toasters May 2003

toasters@lists.teaparty.net

83 participants
92 discussions

��L��y�A�_��g�O�b�c�z�Q��y�O�b�Y��R�Q
by fuku0508 08 May '03

08 May '03

<��M��>DM-top http://dmtop-net100.net <��Ǝ�>�A�_��g�V��b�v�@Secret Dream �@��s�a�J�擹��1-15-3-407�@090-8130-1117 �z�M��~��p�A�h��X�@donot@24i.net �z�M��~�葱��24��ԂŔ��f��܂� ��z�M�͑��M�Ɋւ��菤�\��`��K��ɑ��著�M��Ă��܂��B �Q�Q�Q�Q�Q�Q�Q�Q�Q�Q�Q�Q�Q�y�L��z�Q�Q�Q�Q�Q�Q�Q�Q�Q�Q�Q�Q�Q�Q ��肨�y��݂킭�킭�h�L�h�L��܁� �@��i�Ȃ��Ȃ莟��I��܂��I �@��̏��I�Ȃ��Ȃ�O�ɂƂ肠��ɂ��ā� �@�z�[��y�[�W��Ă��܂��ꂪ��܂��̂ł��߂ɁE�E�E�B �@http://dj.st36.arena.ne.jp/SecretDream

1 0

New 36, 72 and 144gb universal disk drives
by Peter Gauthier 08 May '03

08 May '03

Hi Folks I see Netapp is now selling a universal drive, I'm unable to find any information from the NOW site. 1. These drives are replacing the old 36, 72 and 144gbg drives 2. I assume by universal you can use these in existing raid groups of zoned, block checksum drives 3. is there any issue in using these for spares with the 36gb zoned or block checksum drives Anybody out there have any knowledge about these drives would be much appreciated. Txs Peter

1 0

Newbie: simple NetApp -> NetApp backup, sans Legato et al?
by Chris Shenton 08 May '03

08 May '03

Please excuse my ignorance, we're just about to buy a Filer or two but I don't have any hands-on experience yet. We're looking at a first filer with about 2.5TB and my understanding is we could not do a tape backup overnight with only a single-drive tape subsystem. At this time, we would prefer not to invest in something like Legato to intelligently drive a multi-drive jukebox like the Spectralogic series, though this should be able to dump the full capacity overnight. ("enterprise backup" is down the road). Instead, I was considering getting a second NetApp (probably refurb with transferable license) and backing up the first to the second. This seems surprisingly cost-effective. (I'd love to do SnapMirror but it's surprisingly cost-prohibitive.)-: Is there a way to natively run dumps from one NetApp to another without Legato-ish middleware? without an intermediary client box doing NFS/CIFS mounts? (we need to preserve both filesystem attributes). Is this a plain stooopid idea? Any better ones? Again, I'm hoping to avoid jumping into something Legato-esque at this point -- and just do something cheap and reusable like another NetApp -- because we'll be looking into a more comprehensive backup solution later. Thanks, and sorry for my ignorance. Pointers to docs welcomed.

4 3

Power Requirements for F760 and DS9
by Rogers, Jamie 08 May '03

08 May '03

Hey Toasters, My Generator blew so I have to buy some UPS's. I'm trying to size these puppies for my 760 with 4-DS9 connected. The NetApp guide says that the Filer draws only 300W and each shelf draws about 350W, giving me a total of just 1700W. Can anybody confirm these numbers, they seem awfully low to me for "a toaster". Thanks, Jamie.

1 0

NetApp simulator
by Jose Celestino 08 May '03

08 May '03

Hi, anyone knows where can I get a netapp simulator for linux? TIA. -- Jose Celestino | http://xpto.org/~japc/files/japc-pgpkey.asc ---------------------------------------------------------------- "Don't summarize. Don't abbreviate. Don't interpret." -- DJB

