toasters January 2002

toasters@lists.teaparty.net

91 participants
108 discussions

Re: Netapp alternatives
by ScottUCE＠aol.com 21 Jan '02

21 Jan '02

In a message dated 1/18/2002 4:06:48 PM Central Standard Time, joe.luchtenberg(a)data-line.com writes: > but if you're just looking > to save a few $, then I would suggest considering stepping down to an F810 > or even F87 before ruling out NetApp on price (I may be reading too much > into your post here). > Hello, Joe: You don't necessarily have to "step down" to an F810 or F87 -- let alone abandon NetApp altogether for Sun or Procom or Compaq -- to save money. There are great buys on a limited number of used NetApp filers available today -- F720s, F740s and F760s with transferable NFS, CIFS and even CLUSTER licenses. As such, I don't believe there is any reason a NAS user has to settle for a "non-NetApp" solution because of price. Regards, Scott Scott Fischmann Union Computer Exchange, Inc. 6233 Idylwood Lane Minneapolis, MN 55436 Phone: 952 935 7282 FAX: 952 935 5056 scott(a)unioncomputer.com

1 0

RE: Netapp alternatives
by Joe Luchtenberg 21 Jan '02

21 Jan '02

Peter, If, as a current NetApp user, you have grown accustomed to their standard of reliability, performance, features, breadth of offerings, investment protection and support, I believe you will find more than just reputation lacking in most competitors' offerings. (Of course YMMV; I am certainly familiar with NetApp owners who have been less than satisfied, too.) I state this as one who can sell you not only NetApp filers but also competing storage solutions from Sun and Procom, as well as Compaq, EMC, and others. Obviously your requirements are unique and there are solid solutions from myriad competitors that may satisfy your needs, but if you're just looking to save a few $, then I would suggest considering stepping down to an F810 or even F87 before ruling out NetApp on price (I may be reading too much into your post here). Explore your options. If you can, try to get a few demo boxes in from competing vendors and try them out in your environment. I imagine NetApp would welcome the opportunity to reinforce their dominance in the NAS market by going head-to-head. I'd feel confident with them in there, were I the reseller competing for your business. Very general reply to a very general question. Joe Joe Luchtenberg Dataline, Inc. Email: joe.luchtenberg(a)data-line.com Phone: 757-457-0504 (direct line) 757-858-0600 (front desk) 757-285-1223 (mobile) Fax: 757-858-0606 Please visit us at www.data-line.com > -----Original Message----- > From: Peter D. Gray [mailto:pdg@uow.edu.au] > Sent: Thursday, January 17, 2002 9:49 PM > To: toasters(a)mathworks.com > Subject: Netapp alternatives > > > Has anybody on this list experience with procom > filers or the veritas "servpoint" software. > > We are in the process of upgrading our NAS > and procom and SUN (with veritas servpoint) are > options along with staying with netapp. > > The veritas product looks interesting (see the > veritas web site if you want details) but is pretty new. > The procom filers are a lot cheaper but do not have > the reputation of netapp. The latest spec results > though seem to indicate that the procom filers > offer pretty good performance. > > Regards, > pdg > > -- > > See mail headers for contact information. >

4 3

Intermittent ACL Problems
by Chuah, Nicholas 21 Jan '02

21 Jan '02

I'm having this issue of my folders' ACL intermittently lost and re-appeared at a later stage and happened on random basis on some of the folders. In short, random ACL lost on random folders. How should I start to diagnose the problem when it appear? Any hints would be greatly appreciated. Nic

1 0

RE: filestats
by Thompson, Tim 21 Jan '02

21 Jan '02

> ran filestats on an F740. After noticing the cpu load he wanted to > interrupt but could not do it with Ctrl-C This is bug 16909. There's currently no way to interrupt it. The fix has been implemented and will appear in the next major release. > I ran filestats on one of the F630s with 256 RAM and Ontap version > 6.0.1R3. It took over 6 hours to complete and for 4 hours, CPU was > running at 100%. Does this sound right? Doesn't sound right. I just ran the same command on an F630 with 256 MB running ONTAP 6.0.3, on a volume with 600654 inodes used (6gig of data), and it took only 80 seconds, with the CPU running at 60%. I'll be following up with Daniel. ...Tim Thompson...Network Appliance, Inc...

2 1

HSM and SRM
by Steven Boyer 19 Jan '02

19 Jan '02

Is anyone using HSM or SRM and if so what products are you using. we are looking into Highground and SAM FS from Sun, and BrightStor by Computer Associates. -- Steven N. Boyer UNIX/NT Support HQ USCENTCOM General Dynamics 813-828-1515 --

1 0

Solstice Backup (Legato) question
by Matt Musgrove 18 Jan '02

18 Jan '02

Hello, We have just purchased our first filer (an F820) and are trying to get the backups/restores working before we put it into production. We are using Solstice Backup with NDMP and have a DLT jukebox directly connected to the F820. We can get backups to work but are having trouble with restores. Do you have to use nwrecover (which I can get to work) or can you use the save set recover facility. I get "Invalid fh_info" messages with save set recover. Really I need to know the best way to recover a whole volume in the quickest way in the event of a disaster. thanks Matt Musgrove Thales Information Systems

1 0

SUMMARY: Solaris IP Network Multipathing -- help needed -- peer t o peer w/F840 using Quad 100BaseT
by Surlow, Jim 18 Jan '02

