toasters July 1999

toasters@lists.teaparty.net

90 participants
108 discussions

RE: SnapMirror Very Slow
by Sam Schorr 29 Jul '99

29 Jul '99

Alexei, Actually, there is a very good reason to do both. Clustering only protects filer head failures. If a volume on a filer loses 2 disks in 1 RAID group, the volume built on that RAID group is useless and needs to be rebuilt upon disk repair. So, by using SNAPMIRROR to "almost realtime" copy data to a read-only volume on another filer, upon disk failure that volume can be made "live" or the master volume. This is a strategy we are employing to fully protect our users' data and insure the highest availability of that data. Regards, Sam -----Original Message----- From: alexei(a)mindspring.net [mailto:alexei@mindspring.net] Sent: Thursday, July 29, 1999 1:48 PM To: dmidgett(a)about.com Cc: toasters(a)mathworks.com Subject: Re: SnapMirror Very Slow "David Midgett" <dmidgett(a)about.com> writes: > Has anyone experienced problems with the SnapMirror taking an excessively > long time to complete the transfer. We have two F760's in a cluster > configuration. The mirror is set to update every 15 minutes. There is not > that much data that is changing and the total volume is 107Gb with only 1Gb > used spanning 10 disks. The transfer takes hours for any change to be > replicated. The 'vol snapmirror status' command shows that it is > transferring. The network speed is not an issue. Also connected the two > NetApp's directly to each other with a cross cable. This does not speed it > up. Any insight? Hmm. I don't know if this should work as you describe. The normal overhead for the snapmirror includes moving a constant set of data plus the deltas. Once the initial (level 0) snapmirror finishes, how long do incrementals take? Have you tried with larger intervals? What network interface are you using to conenct the filers? snapmirroring between cluster partners does not seem like it would/should work completely. The whole point of clustering is to have access to both sets of data with a failure, so snapmirroring it between the cluster is an unneccessary step. What occurs when: - snapmirror source filer fails - cluster-failover kicks in - cf partner (snapmirror destination) takes over - snapmirror continues.... how? The filer talks to itself? Try breaking the cluster setup, then do the snapmirror again. See if the speed improves. Perhaps others have better ideas. HTH. Alex

1 0

SnapMirror Very Slow
by David Midgett 29 Jul '99

29 Jul '99

Has anyone experienced problems with the SnapMirror taking an excessively long time to complete the transfer. We have two F760's in a cluster configuration. The mirror is set to update every 15 minutes. There is not that much data that is changing and the total volume is 107Gb with only 1Gb used spanning 10 disks. The transfer takes hours for any change to be replicated. The 'vol snapmirror status' command shows that it is transferring. The network speed is not an issue. Also connected the two NetApp's directly to each other with a cross cable. This does not speed it up. Any insight?

3 3

RE: SnapMirror Very Slow
by Melvin, Grant 29 Jul '99

29 Jul '99

Hi Paul, > Well, have you tried contacting NetApp CS > and asked them to look at your setup? You > may have something different in your > environment or it could be you've uncovered a bug. David HAS contacted NetApp CS and Engineering is helping them troubleshoot the problem. Cheers, Grant

