toasters October 1997

toasters@lists.teaparty.net

32 participants
47 discussions

Re: More capacity on lower-end filers
by hitz＠netapp.com 10 Feb '98

10 Feb '98

> On Thu, 12 Jun 1997, Dave Hitz wrote: > > > > Although marketing certainly has input, the space restrictions also > > come from engineering droids. During normal operation the smaller > > machines could certainly handle more disk, but the time required for > > something like RAID reconstruction could get dangerously long. > > Is this the reason why the F210 can still only use around 50GB of > disk, even though it can physically accomodate more using 9GB drives? In order for a RAID reconstruction to complete, you have to read all of the data on all of the other disks. So RAID reconstruction time is proportional the the amount of data, not proportional to the number of disks. Dave Hitz hitz(a)netapp.com Network Appliance (408) 367-3106

8 10

Alpha future
by Gregory M. Paris 08 Nov '97

08 Nov '97

Any thoughts on what the Intel/Digital settlement means to NetApp and its customers? It sure looks (to me anyway) as though the Alpha is dead. -- Gregory M. Paris Senior Systems Administrator Bose Corporation Email: paris(a)bose.com The Mountain, MS#258 Phone: +1 508 766-4072 Framingham, MA 01701-9168 FAX: +1 508 820-0173

9 10

Re: raid swap question
by sirbruce＠ix.netcom.com 04 Nov '97

04 Nov '97

On 10/08/97 09:10:10 you wrote: >We have "raid swap"ed almost three shelves worth of drives into >an F330 at one time. The AE recommended this method as >being faster than installing all the drives at config >time and building that large file system from scratch. >This worked fine, but still takes a significant amount >of time. I think by "at one time" you still mean one at a time (a raid swap for each drive). >We later added a fourth shelf and "raid swap"ed all those >drives in at once. The filer was only off the net for >the length of time it took to halt/connect the SCSI cable/ >reboot. A few hours later, after the raid swap completes, >all the additional disk space shows up - it does not show >up one drive at a time. I don't quite understand this... if you added them while the filer was down, you didn't "raid swap" anything. And they show up immediately, not a few hours later. I think perhaps you are talking about *raid add*, i.e. actually adding the drives to the filesystem. In that case you can add them individually one drive at a time (and the filer would get the space on drive at a time), or you can raid add them all at once, in which case they'll all finish at about the same time. >Some comments regarding DLT drives - I have heard that you >want to keep them "streaming" (feed with data) or the >drive has to stop, wait for data, backup, reseek to the >stop point, and start again. This applies to both 4000/7000 >series. You pay a significant speed penalty for dropping >the drive out of streaming mode. Our word from Netapp is >that for an F230, they sell the FW/DIff card and it works, but >it is not officially QA'd in the system, but soon should be. Yes, streaming is important, but my point was I don't think a 7000 non-streaming is going to be much slower than a 4000 streaming. But, I could be wrong on this. In any case, there are *plenty* are start-stop behavior in a Netapp dump even locally, so I don't think you can avoid it. Bruce

