toasters October 1997

toasters@lists.teaparty.net

32 participants
47 discussions

Re: reducing the size of a NetApp -- temporarily
by sirbruce＠ix.netcom.com 06 Oct '97

06 Oct '97

On 10/05/97 18:00:36 you wrote: > >And since we can add new drives by swapping them in, it doesn't seem >like it would hurt to only bring 13 drives online at first. Since we >have an active filesystem, can someone tell me what the best route to do >this is? Any caveats? Don't forget to calculate the space you'll need for snapshots and so on too... also, the filesystem optimizes much better if you have lots of free space rather than always running the ragged edge. You don't have to add a whole shelf at once, so if 14 or 15 drives makes more sense for you, do that. Also, feel free to leave one in as a hot spare. >I have had one report from someone at NetApp that I should erase disk >labels (I don't know if he meant all of them, just the ones being >removed, or the ones staying) before starting, and another that it would >be fine to just yank the disks I don't want and newfs the remaining >ones. Yes, yank all the disks you don't want and boot off floppy, and then newfs the filesystem. That is the best way, and won't take very long at all on an F630. Stay away from other shortcut, quickie schemes that can have lots of hidden dangers. Bruce

1 0

quota size limits (was: "quotas to track disk usage")
by Daniel Quinlan 06 Oct '97

06 Oct '97

On 09/05/97 01:40:58 Daniel Quinlan wrote: >> Given these parameters: >> >> - I would like to use quotas to track user disk space usage (but not >> limit it) Bruce <sirbruce(a)ix.netcom.com> replied: > Easily done, but there are some caveats. > > [...] > > 2. Some clients can't deal with quotas great thatn 8GB, and > there is currently no option on the filer to limit this (this > is filed as a bug), so you'd have to restrict your users to 8GB. > If you have any over that, you don't want them in the quota system. > > So, you'd want something like: > > # Quota Target type disk files > # ------------- ----- ---- ----- > /newhome tree > * user@newhome 8G > > The first line might not even be necessary, but it's worth > including just for reference. Hmm, unless it breaks the > clients the same way. Maybe the 8G can be omitted from > the user entry as well? I don't know, I haven't tried it. > The line might also be ncessary for the file to be parsed > properly. > > What Netapp really needs to do is a default quota report by > uid/gid type of command on the filer, to avoid the need to > set up quotas to track usage. Since we have users using more than 8GB, this is a major problem. What operating systems have the 8 GB limit? Has there been any work to address these issues? Will it work without the "8GB" in the user entry? - Dan

1 0

Help
by Jim Grinnell 01 Oct '97

01 Oct '97

help

2 1

RE: Oracle on Netapps
by Bruce Clarke 01 Oct '97

01 Oct '97

On Wednesday, October 01, 1997 9:48 AM, Marc Nicholas [SMTP:marc@hippocampus.net] wrote: > My first question would be: when Sybase? :-) > > (I'm just plain greedy...) > > > -marc > --- > Marc Nicholas - Hippocampus OSD Inc. > 416 979 9000 - fax: 416 979 8223 - http://www.hippocampus.net > 125 John St. - Suite #100 - Toronto - Ontario - M5V 2E2 - CANADA > "Inter/Intra/Extra[net] consulting, services, hardware and software sales" There is no technical reason that we currently know of that would prevent any other database from making similar use of a filer for storing its datastores. Care still needs to be taken with configuration as you would any time you are splitting the files of a particular application across platforms, but putting all the datastores for a particular database instance on the filer for any given RDBMS should work fine. As has already been mentioned, we here at Network Appliance talk to our Sybase database over NFS with stores on the filer and have done so for quite some time without problems. It is rumored that Sybase pulled back from allowing NFS access to its data but I have not been able to confirm this yet. We can say (empiracally at least) that it works. The real answer to your question is that we have had some introductory discussions with Sybase and will continue to work with them to gain their certification. You can be of assistance in this by mentioning to your Sybase representatives of your interest in getting your Sybase stores onto the filer. This is precisely how the intial interest was generated at Oracle when a very large Oracle customer indicated that Oracle really should support storage on a filer. I believe that similar interest expressed to Sybase will generate similar support. At the very least, if you have a test Sybase environment, I would give it a try. You will not be able to operate in "raw" Sybase mode, of course, but should still see similar if not increased performance over the network. Bruce Clarke

1 0

RE: Oracle on Netapps
by sirbruce＠ix.netcom.com 01 Oct '97

01 Oct '97

On 10/01/97 00:12:58 you wrote: >> Any questions feel free to contact me. > >My first question would be: when Sybase? :-) Always? Even Netapp has run Sybase on the filers for some time. Or is there some more specific Sybase feature that doesn't work over NFS? Bruce

2 1

RE: Oracle on Netapps
by sirbruce＠ix.netcom.com 01 Oct '97

01 Oct '97

On 10/01/97 01:11:19 you wrote: >Yup...you can't use a Sybase native filesystem...which is something Sybase >themselves recommend. > >We've been talking with our local NetApp reps about doing some evaluations >of Sybase on a native filesystem versus Sybase running against an NFS >filesystem just to see what the performance difference is like. Ah... well, I don't think the Oracle deal is going to allow Oracle "native filesystem" (i.e. raw) either. It's just so that Oracle will now let their stuff run over NFS if it's the filer. Or is there more to it than that? Bruce

1 0

RE: Oracle on Netapps
by Bruce Clarke 01 Oct '97

01 Oct '97

I am the technical contact in NetApp Marketing responsible for the Oracle relationship. The software that officially supports Oracle will be the 4.3 release of OnTap. This software goes to external Beta test this week and should be generally available by the middle of October. The changes to support Oracle were small but very relevant and will be documented in an upcoming whitepaper describing the correct configurations for NFS, Oracle, and OnTap to ensure maximum performance and reliability when storing Oracle database files. This paper will be available in October. Many customers have chosen to already run Oracle without these specific changes and have been having no problems. So I do encourage anyone interested in storing their datastores on a filer to start their testing immediately and to upgrade to OnTap 4.3 before going into production. Any questions feel free to contact me. Bruce Clarke Technical Manager - Business Development Network Appliance, Inc. Email: bclarke(a)netapp.com Phone: 408-367-3156 On Tuesday, September 30, 1997 11:14 AM, Brian Tao [SMTP:taob@nbc.netcom.ca] wrote: > Anyone have some technical information regarding the recent > announcement between Netapp and Oracle? Is there a new OnTap (5.0?) > that needs to be uploaded on the filers, or is it something that can > be done with the 4.x OS? What's special about this Oraclized version > of OnTap? > > http://www.netapp.com/news/level3b/news_rel_970922.html > > -- > Brian Tao (BT300, taob(a)netcom.ca) > "Though this be madness, yet there is method in't"

2 1

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