toasters December 1999

toasters@lists.teaparty.net

100 participants
81 discussions

RE: Backup solutions
by Kelly Wyatt 10 Dec '99

10 Dec '99

We use NetBackup (currently 3.1.1, migrating to 3.2 early next year). We have been very pleased with the performance. Currently we backup through tape drives directly attached to the filers. However, we are in the process of setting up a backup lab where we can compare the feasibility of backing up over a dedicated trunk or GB network. Even if there is some sacrifice in performance the ability to use all drives in the tape library for all filers intrigues us... If I remember correctly, NBU 3.2 can do three way backups... We also use NBU for NT and UNIX backups... and will be testing AFS early next year. An enterprise wide solution was an important criteria for us... The SAS Institute/Veritas backup was announced in: http://www.veritas.com/company/pressroom/1999/pr991025%2D0.html Also, I presented our backup solution at VERICON99 (Veritas' User Group Meeting)... I'm sure a Veritas sales rep would be willing to send you a copy of the VERICON 99 CD which should have the presentation. Kelly -- Kelly Wyatt, Kelly.Wyatt(a)SAS.com Systems Programmer Integrated Solutions Consulting SAS Institute Inc. / SAS Campus Drive / Cary, NC 27513 http://www.sas.com -----Original Message----- From: Paul Taylor [mailto:ptaylor@connectria.com] Sent: Tuesday, November 30, 1999 12:35 PM To: toasters(a)mathworks.com Cc: dhug(a)connectria.com Subject: Backup solutions Hi. We have two netapps, an f630 and an f760. We are currently using Budtool to back up everything, but we are less than pleased with performance, and the fact that the product is getting EOL'd by Leggato. What is everyone's opinion on what they use for backups? We are considering Workstation Solutions, and Legatto, among others. Thanks, Paul Taylor Sr. Systems Engineer Connectria 215-841-5540

1 0

RE: NAS-SAN
by Alvarado, Michael 10 Dec '99

10 Dec '99

Maybe I am giving too much of the benefit of the doubt but my interpretation of Carlos'' posting was that he wanted to make visible what Zerowait has already taken the initiative to create. Which, I might add, is a good start and I am sure it will be improved with more contributions. -----Original Message----- From: Nick Hilliard [mailto:nick@iol.ie] Sent: Friday, December 10, 1999 2:54 AM To: mora(a)spectrix-hq.spectrix.com Cc: july(a)zerowait.com; toasters(a)mathworks.com Subject: Re: NAS-SAN > You may want to start with http://www.nas-san.com/. It pays to read people's .sigs: > > ---------------------------------------------------------------- > > July A. J. Linett, VP Tech Mktg > > 302.266.9408 july(a)zerowait.com > > > > Zerowait: Best Of Breed Internet Core Technologies > > Web Acceleration ** Data Storage ** Load Balancing > > www.zerowait.com*www.loadbalancing.net*www.nas-san.com > > ------------------------------------------------------------------- Nick

1 0

NAS-SAN
by July at Zerowait 10 Dec '99

10 Dec '99

As many of you know, the debate between NAS and/or SAN rages on. I've been asked to create a website for the purpose of elucidating the theory and practice of each so administrators, such as yourselves, can make better guesses as to which one (or maybe a combo) would work best for them. Plus we'll hopefully be able to provide a searchable database of issues and answers from practical experience. Not in competition to this list, of course, but an additional resource. Does anyone have any tales to tell on this topic? Problems, solutions, etc. Or know of a good source for articles on it? We'll gladly give by-lines to authors that want them. All ideas are welcome. Any help is appreciated. Thanks.-- ---------------------------------------------------------------- July A. J. Linett, VP Tech Mktg 302.266.9408 july(a)zerowait.com Zerowait: Best Of Breed Internet Core Technologies Web Acceleration ** Data Storage ** Load Balancing www.zerowait.com*www.loadbalancing.net*www.nas-san.com -------------------------------------------------------------------

3 2

Budtool / backup sw Mailing-List??
by Michael Coxe 10 Dec '99

10 Dec '99

With all the discussion of backups, ndmp, etc... 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? - michael