2 1

Re: Dumping Clearcase Storage Pools (fwd)i
by Dave Compton 31 Oct '97

31 Oct '97

Gil Smith wrote: > Hey Dave, > > Did you know about the "toasters" mail list at mathworks? > One of our customers started this mailing list for owners > of netapp boxes to share information with each other. > > Anyway below is a question that was on the list just recently > related to clearcase. Thought you might be interrested in > the list and this question. > > --Gil > > ----- Forwarded message from Scott MacDonald ----- > > >From scott(a)msi-uk.com Fri Oct 31 06:51:22 1997 > Sender: scott(a)msi-uk.com > Message-ID: <3459EC09.38A8(a)msi-uk.com> > Date: Fri, 31 Oct 1997 14:32:41 +0000 > From: Scott MacDonald <scott(a)msi-uk.com> > Organization: Mobile Systems International Plc, UK > X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.01Gold (X11; I; SunOS 5.5 sun4m) > To: toasters(a)mathworks.com > Subject: Dumping Clearcase Storage Pools > > Does anyone have any experience using NetApp filers to hold > Clearcase storage pools, and if so, how did you manage the backups? > We're just about to move to them, and we think we should be able > to lock the VOBs, copy the db to the filer, then do a local dump > (from a snapshot) to DLT. > If anyone has any experience they wouldn't mind sharing, I'd > love to hear it. > TIA, > > Scott. > -- > _______________________________________________________________ > > Scott MacDonald Mobile Systems International Plc > Tel: 0171 971 8798 > System Administrator Fax: 0171 971 8712 > E-Mail: scott(a)msi-uk.com > _______________________________________________________________ > > ----- End of forwarded message from Scott MacDonald ----- Scott, We have been doing this for 7 or 8 months now. We have approximately 50 VOBs to backup on a daily basis. Our backups have dropped from around 7 hours to 1 hour and 1/2 hours. Basically this is what we do. Snapshots are set so that there is a snapshot at midnight. At 2357 we lock all the VOBs and wait for the snapshot. At around 0004 we copy the database files from every VOB to a backup directory on the NetApps, create links between this backup area and the source pools in the snapshot. Unlock the VOB and start copying the VOB data to tape. The tape process takes about 7-8 hours. But the most important thing is that our VOB are only locked for around 1 hour. The process has worked very well for us. Hope this helps. Dave

1 0

Dumping Clearcase Storage Pools
by Scott MacDonald 31 Oct '97

31 Oct '97

Does anyone have any experience using NetApp filers to hold Clearcase storage pools, and if so, how did you manage the backups? We're just about to move to them, and we think we should be able to lock the VOBs, copy the db to the filer, then do a local dump (from a snapshot) to DLT. If anyone has any experience they wouldn't mind sharing, I'd love to hear it. TIA, Scott. -- _______________________________________________________________ Scott MacDonald Mobile Systems International Plc Tel: 0171 971 8798 System Administrator Fax: 0171 971 8712 E-Mail: scott(a)msi-uk.com _______________________________________________________________

1 0

Solaris 2.6, multiple IP's and the Netapp?
by rasmus＠lerdorf.on.ca 31 Oct '97

31 Oct '97

Sun apparently changed something in the way multiple IP's assigned to a single interface behaves in Solaris 2.6. As soon as I turn on hme0:1 my Netapp mounted read/write file system starts behaving oddly. And, if I reboot the machine, then I get a permission denied message when I try to mount. I noticed that the Netapp's arp cache picked up the second ip as soon as I turned it on on the Solaris 2.6 box. On my Solaris 2.5.1 box that sits right next to it, its second IP never shows up in the Netapp arp table. And, the Solaris 2.5.1 box happily mounts things. I tried putting both of the Solaris 2.6 box's ip's in the Netapp /etc/exports file, but I still get a "permission denied" message when I try to mount. Turning off the interface and rebooting the Solaris 2.6 machine fixes things. I can mount the file system again. I really do need multiple IP addresses on these Solaris 2.6 machines though. Is there some sort of workaround that is a little less drastic than reverting to Solaris 2.5.1? (The Filer is a 630 running 4.1c if it makes a difference) -Rasmus

2 4

Re: Solaris 2.6, multiple IP's and the Netapp?
by sirbruce＠ix.netcom.com 31 Oct '97

31 Oct '97

On 10/30/97 22:32:23 you wrote: >I tried putting both of the Solaris 2.6 box's ip's in the Netapp >/etc/exports file, but I still get a "permission denied" message when I >try to mount. Turning off the interface and rebooting the Solaris 2.6 >machine fixes things. I can mount the file system again. I haven't had any experience with this explicitly, but if 2.6 is doing some-sort of "load-balancing" among IPs on the interface, there should be a way to turn this feature off. If not, you were on the right track with /etc/exports, but remember that you have to re-run exportfs (I prefer exportfs -av) on the filer for the changes to take effect. Then reboot the Solaris 2.6 client and see what happens. Bruce

2 1

Re: Source NDMP server hangs after successful dump?
by mds46523＠ggr.co.uk 30 Oct '97

