A customer migrating data from a legacy FAS8020 system to a new AFF A250 system via MetroCluster over IP. Which method set would be supported to migrate the data?

A customer migrating data from a legacy FAS8020 system to a new AFF A250 system via MetroCluster over IP. Which method set would be supported to migrate the data?

• A. Host-based copy migration method
• B. Configure a SnapMirror copy between the FAS8020 and the AFF A250 systems
• C. Both host-based copy migration method and SnapMirror copy
• D. Neither method is supported

Answer: (C)

In a MetroCluster over IP migration, you have two practical options for moving data: array-based replication and host-assisted copy. SnapMirror is designed for moving data between NetApp systems, including from an older FAS platform to a newer AFF, and across a MetroCluster pair. It lets you pre-copy data and then perform a final sync with minimal downtime, preserving data consistency and reducing disruption during cutover. Because the migration is across a mixed hardware path (FAS to AFF) and within a MetroCluster, SnapMirror between the source and destination arrays is fully supported and often the backbone of a non-disruptive migration. At the same time, host-based copy migration leverages the hosts to copy data from the source volumes to the destination, which can be useful for workloads that require host-level control, specific application file layouts, or when coordinating with application downtime and quiescing. As long as the hosts can reach both storage systems in the MetroCluster, this method is also supported and can be used either alongside SnapMirror or for particular data sets. Thus, both methods are supported for this migration scenario, giving you flexibility to choose or combine approaches based on downtime tolerance, workload characteristics, and migration timing.

In a MetroCluster over IP migration, you have two practical options for moving data: array-based replication and host-assisted copy. SnapMirror is designed for moving data between NetApp systems, including from an older FAS platform to a newer AFF, and across a MetroCluster pair. It lets you pre-copy data and then perform a final sync with minimal downtime, preserving data consistency and reducing disruption during cutover. Because the migration is across a mixed hardware path (FAS to AFF) and within a MetroCluster, SnapMirror between the source and destination arrays is fully supported and often the backbone of a non-disruptive migration.

At the same time, host-based copy migration leverages the hosts to copy data from the source volumes to the destination, which can be useful for workloads that require host-level control, specific application file layouts, or when coordinating with application downtime and quiescing. As long as the hosts can reach both storage systems in the MetroCluster, this method is also supported and can be used either alongside SnapMirror or for particular data sets.

Thus, both methods are supported for this migration scenario, giving you flexibility to choose or combine approaches based on downtime tolerance, workload characteristics, and migration timing.