1 0

Maxfiles and available space
by scw＠seas.ucla.edu 09 Dec '99

09 Dec '99

We're in the process of ordering another filer, this time with 36Gig disks. One think that we'd like to do is cut down on the filesystem overhead. Just out of curiousity, if we make maxfiles really small (say 50 per meg ) can we we get more available file space? Our current average filesize is ranges from 22k to 89k depending on the actual filesystem. How much space do netapps 'inodes' take? ----- Stephen C. Woods; UCLA SEASnet; 2567 Boelter hall; LA CA 90095; (310)-825-8614 Finger for public key scw(a)cirrus.seas.ucla.edu,Internet mail:scw@SEAS.UCLA.EDU

3 2

NOW cookies?
by Jim Davis 09 Dec '99

09 Dec '99

I asked netscape to show me the cookies and when I login to now.netapp.com I see vanWebSupUsr= my 'Username' vanWebSupPwd= my 'Password' cookies, apparently in cleartext. The only other quick example I could check (hotmail.com) appears not to use cleartext for the username/password. Dunno if it's a big deal, but it does seem... odd.

1 0

HP Exemplar S-Class Supercomputer F/S
by Crve＠aol.com 09 Dec '99

09 Dec '99

Hi All Exemplar S-Class Server will be available as of 12-7-99, those that are interested here are some information links to Hp Complete detail info will be e-mail by request only! Please only serious inquiries only! http://www.hp.com/pressrel/jun98/24jun98.htm http://www.hp.com/pressrel/sep96/30sep96a.htm Also one Hp Optical Library (jukebox) available model C1107H (6) 2.6 gig drive 238 slots with Media (92279F) same as the Hp 660 except with 2.6 drives Craig crve(a)aol.com

4 3

WTB: FW 4.3GB disks for Netapp
by Dane Jasper 08 Dec '99

08 Dec '99

I'm seeking some disks for our older filer. The drives I need are for the F210. They are FW SCSI-2 drives, Netapp model number was X217 4.3GB drive. I'd like to purchase between three and 10 of these drives. If you've got them sitting around and would like to liquidate, please let me know! -- Dane Jasper Sonic.net, Inc. (707)522-1000 mailto:dane@sonic.net http://www.sonic.net/ Key fingerprint = A5 D6 6E 16 D8 81 BA E9 CB BD A9 77 B3 AF 45 53

1 0

Backup failures
by Bhavnesh Makin 07 Dec '99

07 Dec '99

We are using budtool 4.6.1 to backup our filers over the network. Recently we have noticed a problem where backups have failed with following error: Ldi (:budgo.c:4130) 11/23/99 22:06:23> Waiting for the ndmp2fh process to finish ... Ldi (:budgo.c:4131) 11/23/99 22:06:23> More backup data is coming from the socket ... Ldi (:budgo.c:4130) 11/23/99 22:06:25> Waiting for the ndmp2fh process to finish ... Ldi (:budgo.c:4131) 11/23/99 22:06:25> More backup data is coming from the socket ... L00 (:debug.c:1325) 11/23/99 22:06:26> ****************************************************************** L00 (:debug.c:1327) 11/23/99 22:06:26> ------ E R R O R ------- E00 (:debug.c:1327) 11/23/99 22:06:26> Command exceeded maximum allowable run time 78800. L00 (:debug.c:1341) 11/23/99 22:06:26> ****************************************************************** Parsing through the log file everything looks fine i.e. snapshots get created for backups, data gets dumped and snapshots get deleted. I opened up ticket with netapp folks but of no help yet. I went ahead and upgraded the ontap version on one of my F740 filers to 5.2.3 from 5.2.2P1D2 and problem went away for little while, but it has reappeared again. Any thoughts, Bhavnesh Makin

3 2

RE: experiences with clustering and snapmirror
by Anders Ljungberg S (QDT) 07 Dec '99

