toasters October 1999

toasters@lists.teaparty.net

81 participants
89 discussions

downgrading from 5.3.1 to 5.2.3
by Jay Soffian 08 Oct '99

08 Oct '99

How would one go about downgrading an F540 from 5.3.1 to 5.2.3? This is not a production filer. Couldn't find anything on NOW. j.

2 2

Autosupport, 5.2.3 upgrade, diskscrub and wackz
by Jay Soffian 08 Oct '99

08 Oct '99

We recently upgraded our clustered F740 pair to 5.2.3 from 5.2.2. This necessitated an upgrade of the firmware from 2.1_a2 to 2.2_a2, as well as a disk firmware upgrade from FB37 to FB59. On one of our filers, the first disk scrub that ran after the upgrade (6 days after the upgrade) found a bunch on parity inconsistencies: Sun Oct 3 02:50:39 EDT [viking: consumer]: Scrub found 212 parity inconsistencies Sun Oct 3 02:50:39 EDT [viking: consumer]: Scrub found 0 media errors Sun Oct 3 02:50:39 EDT [viking: consumer]: Disk scrubbing finished... Apparently, with 5.2.3 the filer now generates autosupport mail on disk scrubs, so a couple days after this scrub, I received email from NetApp that they had noticed the error. (This is two anomalous autosupport emails in a row that NetApp has opened cases on, so I'd like to acknowledge NA on that.) NA's recommendation was to re-run a disk scrub (which I did, and it completed w/o finding any errors) and then to run wackz (which I haven't done). Unforunately, I cannot find _any_ documentation on wackz on NOW. I've also searched the toasters archive for wackz and didn't find much. In particular, I'd like to know how much downtime I'm going to be saddled with. NA claims that wackz can process 25 million inodes/hour. Given: viking> df -i Filesystem iused ifree %iused Mounted on /vol/cim0a/ 1057771 2593665 29% /vol/cim0a/ that means the wackz should complete in < 10 minutes. From what I've heard about wack, I find this hard to believe (I've heard stories of wack running for 8+ hours). Or I'm missing something? I'm interested in hearing from anyone who has run wackz on a similar configuration and how long it took to complete. This filer has 21 9GB disks. The cim0a volume is composed of 3 raid groups (5+1, 5+1, 4+1). The vol0 volume is composed of a single raid group (1+1). BTW - I'm still not clear on the difference between wack and wackz. The previous explanation to toasters (wackz runs faster, does things in an optimized fashion) wasn't very enlightening. wack must do something above and beyond wackz (or the other way around), otherwise why would both still be included in DOT? RFE: It would be nice if the filer could run a wack (read-only) and report inconsistencies so that I could check the file system w/o downtime. If the filer requires an immutable filesystem to run wack, then DOT should allow you to tag a whole volume as read-only. I'd like to thank Ron Thibault of NA for his assistance so far. j. -- Jay Soffian <jay(a)cimedia.com> UNIX Systems Engineer 404.572.1941 Cox Interactive Media

3 3

RE: Max number of drives.
by Alvarado, Michael 08 Oct '99

08 Oct '99

This also applies to the F630. It is 1.39 TB to be exact. -----Original Message----- From: tkaczma(a)gryf.net [mailto:tkaczma@gryf.net] Sent: Thursday, October 07, 1999 5:13 PM To: toasters(a)mathworks.com Subject: RE: Max number of drives. On Thu, 7 Oct 1999, Alvarado, Michael wrote: > Yes you look at the maximum storage capacity the OS supports. In the case of > the F760, it is 1.4TB. What about an F630 running the same OS? Tom

1 0

Re: File locking, sendmail and toasters
by alexei＠mindspring.net 08 Oct '99

08 Oct '99

Nick Hilliard <nick(a)iol.ie> writes: > If you need to have text-based NFS-mounted client mailboxes, the only > reliable option is to use a mailbox format which doesn't require locking, > such as Maildir. Depending on what access is provided to the mail spool, yes, maildir is a safer, viable format. Check procmail for to use as an LDA for this or look a qmail for some other thoughts on how this is done. But not all instances can work with this. If you have shell users that do funky stuff based on the mbox format, this can be a problem. There are plenty of other cases where maildir is not a viable alternative to mbox. I hope you find what you need. Alex

3 2

What Radius servers are recommended to work with the Netcache Appliance?
by Mike Ball 08 Oct '99

08 Oct '99

What Radius servers are recommended or have been tested with the Netcache appliance? Mike Ball Open System Solutions, Inc. 3124 Spring Forest Rd Raleigh, NC 27616 Fax: 919-871-6308 Vmail: 919-871-6301 ext. 311 Email: mball(a)opensystems.com Http: www.opensystems.com

