Topics started by penguindows
I want to pull alerts from my cluster using ncli. however, the alert message gets truncated. here is an example: code:ncli> alerts ls max-alerts=1 ID : XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX Message : Unable to locate VM(s) VM1, VM2, VM3, VM4, VM5, VM6, VM7, VM8, VM9, VM10, VM11, VM12, VM13, VM15, V... protected by protection domain 'PDgroup2'. Notice the truncated portion with '...'. Is there a switch i can send with ncli to prevent that truncation?
What options are available within nutanix to speed up replication to a remote site? The best i am able to get on a single stream is about 20MBps (160mbps) with an aggregate speed of about 60MBps (480mbps) spread out over several streams. However, we have a 10gbps link between sites, so i expected to get better throughput.
We wanted to look at deploying teradata on to our vmware / nutanix environment. Does anyone have expereince with this? I'm hearing that Teradata does nto support nfs for datastores when virtualized, but the way nutanix handles disks negates a lot of the typical nfs problems. Are there any best practices to follow for teradata, and has anyone had experience with this?
This one is stumping me. I opened a low priority ticket to get some official info, but i figured i would ask here to see if anyone else has had a similar experience: Background: we received an alert from prism central that one of our cluster's was going to run out of CPU soon. I checked in the hypervisor (esxi) and in prism element and in central under analysis but i could not find an issue. Then, i checked planning and it shows us running out of CPU very soon. At first i thought the initial load up was skewing the data, but when i looked closer, i noticed that the value planning was using for our current usage was at 50Ghz, when the hypervisor is reporting 12Ghz (cluster of 3).I pulled all of the other cluster's planning data and all of them have the same problem, CPU usage is being greatly over reported on the planning chart. Charts under analysis agree with the hypervisor, but these are looking at % usage, not hz. What gives? is there a bug in how planning is calculatin
Login to the community
Login with your account
Enter your username or e-mail address. We'll send you an e-mail with instructions to reset your password.