toasters December 1999

toasters@lists.teaparty.net

100 participants
81 discussions

Anyone need sun atl libraries
by Crve＠aol.com 11 Jan '00

11 Jan '00

I got SUN ATL libraries 2 100 tape libraries with 2 DTL 7000 (Quantum model 7100) 2 52 tape libraries with 4 DLT 7000 (Quantum model 520) 4 52 tape libraries with 4 DLT 4000 (Quantum model 520) These units were used for evaluation by sun was never in service! In perfect condition contact Craig

3 2

clearcase & network appliance
by Charly Jacob 07 Jan '00

07 Jan '00

is anyone using clearcase with remote storage pools on the network appliance? i've had the experience of keeping the storage pools local to the servers in the past, but with the new group i'm working in, i'm in the process of using the remote storage idea. in terms of $$s, scalability, backup, etc. i see a big plus. what are some experiences of other individuals doing this? i don't have enough data or experience to fall back on to convince other groups we're working with of the idea. any insight would be helpful (even if i have to go back to local storage, grrr). charly

3 3

Sun Client Maximum Throughputs
by beepy＠netapp.com 05 Jan '00

05 Jan '00

Do any of our customers out there have some measurements of Sun client throughput? I thought I could use a 2 x 400MHz Ultra Enterprise E250 with a new Sun GbE card in it as a killer client, and I find that with V3 32KB UDP packets, the sucker rolls over at ~30 MB/s with 2 CPUs pinned at 99% in system time. This *sucks*. In an experimental filer setup reading from memory (all cached data) the F760 CPU is at 20%. I am totally client bound. Has anyone sized Sun clients out there? Are the PCI clients dogs? Is the new GbE card from Sun a loser? Should I go grab a new Alteon card for the Sun? What is your killer high performance client? It seems a function of the Sun E250 - 100BaseT seems to scale only to 30 MB/s before running out of CPU... Broken-hearted in Amsterdam, beepy

9 13

Re: Budtool / backup sw Mailing-List??
by dnb＠ccs.neu.edu 05 Jan '00

05 Jan '00

Michael Coxe <mc(a)com21.com> writes: > Is there a mailing-list for this sort of discussion? > I'm looking for one, either Budtool specific or UNIX/NT > generic (@ enterprise level). > > If not, do others feel a need for one? We'd be very interested in one as well (and would be willing to host if it didn't exist already). Anyone else? Peace, dNb

4 5

"Wac"-ing the WAFL?
by E Hunter 03 Jan '00

03 Jan '00

Greetings. I'm brand-spankin' new to this list, so please please please excuse me if I landed this question in the wrong space/time. I'm looking for infomation on NetApps because the company I'm working for is considering a 760 for our network. I have been told by someone who is only vaguely familiar with the NetApps that the filesystem has to be maintained in some way by running a _wac_ command, but I have been unable to find any information on such a command in a week of searching . Can anyone fill me in on the use of this _wac_ command , what it does, how often it needs to be done, and whehter or not the filer requires downtime to do it? Thanx. -- Eric Hunter System Administrator _______________________ eric(a)gigaton.com

