NS0-157 · Question #36
A customer enables Flash Pool with SSD storage pools for an HA pair using a single SSD hot spare. The client has assigned aggregates from only cl-01 to Flash Pool storage pool. One of the SSDs in…
The correct answer is A. The SSD hot spare is owned by cl-02. In NetApp ONTAP, SSD hot spares can only automatically replace failed SSDs in a storage pool if the spare is owned by the same node. Since the single SSD hot spare belongs to cl-02 but the storage pool is assigned to cl-01 aggregates, the replacement cannot occur.
Question
A customer enables Flash Pool with SSD storage pools for an HA pair using a single SSD hot spare. The client has assigned aggregates from only cl-01 to Flash Pool storage pool. One of the SSDs in the storage pool fails and the customer observes that the SSd hot spare did not take the place of the failed drive. Why did this happen?
Options
- AThe SSD hot spare is owned by cl-02.
- Bcl-01 contains an SSD aggregate.
- CThe minimum spare count option is set to 0.
- DThe SSD storage pool already contained the maximum number of disks.
How the community answered
(18 responses)- A44% (8)
- B33% (6)
- C6% (1)
- D17% (3)
Why each option
In NetApp ONTAP, SSD hot spares can only automatically replace failed SSDs in a storage pool if the spare is owned by the same node. Since the single SSD hot spare belongs to cl-02 but the storage pool is assigned to cl-01 aggregates, the replacement cannot occur.
Disk ownership in clustered ONTAP is node-specific, meaning a spare disk owned by cl-02 cannot be used to rebuild or replace a failed disk in a storage pool allocated to cl-01 aggregates. Because only one SSD hot spare exists and it belongs to cl-02, there is no eligible spare on cl-01, so the automatic replacement process does not trigger.
The presence of an SSD aggregate on cl-01 is unrelated to spare disk replacement eligibility; aggregates and Flash Pool storage pools are separate constructs that do not block one another.
The minimum spare count option controls ONTAP low-spare warnings but does not gate whether an available spare is used to replace a failed drive.
A maximum disk count limit would prevent adding new allocations to the storage pool, but spare replacement happens within the existing pool structure and is not blocked by a disk count ceiling.
Concept tested: Flash Pool SSD hot spare node ownership in HA pairs
Source: https://docs.netapp.com/us-en/ontap/disks-aggregates/flash-pool-aggregate-caching-policies-concept.html
Topics
Community Discussion
No community discussion yet for this question.