1 0

RE: SnapMirror Very Slow
by Norman, Paul 29 Jul '99

29 Jul '99

> -----Original Message----- > From: alexei(a)mindspring.net [mailto:alexei@mindspring.net] > Sent: Thursday, July 29, 1999 1:48 PM > To: dmidgett(a)about.com > Cc: toasters(a)mathworks.com > Subject: Re: SnapMirror Very Slow > > > "David Midgett" <dmidgett(a)about.com> writes: > > > Has anyone experienced problems with the SnapMirror taking > an excessively > > long time to complete the transfer. We have two F760's in a cluster > > configuration. The mirror is set to update every 15 > minutes. There is not > > that much data that is changing and the total volume is > 107Gb with only 1Gb > > used spanning 10 disks. The transfer takes hours for any > change to be > > replicated. The 'vol snapmirror status' command shows that it is > > transferring. The network speed is not an issue. Also > connected the two > > NetApp's directly to each other with a cross cable. This > does not speed it > > up. Any insight? > > > Hmm. I don't know if this should work as you describe. The > normal overhead > for the snapmirror includes moving a constant set of data > plus the deltas. Correct, overhead is 1/1024 of the volume size. In this case a little over 100MB. > > Once the initial (level 0) snapmirror finishes, how long do > incrementals take? > > Have you tried with larger intervals? The implication here being that an update that does not complete due to network being down or some such will just restart at the next scheduled update time. How are you determining that updates take a long time. Have you done snap list and seen how fast the snapshot names are incrementing. > > What network interface are you using to conenct the filers? > > snapmirroring between cluster partners does not seem like it > would/should > work completely. The whole point of clustering is to have access to > both sets of data with a failure, so snapmirroring it between > the cluster is an > unneccessary step. What occurs when: > > - snapmirror source filer fails > - cluster-failover kicks in > - cf partner (snapmirror destination) takes over > - snapmirror continues.... how? The filer talks to itself? Exactly! The filer is running a virtual machine that actually sends the update to the original physical machine. Actually not as crazy as it first sounds. In fact we do have customers that just have a single filer and want to mirror so that they have two copies of data. [Poof! The engineer in me takes over for the Marketing dweeb that's been talking til now] Alright, maybe we don't have anybody doing it, but we've talked about it with customers. :-) When we first set up customer demos of snapmirroring here in corporate, we did it on a cluster since that was the equipment we had in the demo room. I don't recall any special issues in using it on a cluster. It was hard to see the updates since we had a tiny volume, 30GB, and a direct gigabit connection. Every time we did a status it was idle. Trying to catch the 30MB in flight turned out to be impossible. A sysstat would show the update going once a minute. Looking at the snapshot names incrementing turned out to be the simplest way to see what was happening. > > Try breaking the cluster setup, then do the snapmirror again. > See if the > speed improves. This shouldn't be an issue. > > Perhaps others have better ideas. Well, have you tried contacting NetApp CS and asked them to look at your setup? You may have something different in your environment or it could be you've uncovered a bug. > > HTH. > > > Alex >

1 0

Re: SnapMirror Very Slow
by alexei＠mindspring.net 29 Jul '99

29 Jul '99

"David Midgett" <dmidgett(a)about.com> writes: > Has anyone experienced problems with the SnapMirror taking an excessively > long time to complete the transfer. We have two F760's in a cluster > configuration. The mirror is set to update every 15 minutes. There is not > that much data that is changing and the total volume is 107Gb with only 1Gb > used spanning 10 disks. The transfer takes hours for any change to be > replicated. The 'vol snapmirror status' command shows that it is > transferring. The network speed is not an issue. Also connected the two > NetApp's directly to each other with a cross cable. This does not speed it > up. Any insight? Hmm. I don't know if this should work as you describe. The normal overhead for the snapmirror includes moving a constant set of data plus the deltas. Once the initial (level 0) snapmirror finishes, how long do incrementals take? Have you tried with larger intervals? What network interface are you using to conenct the filers? snapmirroring between cluster partners does not seem like it would/should work completely. The whole point of clustering is to have access to both sets of data with a failure, so snapmirroring it between the cluster is an unneccessary step. What occurs when: - snapmirror source filer fails - cluster-failover kicks in - cf partner (snapmirror destination) takes over - snapmirror continues.... how? The filer talks to itself? Try breaking the cluster setup, then do the snapmirror again. See if the speed improves. Perhaps others have better ideas. HTH. Alex

1 0

RE: CIFS Remote Backup Options
by Benn, Paul 29 Jul '99

29 Jul '99

Hello Annisa, Keeping ARCServe in place should be just fine and would relieve you from having to learn a new piece of backup software (not to mention having to train anybody else in the support staff that might need to use it). The most common (only) "gotchas" that I've personally seen are related to mal-configured file permissions or occasionally name resolution problems. Make sure that the backup application's service account has access to the files and directories that you want to backup. Best of Luck! Regards, Paul Benn Network Appliance -----Original Message----- I am working on design of a backup system for our F740 filer (100G usable) in a CIFS environment. At this time we have no plans on directly attaching a tape backup device to the filer. Our current enterprise backup solution is ARCserve 6.5 (on NT). I have the White Paper on NT Backups and am wondering what is actually in use in the field. Are there any gotcha's I need to watch out for? Any best practices out there?