30 Oct '97

Well I recognise it! It happened 9 times out of 10 when I was using NDMPCopy a month or so back. The source filer will eventually give up, but only after an hour or two... Because there are 5 sessions for NDMP on a given filer, and I was copying qtrees between filers, I had to spend lots'o time manually setting up and tearing down NDMPCopies - because I couldn't rely on a script keeping the copies going as fast as possible, and I was constrained by time. I also had anomalously low throughput on one pair of filers which remained constant no matter how many concurrent NDMPCopies I set running, and another pair would crash if I tried to set up concurrent NDMPCopies, though the throughput was sufficiently high (ten times the speed of the stable-but-slow pair) that that didn't impact the overall operation. In case you're wondering the first pair was pretty much identical to the second pair, give or take a shelf of disks or two. We've not yet figured out why the difference in stability or performance. The source filers were F540s, the targets were F630s, all on one FDDI ring with two E4000's running 2.5.1 fully and equivalently patched to the gills running the NDMPCopies. Nevertheless, I used to hate setting up back-to-back dump restores and NDMPCopy is gonna be a permanent fixture in our toolbox (until something even better happens 8) On Oct 30, 6:43, Brian Tao wrote: > Subject: Source NDMP server hangs after successful dump? > I downloaded ndmpcopy 1.1 from ftp.ndmp.org and used it to > duplicate the data across filers. In every case using four different > F230's, the dump/restore was successful, but the ndmpcopy never > exits, suggesting the source filer may be hung. All the data was > transferred, and the source filer is still alive and serving NFS, > except it doesn't know that the dump is finished. All the filers are > running 4.2a, as shipped. Is this a known problem? > > # ./ndmpcopy -v adm1-na1:/home/home1 adm1-na3:/home/home3 -sa root:******** -da root:******** > Connecting to adm1-na1. > Connecting to adm1-na3. > adm1-na1: CONNECT: Connection established. > adm1-na3: CONNECT: Connection established. > adm1-na1: LOG: DUMP: creating "snapshot_for_dump.1" snapshot. > adm1-na1: LOG: DUMP: Date of this level 0 dump: Wed Oct 29 12:11:30 1997 > adm1-na1: LOG: DUMP: Date of last level 0 dump: the epoch > adm1-na1: LOG: DUMP: Dumping /home/home1/ to NDMP connection > adm1-na1: LOG: DUMP: mapping (Pass I) [regular files] > adm1-na1: LOG: DUMP: mapping (Pass II) [directories] > adm1-na1: LOG: DUMP: estimated 3373500 tape blocks. > adm1-na1: LOG: DUMP: dumping (Pass III) [directories] > adm1-na1: LOG: DUMP: dumping (Pass IV) [regular files] > adm1-na1: LOG: DUMP: 15% done, finished in 0:27 > adm1-na1: LOG: DUMP: 32% done, finished in 0:20 > adm1-na1: LOG: DUMP: 49% done, finished in 0:15 > adm1-na1: LOG: DUMP: 66% done, finished in 0:10 > adm1-na1: LOG: DUMP: 82% done, finished in 0:05 > adm1-na1: LOG: DUMP: 99% done, finished in 0:00 > adm1-na3: HALT: The operation was successful! > Waiting for adm1-na1 to halt too. > (If it sits here forever, the transfer was successful, > but the source filer has hung. Press ^C.) > Elapsed time: 0 hours, 32 minutes, 10 seconds. > > ^C > 0.04u 0.00s 37:02.48 0.0% > > -- > Brian Tao (BT300, taob(a)netcom.ca) > "Though this be madness, yet there is method in't" >-- End of excerpt from Brian Tao -- -Mark, TSG Unix admin and support, int 782 4412, ext +44 1438 76 4412. ... an Englishman in London ...