1 0

open bugs / closed bugs
by Jay Soffian 08 Oct '99

08 Oct '99

In searching for a bug on NOW, I've noticed that a majority of bugs are still in the open state. Does this mean these bugs have not been fixed? What does the 'release fix' column refer to? Does this mean the bug applies only to that specific release, or that the bug was fixed in that release, or that the bug was first noticed in that release? Are bugs numbered in a strictly sequential order? If so, how is it that bug #289 applies to release 5.3? It would be nice to see the bug tracking system be setup more clearly, perhaps with the following fields: Date bug opened. Date bug closed. First release bug noticed. Releases which contain bug. First release which fixed bug. State: (opened, analyzed, solved, fix incorporated into release). I'd have to guess that the NOW bug system is not the same system used internally by NA engineers. j. -- Jay Soffian <jay(a)cimedia.com> UNIX Systems Engineer 404.572.1941 Cox Interactive Media

1 0

RE: Max number of drives.
by Alvarado, Michael 08 Oct '99

08 Oct '99

Yes you look at the maximum storage capacity the OS supports. In the case of the F760, it is 1.4TB. -----Original Message----- From: Jason Middlebrooks [mailto:Jason_Middlebrooks@datalink.com] Sent: Thursday, October 07, 1999 1:37 PM To: Thompson, Arnold Cc: Mohler, Jeff; toasters(a)mathworks.com Subject: RE: Max number of drives. I am not concerned about mixing the drives in the volume because like drive will be in there own raidgroup. I am just wondering about the max number of drives. All the docs say 28 18Gig drives and 56 9Gig drives in a loop. But what if you have 21 18Gig drives and 14 9Gig drives? Do you look at the maximum Storage Capacity to determine how many total drive you can have when you mix them? Thanks Jason "Thompson, Arnold" <arnold.thompson(a)netapp.com> on 10/07/99 03:46:34 PM To: "Mohler, Jeff" <jeff.mohler(a)netapp.com>, Jason Middlebrooks/Datalink, toasters(a)mathworks.com cc: Subject: RE: Max number of drives. I recall from mixing 9s and 18s at a customer site that you *can* add the 18s to an existing volume of 9s and still get 18G worth (minus filesystem overhead, snaps, etc.) from each 18G drive. The first 18G drive becomes parity and the 9G parity becomes a data drive (so you get 9G additional capacity from the first 18G drive), but after that you should get 18 and not 9. Historically, you've been able to mix and match with the filer doing the right thing. It is true that if a 9G drive fails and there is no 9G spare, it will rebuild on an 18G drive but you will only get 9G on that rebuilt drive. So be sure to have a spare of each size available. If anybody has tested this with different results I could be completely nuts, so please educate us! It is important to make the 9G shelves the lowest order shelves for FCAL loop initialization purposes, so make the 9G shelves numbers 0 and 1. Regards, Arnie > -----Original Message----- > From: Mohler, Jeff [mailto:jeff.mohler@netapp.com] > Sent: Thursday, October 07, 1999 11:38 AM > To: 'Jason Middlebrooks'; toasters(a)mathworks.com > Subject: RE: Max number of drives. > > > Sure, no problem. > > But when you add them to a volume (if you are not creating a > new one) make sure > you add them to the volume made up of 18G drives. (That is, > if the 18G drives > are a separate volume from the 9G ones). > > If you mix/max drive sizes in a volume, the larger drives > will appear only to be > the size of the smallest drive in the array. > > -----Original Message----- > From: Jason Middlebrooks [mailto:Jason_Middlebrooks@datalink.com] > Sent: Thursday, October 07, 1999 12:01 PM > To: toasters(a)mathworks.com > Subject: Max number of drives. > > > Question. > > I have 14 9Gig drives and 14 18Gig drives. So a total of 28 > drives. Can I > add 7 more 18Gig drives on the same loop? > > The filer is a F760 > > Thanks in advance > Jason Middlebrooks >