1 0

Linux, Samba and CIFS
by Sam Schorr 29 Jul '99

29 Jul '99

Folks, We're trying to get a Linux box, using Samba, to mount an NT share to our filers. We have been, quite successfully, accessing the filers from the NT domain they are in using normal UNC share names. We have also, successfully, mounted NT shares from the Linux box using Samba. The failure seems to be in some area of authentication on the part of the filers that is somehow unique to them as other NT systems are quite happy talking to the Linux/Samba mount. Any thoughts? Sam Schorr Homestead Technologies ph: (650) 549-3152 fax: (650) 364-7329 sschorr(a)homestead.com Don't just build a home page...build a Homestead!! http://www.homestead.com

3 2

File Ownership
by Ken Zola 29 Jul '99

29 Jul '99

Has anyone had the problem of Microsoft Word or Excel file writes taking over ownership of a file? I have a 720 at OS version of 5.1.2R3 running both the NFS and CIFS protocols. The filer contains only the root volume which has multiple qtrees of UNIX style security. Scenario: CIFS user#1 creates a Microsoft Word document which has write access at the UNIX group level. CIFS user#2, who is in the same UNIX group, modifies the file and automatically becomes the UNIX owner of the file. This works the same for Excel documents but not for text documents using Notepad. All help is appreciated. Ken

2 1

RE: File Ownership
by Muhlestein, Mark 29 Jul '99

29 Jul '99

This has to do with the way many Windows applications work. When a file is opened the application typically operates on a temporary copy of the original file. The temporary file is of course owned by the user that just created it. When the file is saved, the original file is renamed to become a backup file, and the temporary file is renamed to the original file name. That's how the ownership changes. Mark -----Original Message----- From: Ken Zola [mailto:kenz@cfsmo.honeywell.com] Sent: Thursday, July 29, 1999 8:24 AM To: toasters(a)mathworks.com Subject: File Ownership Has anyone had the problem of Microsoft Word or Excel file writes taking over ownership of a file? I have a 720 at OS version of 5.1.2R3 running both the NFS and CIFS protocols. The filer contains only the root volume which has multiple qtrees of UNIX style security. Scenario: CIFS user#1 creates a Microsoft Word document which has write access at the UNIX group level. CIFS user#2, who is in the same UNIX group, modifies the file and automatically becomes the UNIX owner of the file. This works the same for Excel documents but not for text documents using Notepad. All help is appreciated. Ken

1 0

RE: Linux, Samba and CIFS
by Benn, Paul 29 Jul '99

29 Jul '99

You might want to consider upgrading to Data ONTAP 5.3.2. The smbmount command works with that version. Out of curiosity, is there any reason that you would rather use CIFS than NFS to connect from a Linux box (assuming your filer is licensed for both)? Regards, Paul -----Original Message----- From: Sam Schorr [mailto:sschorr@homestead.com] Sent: Thursday, July 29, 1999 10:49 AM To: 'Benn, Paul'; Sam Schorr; 'toasters(a)mathworks.com' Cc: Stephen Wu; Mike Mcnelly Subject: RE: Linux, Samba and CIFS We are using Samba 2.0.3-8. the filers are running 5.2.1P2D6. -----Original Message----- From: Benn, Paul [mailto:paul.benn@netapp.com] Sent: Thursday, July 29, 1999 10:46 AM To: 'Sam Schorr'; 'toasters(a)mathworks.com' Cc: Stephen Wu; Mike Mcnelly Subject: RE: Linux, Samba and CIFS What are you using to mount the share? What version of Data ONTAP are you using? Regards, Paul -----Original Message----- We're trying to get a Linux box, using Samba, to mount an NT share to our filers. We have been, quite successfully, accessing the filers from the NT domain they are in using normal UNC share names. We have also, successfully, mounted NT shares from the Linux box using Samba. The failure seems to be in some area of authentication on the part of the filers that is somehow unique to them as other NT systems are quite happy talking to the Linux/Samba mount.

1 0

2025

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 July 1999