07 Dec '99

Joe. I'll give you a simple picture of the setup we're having at Ericsson In Stockholm serving 8000 users today. 6 F760 in cluster pairs all them primary owner of 750GB Disk 3 F760 Standalone Snapmirror replicas In total ~9TB of disk The're running in a mixed CIFS & UNIX Enviroment. We installed this setup in the begining ot the year and runned across a couple of bugs in the cifs implementation. But overall we're realy happy with what we're having and most important it's doing lots of good for the organisation using it. This is a few hints. - Clustering works great! Booth manual and automatic. - Snapmirror , i would not put my mirrors on the same heads. Fist of all i like to move the data to a different location. Putting the mirrors on the cluster heads make's the supported amount of data stored on each head go down ( Today thers is a 750 GB limit in cluster configs due to sharing NVRAM etc. ) It's realy fast to make a snapmirror head take the place of a destroyed cluster. With the standard trottle it's not taking to much power out of the heads. We are pointing the snapmirror traffic to "dedicated" NIC's on the heads so it does'nt interfear with client traffic. We take our backups from the snapmirror heads on a separat "Storage SAN" which gives us a larger backup window and does'nt effect the clients in any way. No snapshots, the mirrored volumes are read only. - Network balancing , today there is no failover/balancing support in my GB NIC's i keep 3 in every head. One for client access, one for fail over and one for snapmirroring. I heard there is going to be GB Ether Channel support, which would give failover/loadbalancing try to get an update from your sales rep. - WAFL , no problems snapshots makes it easy for the users to recover files them self. The raid is working good. snapshots saved us a coupple of times. - NFS I havent been across any problems with any NFS platform ( SUN, HP , IBM etc ) Just realy good NFS performance. Let me know it there is any thing a can answer for you. Good Luck Anders Ljungberg -----Original Message----- From: Joe Gross [mailto:jgross@stimpy.net] Sent: Tuesday, December 07, 1999 7:47 AM To: toasters(a)mathworks.com Subject: experiences with clustering and snapmirror We're currently evaluating several solutions for hosting initially about 1TB but will probably grow to several times that over the next 18 months. We already have a small 740 happily chugging away for the past 4 months and have been extremely happy with it. The configuration we're considering is clustering two F760s. Each filer will serve its own data and also be physically connected to the disks that the other filer serves. From what I understand this is the standard clustering configuration. We would plan to add more filers in pairs as we outgrow the initial pair. The main NFS clients would be bunch of suns that run as application servers. They'll take requests, munge data and return results back to other parts of the site. All the application servers would be able to see all the data. Since the application servers don't hold any data they would all be identical (and expendable.) In addition, we're considering adding a second raid volume to each filer and using snapmirror against the other filer's primary volume. This would protect us against the possibility of one of the primary raid devices having a catastrophic failure. We'd run snapmirror every five minutes or so to keep the secondary updated. Each filer would have a primary and secondary ethernet interface connected to different edge devices on a switched GB network. This would assure that if a network edge device went down the filer would still be able to reach the backbone. Backups would happen with traditional methods using a snapshot of the mirror copy. Here's a cheap ascii picture of what I poorly described above: +---------------+ +---------------+ |snapmirror of | |snapmirror of | |filer 2 primary| |filer 1 primary| +---------------+ +---------------+ | | | +-------+ | | +-------|filer 1|-------+ | | | |primary| | | +-------+ | disks | +-------+ gb ether---| | +-------+ | |---gb ether |filer 1| |filer 2| gb ether---| | | |---gb ether +-------+ +-------+ +-------+ | |filer 2| | +--------|primary|--------+ | disks | +-------+ gb ether gb ether gb ether gb ether gb ether gb ether | | | | | | +------+ +------+ +------+ +------+ +------+ +------+ | app | | app | | app | | app | | app | | app | |server| |server| |server| |server| |server| |server| +------+ +------+ +------+ +------+ +------+ +------+ I'm looking for any experiences you have had with this or any subset of the picture. Specifically, I'd like to hear experiences about - Clustering: Does it work for you? Have you had a filer die and had the secondary take over? Have you had a filer die and the secondary NOT take over? - Snapmirror: Do you use it? How does frequent mirroring affect performance of both the sending and receiving systems? Have you had any consistency or other problems with it? Can you take snapshots of the receiving disk? - Multiple paths to the network. Can you aggregate bandwidth through multiple gigabit connections to the same network? What about setting one interface as the primary and the other as a secondary? - WAFL: Good or bad things to say about the filesystem. - NFS issues. NFS is famous for problems with lockups, locking problems, stuck mounts, etc. We won't be doing any locking over NFS mounts and will be using whatever version of solaris is recommended at the time. Anything good or bad that can be said about the combination of a netapp and sun. Any other information or advice regarding this arrangement would, of course, be welcome. This is being considered as an alternative to the traditional method of hanging a RAID off each server but there are still some big hangups about NFS in general. Good (or bad) experiences regarding this would be appreciated. Thanks for reading this far and thanks in advance for any knowledge you can pass on. Joe Gross

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 December 1999