toasters March 2000

toasters@lists.teaparty.net

125 participants
147 discussions

Re: Disk drive technology
by mds＠gbnet.net 03 Mar '00

03 Mar '00

On Wed 23 Feb, 2000, "Bruce Sterling Woodcock" <sirbruce(a)ix.netcom.com> wrote: > The article doesn't say, but bigger, faster disk drives often draw more > power. Thus, NetApp needs to have shelves that can support them > first, before they can test them for reliability. There are a lot of issues > involving mechanical vibration and so on that have to be assessed before > such a drive could be qualified. It may be that this particular drive is > not appropriate for certain shelves. Well, yeah, so much so obvious. So how soon was that? 8) > More spindles is better performance, if you are read-heavy. If your filer > seems slow and it's reading constantly but the CPU is still under 100%, > more spindles could help. So much for conventional wisdom. However, my question was trying to elicit something a little more, well, complete as a model of performance. I mean FCAL is a loop technology, and filers can come with 1, 2 or 3 loops. How much does performance differ when using 1 chain as opposed to 3 balanced chains, using which drives, using what RAID set sizes and volume mappings? How does performance get affected by the size of the disks you use? See, if none of these things makes any difference to performance I'd love to know why. If they *do* then I'd love to know how to build faster filers. I'd be happy with an analytical model, or a set of tables taken from either real lab testing with real filers, or simulator results. As it stands though, all we have are rules of thumb that sound plausible. The same goes for backup performance. There's been so much discussion on the list about both topics, but I can't honestly hand-on-heart tell someone how best to set-up their filers. I'd write something if I knew the answers myself. The best I can find is things like: http://now.netapp.com/NOW/knowledge/contents/FAQ/FAQ_560.shtml I've been meaning to brush up on queueing theory so maybe I *will* try to work something up myself on this. I'd just hate to reinvent the wheel if someone's done it already. I also don't know anything about the buffers in the filer, on FCAL interfaces, the network interfaces, the precise use of the WAFL, etc.. So my model might be under-informed. Here's a thought to mull over: if you have 20 18 gig drives on 2 loops and 16MB nvram, will you see better or worse performance than with 40 9GB drives on 1 loop with 16MB nvram presuming your clients are all writing as fast as they are allowed? Please disregard any "such configs aren't shipped" objections as this is an in-principle hypothetical. Please do consider the effect of RAID sets, and incremental disk-additions over the lifetime of the filer in question. I picked writing as the task because I wanted to point out also that there's an impact on the DOT algorithms, based on the spindles, the RAID set sizes, and maybe the chains too. I don't know the answer, but I'd like to. Without such models we all have to purchase filers somewhat in the dark, and either pray that we got it right, or expend more time than we could in evaluating our purchases for suitability. One question - is anyone else interested in this or am I just shooting my mouth off needlessly? >-- End of excerpt from "Bruce Sterling Woodcock" -- -Mark ... an Englishman in London ...

6 6

legato java client
by bentele＠mtu-friedrichshafen.com 03 Mar '00

03 Mar '00

Hi all, we have a F740 with 534R3 and I just installed legato's netapp client ( patch 5.5 ) . ( Filer has not been rebootet after the legato-installation.) na_nsrexecd -s *nt-legato-server* start shows the daemon is running, rsh-option is on; but I get the following messages, when starting the clients group on the nsr-server: NetWorker: ASM donesave failed. NetWorker: save: Error java.io.IOException: save failed java.io.IOException: save failed at COM.legato.networker.cmd.Save.savepaths(Save.java:336) at COM.legato.networker.cmd.Save.save(Save.java:108) Does anyone has any suggestions ? Thank you Mit freundlichen Grüßen Markus Bentele MTU Friedrichshafen GmbH * 07541-90-2654 * 07541-90-5510 * bentele(a)mtu-friedrichshafen.com

1 0

RE: Site Server and netapp
by Benn, Paul 03 Mar '00

03 Mar '00

The release to use is: 5.3.4R3P2 -----Original Message----- From: Keith Brown [mailto:keith@netapp.com] Sent: Thursday, March 02, 2000 7:37 AM To: jq; toasters(a)mathworks.com Subject: Re: Site Server and netapp Hi Jay... You need to be using a Data ONTAP rev 5.3.4R2D2 or better (yes, I know.... we're still working on the C3PO release! :-)). You quoted a site server update propogation issue in your mail, but the root cause of that problem actually has to do with the way IIS uses the change notification APIs in Win32 (towit, very heavily!) and a small difference that existed between the way Windows NT handled change notify events and the way that Data ONTAP handled them. The issue was a little involved, and only ever occured when an app started using change notify like it was going out of fashion, but the engineering team here chased it down and it's all solved. I did just try and check to make sure the needed fix got rolled into Data ONTAP 5.3.5 also, which you should be able to obtain from NOW, but the system we have for letting me do that doesn't appear to be available to me right now. I'll try again a little later and e-mail you privately. Keith

1 0

User viewing quota
by bhaskar.g＠philips.com 02 Mar '00

02 Mar '00

Hi all, We have set the quotas for all the users in the /vol/vol0/home. If any user from the unix system gives the command quota -v. he gets lists of all the users who are owning the files in the home directory. But the disk usage is of my home directory. Please let me know is there any solution for this. bhaskarg@nakul$ quota -v Disk quotas for bhaskarg (uid 1036): Filesystem usage quota limit timeleft files quota limit timeleft /chicago/disk14 0 75000 76000 0 2200 2225 /tmp_mnt/home/babuk 228900 409600 409600 894 20480 20480 /tmp_mnt/home/bhaskarg 228900 409600 409600 894 20480 20480 /tmp_mnt/home/opusadm 228900 409600 409600 894 20480 20480 /tmp_mnt/home/kjayanth 228900 409600 409600 894 20480 20480 /tmp_mnt/home/kannan 228900 409600 409600 894 20480 20480 /tmp_mnt/home/model 228900 409600 409600 894 20480 20480 /tmp_mnt/home/vish 228900 409600 409600 894 20480 20480 /tmp_mnt/home/bhargava 228900 409600 409600 894 20480 20480 /tmp_mnt/home/ksaxena 228900 409600 409600 894 20480 20480 regards Bhaskar G Systems Engineer, Philips Semiconductors, #3, Sterling Square,Madras Bank Road, Off St Mark's Road,BANGALORE-560 001. Voice : +91 80 222 9200 Ext 5060 Fax: +91 80 2229700

5 4

Site Server and netapp
by jq 02 Mar '00

02 Mar '00

Hi, Does anyone have any experience using Site Server as a front end to pages on a Netapp. When we update the pages on the Netapp the clients still seem to get the cached copies. Are there any settings on the Netapp that should be set (oplocks?) or is this more likely a Site Server issue only. Thanks, Jay

2 1

Running du's
by Derek Kelly 01 Mar '00

01 Mar '00

This may be a fruitless search for info but i'm interested in hearing about how folks are handling disk usage stats on large quantities of data (say 2 or more TB). Of particular interest to me are environments where there are lots and lots of small files rather than a modest amount of large ones. Knowing that the network wire is usually the bottleneck, we are running our du's from an admin host on the same isolated 100 bt server network as our 6 filers. But- because of a known incompatibility between the network card on our admin host and the Bay switch we're using, the card can only sucessfully do half-duplex, not full. Due to a lack of other suitable hosts to run these reports from, I now turn my attention to this list for some collective brainstorming. Thanks, Derek Kelly

3 2

Max disk limit on F740?
by Öberg Mats 01 Mar '00

01 Mar '00

Hi, I have some questions about the maximum amount of disk allowed on the F740. Is it a hard limit on the total disksize or the useable disksize? ie. do you count the hotspares? The 1TB limit: is it 2^40 or 10^12? or some other fixed number? ----- Mats Oberg / TietoEnator Sweden

3 2

Jump to page:

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 March 2000