18 Jan '02

The short summary is that the Solaris 8 IP Network Multipathing feature is intended with SunTrunk compatable switches. So, it won't work in a peer to peer environment with a NetApp. I didn't bother with trying to hook up a switch as this is temporary. Ended up just ifconfig-ing 4 different interfaces on both the filer and Sun. -----Original Message----- From: Surlow, Jim Sent: Friday, January 11, 2002 3:53 PM To: 'toasters(a)mathworks.com' Subject: Solaris IP Network Multipathing -- help needed -- peer to peer w/F840 using Quad 100BaseT Toaster Admins, Am wondering if anyone has done what I'm currently trying to do. I'm trying to setup a Sun E6500 w/a Quad Fast Ethernet Card to connect directly to an F840 w/a Quad NIC using IP Network Multipathing found in Sol 8. I'm running OnTap 6.1.2. These are connected together without a switch or hub. Each of the boxes has a separate NIC to connect to our LAN. I currently have a vif established on the filer and I have the Solaris box cooperating (no errors in the logs anymore). I can mount over the vif (and use the group IP on the "Solaris vif"). The problem is that I only seeing substantial traffic over a single ethernet interface (using "vif stat <vif name>"). And when I say "substantial", it seems that there are ping packets or such on occasion checking the up state of the connections. According to http://www.sun.com/blueprints/0801/Multipathing-updt1.pdf (page 4), it says that outbound packets should be balanced over the multipath which in my tests they clearly are not. Has anyone else come across this? My test case has 9 mount points. If this fails, I'm thinking of dividing up the mounts over the 4 ports in the QFE and mounting the exports separately, but then I get no pooling of the interfaces and no failover. Pros & Cons to this? Thanks, J. Surlow

3 2

Netapp alternatives
by Peter D. Gray 18 Jan '02

18 Jan '02

Has anybody on this list experience with procom filers or the veritas "servpoint" software. We are in the process of upgrading our NAS and procom and SUN (with veritas servpoint) are options along with staying with netapp. The veritas product looks interesting (see the veritas web site if you want details) but is pretty new. The procom filers are a lot cheaper but do not have the reputation of netapp. The latest spec results though seem to indicate that the procom filers offer pretty good performance. Regards, pdg -- See mail headers for contact information.

1 0

bugwatch
by neil lehrer 17 Jan '02

17 Jan '02

how can a bug be fixed if a fixed version is not available? what's the point? or is this implying there is a patch version and i have to call and ask about it? please see below: ~~~~~~~~~~ The following are bugs that meet the critera as specified in your NOW Bug Alerts Profile(s) ======================================================================== Profile Name : cifs http://now.netapp.com/NOW/cgi-bin/bugprofile?Action=Details&profileid=97 Bug Id : 63046 Details : http://now.netapp.com/NOW/cgi-bin/bol?Type=Detail&Display=63046 Title : CIFS Accounts with User Names Longer than 16 Characters May Not Authenticate in Windows 2000 Domains Product : Data ONTAP Severity : 3 - Serious inconvenience Status : Fixed Version Found -Data ONTAP : 6.1.1R2 -NetCache : N/A Likely Exists -Data ONTAP : 6.1.1R2 through 6.1.2R1 -NetCache : N/A Fixed In Versions <<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<< Bug Watch activated: Yes [If 'Yes', you will be notified when a fix is released] [See http://now.netapp.com/NOW/cgi-bin/bugwatch for more information] ~~~~~~~~~~~~ -- regards

1 0

RE: ascii files convertion UNIX <--> windows ?
by Stout, Noelette 16 Jan '02

16 Jan '02

you can download the mtools utility (http://www.mit.edu/afs/athena/system/mtools/src/) to get the dos2unix/unix2dos functionality as well as others. Other sites for finding dos2unix are: http://www.megaloman.com/~hany/RPM/dos2unix.html http://www.bastet.com/software/software.html --this is a win32 port http://jon.kw.net/download/dos2unix/ and these are just a few. A web search on dos2unix and mtools turned up several sources for both. Noelette Stout Unix System Administrator IKON Office Solutions, Inc Digital Express tel. (770)326-4140 fax (770)326-4139 email: nstout(a)ikon.com -----Original Message----- From: Guy Harris [mailto:guy@netapp.com] Sent: Wednesday, January 16, 2002 3:13 PM To: Stout, Noelette Cc: toasters(a)mathworks.com Subject: Re: ascii files convertion UNIX <--> windows ? > On the UNIX side, you can also use the dos2unix and unix2dos commands. That depends on the UNIX; Digital UNIX 4.0, for example, doesn't have those commands, unless they're in a component we didn't install: hostname$ uname -sr OSF1 V4.0 hostname$ dos2unix ksh: dos2unix: not found hostname$ unix2dos ksh: unix2dos: not found The same applies to HP-UX 11.00: hostname$ uname -sr HP-UX B.11.00 hostname$ dos2unix ksh: dos2unix: not found hostname$ unix2dos ksh: unix2dos: not found and, for that matter, to whatever version of Red Hat Linux is on some machines here: hostname$ uname -sr Linux 2.2.14-6.1.1 hostname$ dos2unix ksh: dos2unix: not found hostname$ unix2dos ksh: unix2dos: not found I would not, however, be surprised to hear that there's a GNU utility that'll convert between DOS/Windows and UNIX text file format.

1 0

← Newer
1
...
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
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 January 2002