all this with my VM - my company email server - down. To delete this snapshot, I will need to provision a whole new LUN with 500+ GB of storage, copy my virtual disks to it, then remove the snapshot. If I'm reading the article correctly, the real issue is, snapshot removal is wildly, insanely inefficient because it makes a whole new copy of all the blocks. So by definition, lots of data is removed. ![]() Removing a snapshot gets rid of old copies of blocks. The snapshot contains old copies of blocks replaced by new copies of blocks. ![]() The article says, "So in actual no data is removed." This cannot be true. I apparently need (original disk size + snapshot size) free space in the LUN to get rid of a snapshot? The upgrade is done, now it's time to remove the snapshot. And I have a thin provisioned virtual disk with 200 GB used and allocated, plus a snapshot I took last week before some upgrades at about 40 GB. I have a storage domain with 500 GB total, 121 GB available.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |