toasters February 2001

toasters@lists.teaparty.net

88 participants
116 discussions

Disk usage recomendations...
by svawter＠c-cube.com 24 Feb '01

24 Feb '01

Having a set of Filers that have been poorly planned and poorly configured, I would ask for a hand from fellow admins about how to proceed. (okay, I know the best way, buy a new cluster of 840's and migrate it all!) Given that I have 12 "36GB" disks (plus a hot spare) that have been added to one of my filers, should I: a) Build one large volume and control it's space via qtrees? a1) If so, should I lower the raidgroup size or leave it at 14? b) Build multiple (2? 3? 4?) volumes of smaller size Pro's & Con's for each approach would be greatly appreciated! Steve Vawter voice: 408-490-5310 fax: 408-490-8615 Staff UNIX Systems Administrator Steve.Vawter(a)C-Cube.COM

2 1

RE: supported tape drives
by Cormier, Darleen 22 Feb '01

22 Feb '01

Hi Neil, PVR stands for "Policy Variation Request" We use the term in-house when a customer needs to order a configuration that is not released yet. As to the AIT2 drives, they will work on your F760 as long as you are running 5.3.4 and above, so don't worry about it. -----Original Message----- From: neil lehrer [mailto:nlehrer@ibb.gov] Sent: Thursday, February 22, 2001 7:49 AM To: toasters Cc: John Ederma Subject: supported tape drives Importance: High on the netapp list of supported tape drives it says for an f760 and ait2: FWD-HVD (Requires Data ONTAP 5.3.4R2 or above and a PVR. PVR not required with Data ONTAP 6.0 and above.) what is a PVR?? thanks. -- regards +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ + Neil Lehrer + + United States International Broadcasting Bureau + System Development Division + + voice 202 619-2524 + fax 202 619-3576 + nlehrer(a)ibb.gov + + " is this crisis an opportunity or just + another grab the fire extinguisher moment?" + +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

1 0

Netbackup problem...
by Premanshu Jain 22 Feb '01

22 Feb '01

Scenerio: NetApps 840's backed up Using Veritas Netbackup (NDMP) 3.2 on an NT server. Problem : Lost all the .jpg files on a particular volume on the NetApp filer, which is beyond the snapshots, Courtsey Virus... . Need to look for all these .jpg files from the backup and restore them to the same location. I don't find any option allowing searching for all .jpg type files recursively in a Netbackup index. Any solutions...????

1 0

RE: backup via ndmp
by Itzik Meirson D.Sc. 22 Feb '01

22 Feb '01

If you read carefully the Legato documentation you will find out the in order to create the indexes for a NDMP dump legato will use temporary space on the server. You should have enough free space (and maybe swap too) to accomodate the indexes creation. Regards, Itzik -----Original Message----- From: owner-toasters(a)mathworks.com [mailto:owner-toasters@mathworks.com]On Behalf Of Jean-Francois Aupee Sent: Thursday, February 22, 2001 12:20 PM To: toasters Subject: backup via ndmp Hello, I have a problem to backup my netapps via ndmp : My server is a HP9000 serie K420 , 2Go RAM, 2Go swap, with networker 6.0.1 ( patch 1 ). The jukebox is attached directly to one netapp. I run the backup and I receive the following message : It's a part of the message: * netapp3:/vol/ApplCAD/.snapshot/netapp3_backup NDMP Service Log: DUMP IS DONE * netapp3:/vol/ApplCAD/.snapshot/netapp3_backup nsrdmpix: error, out of memory * netapp3:/vol/ApplCAD/.snapshot/netapp3_backup ****************************************************************** * netapp3:/vol/ApplCAD/.snapshot/netapp3_backup ------ E R R O R ------- * netapp3:/vol/ApplCAD/.snapshot/netapp3_backup Failed to store index entries * netapp3:/vol/ApplCAD/.snapshot/netapp3_backup ****************************************************************** netapp3: /vol/ApplCAD/.snapshot/netapp3_backup level=full, 1969 GB 07:38:47 7935328 files bckserv1: index:netapp3 level=full, 1 KB 00:00:04 2 files The backup of data is done, but networker don't save the index !!! Caould you help me ? -- _____________________________________________________________________ Jean-Francois AUPEE AtosOrigin - Philips Semiconductors Caen 2, rue de la girafe - B.P. 5120 14079 Caen Cedex, France Tel: (+33) 2 31 45 22 77 Fax: (+33) 2 31 45 22 60 SERI: aupee@rtccnh1 E-MAIL: mailto:Jean-Francois.Aupee@atosorigin.com aupee(a)caen.sc.philips.com _____________________________________________________________________

1 0

supported tape drives
by neil lehrer 22 Feb '01

22 Feb '01

on the netapp list of supported tape drives it says for an f760 and ait2: FWD-HVD (Requires Data ONTAP 5.3.4R2 or above and a PVR. PVR not required with Data ONTAP 6.0 and above.) what is a PVR?? thanks. -- regards +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ + Neil Lehrer + + United States International Broadcasting Bureau + System Development Division + + voice 202 619-2524 + fax 202 619-3576 + nlehrer(a)ibb.gov + + " is this crisis an opportunity or just + another grab the fire extinguisher moment?" + +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

1 0

RE: backup via ndmp
by Traitel, Eyal 22 Feb '01

22 Feb '01

Can you check if you have enough free swap space on the HP ? Eyal. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- eTraitel - I'm the new eBuzzword around !!! ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Eyal Traitel - Filer Escalation Engineer CNA, MCSE, CSA, NACA Network Appliance BV Holland Office Center Kruisweg 799b 2132 NG, Hoofddorp The Netherlands Office: +31 23 567 9685 Cellular: +31 6 5497 2568 Email: eyal(a)netapp.com ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Get answers NOW! - NetApp On the Web - http://now.netapp.com ---------------------------------------------------------------------- -----Original Message----- From: Jean-Francois Aupee [mailto:aupee@caen.sc.philips.com] Sent: Thursday, February 22, 2001 11:20 AM To: toasters Subject: backup via ndmp Hello, I have a problem to backup my netapps via ndmp : My server is a HP9000 serie K420 , 2Go RAM, 2Go swap, with networker 6.0.1 ( patch 1 ). The jukebox is attached directly to one netapp. I run the backup and I receive the following message : It's a part of the message: * netapp3:/vol/ApplCAD/.snapshot/netapp3_backup NDMP Service Log: DUMP IS DONE * netapp3:/vol/ApplCAD/.snapshot/netapp3_backup nsrdmpix: error, out of memory * netapp3:/vol/ApplCAD/.snapshot/netapp3_backup ****************************************************************** * netapp3:/vol/ApplCAD/.snapshot/netapp3_backup ------ E R R O R ------- * netapp3:/vol/ApplCAD/.snapshot/netapp3_backup Failed to store index entries * netapp3:/vol/ApplCAD/.snapshot/netapp3_backup ****************************************************************** netapp3: /vol/ApplCAD/.snapshot/netapp3_backup level=full, 1969 GB 07:38:47 7935328 files bckserv1: index:netapp3 level=full, 1 KB 00:00:04 2 files The backup of data is done, but networker don't save the index !!! Caould you help me ? -- _____________________________________________________________________ Jean-Francois AUPEE AtosOrigin - Philips Semiconductors Caen 2, rue de la girafe - B.P. 5120 14079 Caen Cedex, France Tel: (+33) 2 31 45 22 77 Fax: (+33) 2 31 45 22 60 SERI: aupee@rtccnh1 E-MAIL: mailto:Jean-Francois.Aupee@atosorigin.com aupee(a)caen.sc.philips.com _____________________________________________________________________

1 0

backup via ndmp
by Jean-Francois Aupee 22 Feb '01

22 Feb '01

Hello, I have a problem to backup my netapps via ndmp : My server is a HP9000 serie K420 , 2Go RAM, 2Go swap, with networker 6.0.1 ( patch 1 ). The jukebox is attached directly to one netapp. I run the backup and I receive the following message : It's a part of the message: * netapp3:/vol/ApplCAD/.snapshot/netapp3_backup NDMP Service Log: DUMP IS DONE * netapp3:/vol/ApplCAD/.snapshot/netapp3_backup nsrdmpix: error, out of memory * netapp3:/vol/ApplCAD/.snapshot/netapp3_backup ****************************************************************** * netapp3:/vol/ApplCAD/.snapshot/netapp3_backup ------ E R R O R ------- * netapp3:/vol/ApplCAD/.snapshot/netapp3_backup Failed to store index entries * netapp3:/vol/ApplCAD/.snapshot/netapp3_backup ****************************************************************** netapp3: /vol/ApplCAD/.snapshot/netapp3_backup level=full, 1969 GB 07:38:47 7935328 files bckserv1: index:netapp3 level=full, 1 KB 00:00:04 2 files The backup of data is done, but networker don't save the index !!! Caould you help me ? -- _____________________________________________________________________ Jean-Francois AUPEE AtosOrigin - Philips Semiconductors Caen 2, rue de la girafe - B.P. 5120 14079 Caen Cedex, France Tel: (+33) 2 31 45 22 77 Fax: (+33) 2 31 45 22 60 SERI: aupee@rtccnh1 E-MAIL: mailto:Jean-Francois.Aupee@atosorigin.com aupee(a)caen.sc.philips.com _____________________________________________________________________

1 0

Re: Disk usage recomendations...
by Rick Hulsey 22 Feb '01

22 Feb '01

There is probably not a short answer to this one. We use Q-trees to manage all of our data so that we get some virtualization of our storage, but we break up data into volumes based on how the data is used. For instance we have our Oracle databases on our filers. In that environment, we have a separate volume for each of the following: tables, logs, and archives. The reason for this is that we use snapshots for backups and data replication. If we have table, logs, and archives in the same volume, a snapshot would take a point in time image of all of the data at the same time, but we actually need to snapshot the archives separately for recoverability. Additionally, we can lose any one entire volume and still recover our data without risking corruption. If you are just using this for plain ol' files, you probably can get away with putting everything into one volume. If it is critical data you may want to snap mirror the critical data so that the critical data is not at risk. >>> Steve Vawter <svawter(a)c-cube.com> 02/21/01 05:50PM >>> Having a set of Filers that have been poorly planned and poorly configured, I would ask for a hand from fellow admins about how to proceed. (okay, I know the best way, buy a new cluster of 840's and migrate it all!) Given that I have 12 "36GB" disks (plus a hot spare) that have been added to one of my filers, should I: a) Build one large volume and control it's space via qtrees? a1) If so, should I lower the raidgroup size or leave it at 14? b) Build multiple (2? 3? 4?) volumes of smaller size Pro's & Con's for each approach would be greatly appreciated! Steve Vawter voice: 408-490-5310 fax: 408-490-8615 Staff UNIX Systems Administrator Steve.Vawter(a)C-Cube.COM

1 0

Re: Disk usage recomendations...
by svawter＠c-cube.com 22 Feb '01

22 Feb '01

I understand that smaller raidgroup sizes and/or more volumes waste space for parity disks. I know that some of the political considerations are for just that in order to lessen the odds of the dreaded double disk failure (DDDF). What other considerations should I be looking at? Backups? Large number of qtrees? Large number of inodes? What other Pro's does a large volume with a large (or at least default of 14) raidgroup size give me? --Steve --> --> From svawter(a)c-cube.com Wed Feb 21 16:00:44 2001 --> From: svawter(a)c-cube.com (Steve Vawter) --> To: toasters(a)mathworks.com --> Subject: Disk usage recomendations... --> --> Having a set of Filers that have been poorly planned and poorly configured, --> I would ask for a hand from fellow admins about how to proceed. --> (okay, I know the best way, buy a new cluster of 840's and migrate it all!) --> --> Given that I have 12 "36GB" disks (plus a hot spare) that have been --> added to one of my filers, should I: --> --> a) Build one large volume and control it's space via qtrees? --> a1) If so, should I lower the raidgroup size or leave it at 14? --> b) Build multiple (2? 3? 4?) volumes of smaller size --> --> Pro's & Con's for each approach would be greatly appreciated! --> --> Steve Vawter voice: 408-490-5310 fax: 408-490-8615 --> Staff UNIX Systems Administrator Steve.Vawter(a)C-Cube.COM --> -->