22 35

RE: volcopy and snapmirror performance
by Walters, Mike 31 Dec '99

31 Dec '99

We did this transfer on a site to migrate around 150GB data between F630 to F760 - it went though at around 14-15MB/s (50+GB/hour) on a direct cross-over GbE connection. Although it's not a requirement, I would sugggest using the same versions of ONTAP - we hit a hardware problem on one filer which aborted the transfer, & there was a problem with aborted transfers when the filers were on 5.2.1 and 5.2.3 resp. - we upped them both to 5.2.3 & all was well ;-) Cheers Mike > -----Original Message----- > From: owner-dl-toasters(a)netapp.com > [mailto:owner-dl-toasters@netapp.com]On Behalf Of kevin graham > Sent: 30 December 1999 11:54 > To: toasters(a)mathworks.com > Subject: volcopy and snapmirror performance > > > > We're looking at moving 287gb (~10.7m inodes) worth of data > from a 630 to > a clean volume on a 760. > > To schedule the downtime, I need to know if anyone has > ballpark figures > for calculating the tiem for a volcopy. The filers are well > connected > (gbit ether on both of them), and I can sacrafice big chunks of > performance to make this go in a timely manner. (the > 100mbit interfaces > are inactive as well, if those should just be strapped together) > > Later on, we're looking at trying to snapmirror 536gb > (~17.2m inodes) > spread pretty evenly across two volumes between two > locations. Are there > numbers available on the approximate overhead of the > snapmirror protocol > (delta bytes * overhead), and how often it would be > feasible to run it > (I'd prefer something in the neighborhood of 5-10 minutes). > > The best numbers I could find on NOW were "36GB/hr will > drive the cpu to > 100%" without any reference to the filer model, cache sizes > (the filer > does do read-aheads, right?), inode density, etc... > > thanks. > > ..kg.. > >

2 1

RE: Goodies (was wack)
by Mohler, Jeff 31 Dec '99

31 Dec '99

Depends. If it's a round of golf or a T-shirt..its a safe bet, feel free to produce a P.O.. But if it's a leather jacket...hold out for the jacket, because between the jacket and the gold, you KNOW the salesguy _wants_ that round of golf. Isn't there a Dilbert about this..yet? :-----Original Message----- :From: Alan R. White [mailto:arw@tipper.demon.co.uk] :Sent: Thursday, December 30, 1999 12:44 PM :To: toasters(a)mathworks.com :Subject: Re: Goodies (was wack) : : :Wonder how many sales folk actually believe that there is a direct :relationship between giveaways and meeting their end of year targets? : :....or is it me thats being naive.....

1 0

toasters
by TomArlington 30 Dec '99

30 Dec '99

toasters

1 0

RE: "Wac"-ing the WAFL?
by Mohler, Jeff 30 Dec '99

30 Dec '99

Yes, but in the spirit of keeping the post simple for our new user, I didnt bring in complexities of how a F720 and lower work, or clustering. So yes, my post is somewhat inaccurate outside the scope of the reply itself. :-----Original Message----- :From: tkaczma(a)gryf.net [mailto:tkaczma@gryf.net] :Sent: Thursday, December 30, 1999 8:51 AM :Cc: toasters(a)mathworks.com :Subject: RE: "Wac"-ing the WAFL? : : : :On Wed, 29 Dec 1999, Mohler, Jeff wrote: : :> When a series of writes comes into the box, it is buffered :*im making this :> simple*, and it flushed out to disk (on a 760) ever 10 :seconds, of when 16Mb of :> data is in the buffer (NVRAM). : :This is inaccurate, I believe in clustered machines with 32MB :NVRAM it is :8MB. I think the general rule is half of NVRAM dedicated to the :particular filer. : :Tom :

1 0

RE: "Wac"-ing the WAFL?
by Mohler, Jeff 30 Dec '99

30 Dec '99

:RAID 0. I know, I know, it sounds almost suicidal but as I :said speed is more :important in this instance than recovery. We'll be testing :this 760 against :an Auspex, which can be configured to use RAID 0, so I was :wondering if the :NetApps could also do this. --- Actually, the way RAID4 is used in conjunction with WAFL, really looks and feels like RAID0, just with a parity write at the end. WAFL removes the problem on a UFS type filesystem of having that single parity drive just thrash to tiny bits, taking the stripe performance with it. When a series of writes comes into the box, it is buffered *im making this simple*, and it flushed out to disk (on a 760) ever 10 seconds, of when 16Mb of data is in the buffer (NVRAM). A single stripe (or series of stripes) is then written in a _very_ optimized manner using the WAFL filesystem, and a single parity calculation/write is created per stripe. I direct you to a document Mr. Hitz wrote at http://www.netapp.com/tech_library/3001.html for more details. I have every confidence you will enjoy our performance in your testing.

3 2

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 December 1999