2 1

RE: Max number of drives.
by Palinckx, Gregory 08 Oct '99

08 Oct '99

Hi Jason, There is a 56 drive hardware limit per FC-AL loop. There is also a total capacity software restriction. I believe this is a F760, so the software restriction will be about 1.4TB. Greg > -----Original Message----- > From: Jason Middlebrooks [mailto:Jason_Middlebrooks@datalink.com] > Sent: Thursday, October 07, 1999 2:37 PM > To: Thompson, Arnold > Cc: Mohler, Jeff; toasters(a)mathworks.com > Subject: RE: Max number of drives. > > > I am not concerned about mixing the drives in the volume > because like drive > will be in there own raidgroup. I am just wondering about > the max number > of drives. All the docs say 28 18Gig drives and 56 9Gig > drives in a loop. > But what if you have 21 18Gig drives and 14 9Gig drives? Do > you look at > the maximum Storage Capacity to determine how many total > drive you can have > when you mix them? > > Thanks > Jason > > > > > > "Thompson, Arnold" <arnold.thompson(a)netapp.com> on 10/07/99 > 03:46:34 PM > > To: "Mohler, Jeff" <jeff.mohler(a)netapp.com>, Jason > Middlebrooks/Datalink, > toasters(a)mathworks.com > cc: > Subject: RE: Max number of drives. > > > > > I recall from mixing 9s and 18s at a customer site that you > *can* add the > 18s to > an existing volume of 9s and still get 18G worth (minus filesystem > overhead, > snaps, etc.) from each 18G drive. The first 18G drive > becomes parity and > the 9G > parity becomes a data drive (so you get 9G additional > capacity from the > first > 18G drive), but after that you should get 18 and not 9. Historically, > you've > been able to mix and match with the filer doing the right > thing. It is > true > that if a 9G drive fails and there is no 9G spare, it will > rebuild on an > 18G > drive but you will only get 9G on that rebuilt drive. So be > sure to have a > spare of each size available. If anybody has tested this > with different > results > I could be completely nuts, so please educate us! > > It is important to make the 9G shelves the lowest order > shelves for FCAL > loop > initialization purposes, so make the 9G shelves numbers 0 and 1. > > Regards, > Arnie > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Mohler, Jeff [mailto:jeff.mohler@netapp.com] > > Sent: Thursday, October 07, 1999 11:38 AM > > To: 'Jason Middlebrooks'; toasters(a)mathworks.com > > Subject: RE: Max number of drives. > > > > > > Sure, no problem. > > > > But when you add them to a volume (if you are not creating a > > new one) make sure > > you add them to the volume made up of 18G drives. (That is, > > if the 18G drives > > are a separate volume from the 9G ones). > > > > If you mix/max drive sizes in a volume, the larger drives > > will appear only to be > > the size of the smallest drive in the array. > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Jason Middlebrooks [mailto:Jason_Middlebrooks@datalink.com] > > Sent: Thursday, October 07, 1999 12:01 PM > > To: toasters(a)mathworks.com > > Subject: Max number of drives. > > > > > > Question. > > > > I have 14 9Gig drives and 14 18Gig drives. So a total of 28 > > drives. Can I > > add 7 more 18Gig drives on the same loop? > > > > The filer is a F760 > > > > Thanks in advance > > Jason Middlebrooks > > > > >

2 1

RE: Max number of drives.
by Jason Middlebrooks 07 Oct '99

07 Oct '99

I am not concerned about mixing the drives in the volume because like drive will be in there own raidgroup. I am just wondering about the max number of drives. All the docs say 28 18Gig drives and 56 9Gig drives in a loop. But what if you have 21 18Gig drives and 14 9Gig drives? Do you look at the maximum Storage Capacity to determine how many total drive you can have when you mix them? Thanks Jason "Thompson, Arnold" <arnold.thompson(a)netapp.com> on 10/07/99 03:46:34 PM To: "Mohler, Jeff" <jeff.mohler(a)netapp.com>, Jason Middlebrooks/Datalink, toasters(a)mathworks.com cc: Subject: RE: Max number of drives. I recall from mixing 9s and 18s at a customer site that you *can* add the 18s to an existing volume of 9s and still get 18G worth (minus filesystem overhead, snaps, etc.) from each 18G drive. The first 18G drive becomes parity and the 9G parity becomes a data drive (so you get 9G additional capacity from the first 18G drive), but after that you should get 18 and not 9. Historically, you've been able to mix and match with the filer doing the right thing. It is true that if a 9G drive fails and there is no 9G spare, it will rebuild on an 18G drive but you will only get 9G on that rebuilt drive. So be sure to have a spare of each size available. If anybody has tested this with different results I could be completely nuts, so please educate us! It is important to make the 9G shelves the lowest order shelves for FCAL loop initialization purposes, so make the 9G shelves numbers 0 and 1. Regards, Arnie > -----Original Message----- > From: Mohler, Jeff [mailto:jeff.mohler@netapp.com] > Sent: Thursday, October 07, 1999 11:38 AM > To: 'Jason Middlebrooks'; toasters(a)mathworks.com > Subject: RE: Max number of drives. > > > Sure, no problem. > > But when you add them to a volume (if you are not creating a > new one) make sure > you add them to the volume made up of 18G drives. (That is, > if the 18G drives > are a separate volume from the 9G ones). > > If you mix/max drive sizes in a volume, the larger drives > will appear only to be > the size of the smallest drive in the array. > > -----Original Message----- > From: Jason Middlebrooks [mailto:Jason_Middlebrooks@datalink.com] > Sent: Thursday, October 07, 1999 12:01 PM > To: toasters(a)mathworks.com > Subject: Max number of drives. > > > Question. > > I have 14 9Gig drives and 14 18Gig drives. So a total of 28 > drives. Can I > add 7 more 18Gig drives on the same loop? > > The filer is a F760 > > Thanks in advance > Jason Middlebrooks >