1 0

Source NDMP server hangs after successful dump?
by Brian Tao 30 Oct '97

30 Oct '97

I downloaded ndmpcopy 1.1 from ftp.ndmp.org and used it to duplicate the data across filers. In every case using four different F230's, the dump/restore was successful, but the ndmpcopy never exits, suggesting the source filer may be hung. All the data was transferred, and the source filer is still alive and serving NFS, except it doesn't know that the dump is finished. All the filers are running 4.2a, as shipped. Is this a known problem? # ./ndmpcopy -v adm1-na1:/home/home1 adm1-na3:/home/home3 -sa root:******** -da root:******** Connecting to adm1-na1. Connecting to adm1-na3. adm1-na1: CONNECT: Connection established. adm1-na3: CONNECT: Connection established. adm1-na1: LOG: DUMP: creating "snapshot_for_dump.1" snapshot. adm1-na1: LOG: DUMP: Date of this level 0 dump: Wed Oct 29 12:11:30 1997 adm1-na1: LOG: DUMP: Date of last level 0 dump: the epoch adm1-na1: LOG: DUMP: Dumping /home/home1/ to NDMP connection adm1-na1: LOG: DUMP: mapping (Pass I) [regular files] adm1-na1: LOG: DUMP: mapping (Pass II) [directories] adm1-na1: LOG: DUMP: estimated 3373500 tape blocks. adm1-na1: LOG: DUMP: dumping (Pass III) [directories] adm1-na1: LOG: DUMP: dumping (Pass IV) [regular files] adm1-na1: LOG: DUMP: 15% done, finished in 0:27 adm1-na1: LOG: DUMP: 32% done, finished in 0:20 adm1-na1: LOG: DUMP: 49% done, finished in 0:15 adm1-na1: LOG: DUMP: 66% done, finished in 0:10 adm1-na1: LOG: DUMP: 82% done, finished in 0:05 adm1-na1: LOG: DUMP: 99% done, finished in 0:00 adm1-na3: HALT: The operation was successful! Waiting for adm1-na1 to halt too. (If it sits here forever, the transfer was successful, but the source filer has hung. Press ^C.) Elapsed time: 0 hours, 32 minutes, 10 seconds. ^C 0.04u 0.00s 37:02.48 0.0% -- Brian Tao (BT300, taob(a)netcom.ca) "Though this be madness, yet there is method in't"

1 0

Re: Alpha future
by mds46523＠ggr.co.uk 29 Oct '97

29 Oct '97

On Oct 29, 16:01, Alexei Rodriguez wrote: > Subject: Re: Alpha future > +--- In our lifetime, "Gregory M. Paris" <paris(a)bose.com> wrote: > | > | Any thoughts on what the Intel/Digital settlement means to NetApp and > | its customers? It sure looks (to me anyway) as though the Alpha is dead. > I don't think Intel will discontinue the Alpha line, as it would not be in > it's best interests. Especially given the current microprocessor market. > Who is out there that has a good chip? Intel *have* to service Digital's needs for Alpha production. At least that's what I gathered from the announcements about the deals. I'm pretty sure there will be more technology exchange from Digital to Intel over time - Digital's really virtualising its business now, returning in many ways to being a service oriented company. Intel can almost certainly produce Alphas profitably - having the exclusive license to make them may mean Intel's attitude changes. Intel, like Motorola, seem to have few objections to maintaining multiple processor lines as long as they remain profitable and so far as anyone can tell the Alpha 21264 and 21364 at the ridiculous clock speed they're aiming at will stay ahead of the IA64 line. As for the rest, the MIPS line covers the full gamut of v.small to v.powerful CPU's and, as a result, has more sold units per annum than HP-PA, PowerPC and SPARC put together, last time I looked. Check out the Microprocessor report (I think it's at www.chipanalyst.com) for more detailed CPU/DSP industry watching. > > Alexei >-- End of excerpt from Alexei Rodriguez -- -Mark, TSG Unix admin and support, int 782 4412, ext +44 1438 76 4412. ... an Englishman in London ...

1 0

2024

2023

2022

2021

2020

2019

2018

2017

2016

2015

2014

2013

2012

2011

2010

2009

2008

2007

2006

2005

2004

2003

2002

2001

2000

1999

1998

1997

toasters October 1997