1 0

RE: F85 series
by White, Lance 21 Feb '01

21 Feb '01

Reason we/I quote raw is that you can carve up the volumes in a myriad of ways, and depending on how you do so, it will impact useable space. Probably a more accurate measurement (but not necessarily meaningful) is "What is LARGEST useable storage configuration for the storage system?" i.e. in this situation, you COULD use 36GB drives, set aside 1 disk for parity, factor in WAFL/OnTap overhead, set snap reserve to zero, and come up with a single data drive value x 17 disks (of course, in reality, you would LIKELY have a SR of 10-20% and set aside 1 disk as hot spare, but you get the idea). Would you increase Max RG Size to 18? Hmm, that's another topic for discussion...one might go with small RG's and hence, increase overhead, decrease likelihood of double disk failure, and decrease SOME performance...so, I ask again (hypothetically, that is), realistically, how SHOULD a vendor quote storage capacity?!? I, personally, explain this to ALL of my customers so that they can understand the correlation of max storage to useable...NetApp employees are HIGHLY encouraged to do so when they are hired, particularly SE's. Lance -----Original Message----- From: Luke Mewburn [mailto:lukem@wasabisystems.com] Sent: Tuesday, February 20, 2001 9:29 AM To: White, Lance Cc: 'toasters(a)mathworks.com' Subject: Re: F85 series On Tue, Feb 20, 2001 at 08:16:55AM -0800, White, Lance wrote: > No, it uses FW Ultra SCSI-3 disks, not FC. Yes, NDMP backup is supported. > Limitations? Well, as it's positioned to be the NEW entry level Netapp (at > 3300 NFS ops/sec, it actually about 30% faster than the old low end F720, > and about 30% less expensive), it IS limited to 648GB MAX storage (6 > internal plus 12 external in 18GB & 36GB flavors), as opposed to the F720's > limit of ~500GB. Still doin' hot swap, RAID4, snapshots, OnTap, WAFL, > everything that's cool about a Filer and more! :-D The box sounds cool. It's about time a box of this price point was available again :) I have a (long-time) gripe in the way it's advertised. It's a gripe I have with every vendor. I wish NetApp would advertise the *usable* diskspace of the machine (as seen by a client OS or df, for example), not the raw diskspace calculated by taking the disk vendor size and multiplying by the number of disks. I know this makes the boxes appear more expensive per usable megabyte, but it's being more honest to the client, and once you explain to the client to take into account all the overheads, and how to do the same math on competing options (e.g, h/w raid + vxfs on Solaris, EMC, etc), then you (NetApp) appear to be delivering accurate technical information. For example, there's no WAY an F720 has 500 GB of usable space. Out of the box, with default snap reserve, it barely has 300 GB, where GB == 2^30, which is what client based tools (such as df and the `Properties' box in Windows) use, not 10^9, which is what (overzealous) disk vendors use. The usuable capacity of an F720 is trivial to calculate: 14 x 36 GB disks, utilised as: 1 hot spare, 1 parity, 12 data disks Each data disk has 24840 MB usable, calculated as: 34500 megabytes (rightsized by OnTAP) - 10% wafl overhead (is this 8% in OnTAP 6.x?) - 20% snap reserve (default; but often reduced to 10%) = 24840 megabytes So, 12 x 24840 = 298080 MB = ~ 291 GB Tweaking the numbers to 8% wafl overhead (from OnTAP 6) and 10% snap reserve gives an F720 approximately 334 GB of space (from 500 GB `raw'). Based on the info Lance White gives above, an F85 with 36 GB drives, consisting of 15 data disks, 1 hot spare, 2 parity, 8% wafl overhead, 10% snap reserve would have a usuable capacity at the client of: 15 x (34500 - 8% - 10%) = 15 x 28556 = 428490 MB = 418 GB 418 GB is a bit less than the ``648 GB MAX storage'' that Lance quotes above. In general, take away approximately one third of the raw capacity that NetApp quote and that will give you an guestimate on the usuable capacity that will suit most client's needs. Luke. PS: I'm sure some people have seen or heard this rant before :) Disclaimer: I like NetApp. I worked at NetApp for a while as an SE. I just believe in being honest to the technical people you're selling to, especially those who have to justify to their management why the (not cheap) 500 GB box they bought ran out of space at 300 GB. -- Luke Mewburn <lukem(a)wasabisystems.com> http://www.wasabisystems.com Luke Mewburn <lukem(a)netbsd.org> http://www.netbsd.org Wasabi Systems - providing NetBSD sales, support and services.

3 2

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 February 2001