1 0

RE: Max number of drives.
by Palinckx, Gregory 07 Oct '99

07 Oct '99

Hi All - Unless something has changed in the 5.3 days, Arnie is correct - you can add 18s to a 9GB group and get 18(17)GB. Here is a sysconfig from a customer out here - RAID group 0 RAID Disk HA.ID HA SHELF BAY CHAN Used (MB/blks) Phys (MB/blks) --------- ----- ------------ ---- -------------- -------------- parity 0a.11 0a 1 3 FC:A 17000/34816000 17366/35566480 data 0a.5 0a 0 5 FC:A 8600/17612800 8683/17783112 data 0a.1 0a 0 1 FC:A 8600/17612800 8683/17783112 data 0a.2 0a 0 2 FC:A 8600/17612800 8683/17783112 data 0a.3 0a 0 3 FC:A 8600/17612800 8683/17783112 data 0a.6 0a 0 6 FC:A 8600/17612800 8683/17783112 data 0a.4 0a 0 4 FC:A 8600/17612800 8683/17783112 data 0a.13 0a 1 5 FC:A 17000/34816000 17366/35566480 data 0a.12 0a 1 4 FC:A 17000/34816000 17366/35566480 data 0a.9 0a 1 1 FC:A 17000/34816000 17366/35566480 I would just be sure that you have enough 18s to get a decent stripe.... Greg SE - Rockies > -----Original Message----- > From: Mohler, Jeff [mailto:jeff.mohler@netapp.com] > Sent: Thursday, October 07, 1999 1:50 PM > To: Thompson, Arnold; 'Jason Middlebrooks'; 'toasters(a)mathworks.com' > Subject: RE: Max number of drives. > > > Im scratching some documents here.. > > I could have swore the last time I asked that I was told the > larger drives would > be counted as the smaller capacity drives after the parity drive. > > > > -----Original Message----- > From: Thompson, Arnold > Sent: Thursday, October 07, 1999 12:47 PM > To: Mohler, Jeff; 'Jason Middlebrooks'; toasters(a)mathworks.com > Subject: RE: Max number of drives. > > > I recall from mixing 9s and 18s at a customer site that you > *can* add the 18s to > an existing volume of 9s and still get 18G worth (minus > filesystem overhead, > snaps, etc.) from each 18G drive. The first 18G drive > becomes parity and the 9G > parity becomes a data drive (so you get 9G additional > capacity from the first > 18G drive), but after that you should get 18 and not 9. > Historically, you've > been able to mix and match with the filer doing the right > thing. It is true > that if a 9G drive fails and there is no 9G spare, it will > rebuild on an 18G > drive but you will only get 9G on that rebuilt drive. So be > sure to have a > spare of each size available. If anybody has tested this > with different results > I could be completely nuts, so please educate us! > > It is important to make the 9G shelves the lowest order > shelves for FCAL loop > initialization purposes, so make the 9G shelves numbers 0 and 1. > > Regards, > Arnie > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Mohler, Jeff [mailto:jeff.mohler@netapp.com] > > Sent: Thursday, October 07, 1999 11:38 AM > > To: 'Jason Middlebrooks'; toasters(a)mathworks.com > > Subject: RE: Max number of drives. > > > > > > Sure, no problem. > > > > But when you add them to a volume (if you are not creating a > > new one) make sure > > you add them to the volume made up of 18G drives. (That is, > > if the 18G drives > > are a separate volume from the 9G ones). > > > > If you mix/max drive sizes in a volume, the larger drives > > will appear only to be > > the size of the smallest drive in the array. > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Jason Middlebrooks [mailto:Jason_Middlebrooks@datalink.com] > > Sent: Thursday, October 07, 1999 12:01 PM > > To: toasters(a)mathworks.com > > Subject: Max number of drives. > > > > > > Question. > > > > I have 14 9Gig drives and 14 18Gig drives. So a total of 28 > > drives. Can I > > add 7 more 18Gig drives on the same loop? > > > > The filer is a F760 > > > > Thanks in advance > > Jason Middlebrooks > > >

1 0

← Newer
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
Older →

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 1999