2 1

Re: "snap list" and "df" output differs
by Davin Milun 08 May '03

08 May '03

The numbers in snap list are relative to the total volume sizes: 29527820 / (163842632 + 29527820) = 0.1527, which is rounded to 15% of the total used space. 29527820 / (300719556 + 75179888) = .07855, which is rounded to 8% of the total size of the volume. 39% is how much of the snap reserve you're using right now. (But nothing prevents this from going over 100%.) Davin. At 16:22, on May 7, 2003, Charles Bartels wrote: > Hi, > > Running "df" and "snap list" show vastily different numbers. Is this a bug > or am I missing something? Shouldn't the 39% under capacity for df match > the 15% under %/used ? > > Ex. > > Filer> df > Filesystem kbytes used avail capacity Mounted on > /vol/vol0/ 300719556 163842632 136876924 54% /vol/vol0/ > /vol/vol0/.snapshot 75179888 29527820 45652068 39% > /vol/vol0/.snapshot > > > Filer> snap list > Volume vol0 > working... > > %/used %/total date name > ---------- ---------- ------------ -------- > 0% ( 0%) 0% ( 0%) May 07 16:00 hourly.0 > 1% ( 1%) 0% ( 0%) May 07 12:00 hourly.1 > 2% ( 1%) 1% ( 1%) May 07 08:00 hourly.2 > 3% ( 1%) 1% ( 1%) May 07 00:00 nightly.0 > 4% ( 1%) 2% ( 0%) May 06 20:00 hourly.3 > 5% ( 1%) 2% ( 1%) May 06 16:00 hourly.4 > 6% ( 1%) 3% ( 1%) May 06 12:00 hourly.5 > 9% ( 3%) 4% ( 1%) May 06 00:00 nightly.1 > 15% ( 7%) 8% ( 3%) May 05 00:00 weekly.0

1 0

"snap list" and "df" output differs
by Charles Bartels 07 May '03

07 May '03

Hi, Running "df" and "snap list" show vastily different numbers. Is this a bug or am I missing something? Shouldn't the 39% under capacity for df match the 15% under %/used ? Ex. Filer> df Filesystem kbytes used avail capacity Mounted on /vol/vol0/ 300719556 163842632 136876924 54% /vol/vol0/ /vol/vol0/.snapshot 75179888 29527820 45652068 39% /vol/vol0/.snapshot Filer> snap list Volume vol0 working... %/used %/total date name ---------- ---------- ------------ -------- 0% ( 0%) 0% ( 0%) May 07 16:00 hourly.0 1% ( 1%) 0% ( 0%) May 07 12:00 hourly.1 2% ( 1%) 1% ( 1%) May 07 08:00 hourly.2 3% ( 1%) 1% ( 1%) May 07 00:00 nightly.0 4% ( 1%) 2% ( 0%) May 06 20:00 hourly.3 5% ( 1%) 2% ( 1%) May 06 16:00 hourly.4 6% ( 1%) 3% ( 1%) May 06 12:00 hourly.5 9% ( 3%) 4% ( 1%) May 06 00:00 nightly.1 15% ( 7%) 8% ( 3%) May 05 00:00 weekly.0

1 0

RE: Legato and NDMP
by Dell, Mary 07 May '03

07 May '03

Just to add what others have said about NDMP and Legato, here's my experience: 1. You can use nfs mounts with legato fine, but you will not get CIFS metadata that way. So if you're only using NFS on your filer, I would recommend using nfs mounts instead of NDMP...more flexible and fewer juke issues down the road. If you're using CIFS you will probably want to retain your user permission data. 2. our juke (ATL1500) requires an ungodly amount of load sleep and unload sleep time to be able to mount and unmount tapes. I have it set to 300 sec on every sleep time that affects loading. What happened with the default (5 sec I think) is that it would get the signal to load the tape, then get the signal to read the label way before the tape was in the drive, and therefore think the drive was empty, and come back with an error. Icky. Once we increased the load times, all was ok. 3. NDMP can't do incremental backups (differentials are fine)...we do a full one night and level 1's the rest of the week, and that works fine. 4. we had the juke directly attached to the filer but for various reasons related to our particular environment we ended up attaching it to a sun machine and using a 3-way NDMP setup to back up the filer. It's not as fast as direct attach but it does work. In the unlikely event that you need to do this, feel free to email me direct and I'll be happy to walk you through it. You'll probably only need to do this if you've significantly angered one of ye elder gods, though...it's not normal. I've been running NDMP/Legato for about 2 years now and have probably seen every possible error message, so you can file me in your contacts if you like...good luck Mary Dell Server Administrator Mesirow Financial mdell(a)mesirowfinancial.com This communication may contain privileged and/or confidential information. It is intended solely for the use of the addressee. If you are not the intended recipient, you are strictly prohibited from disclosing, copying, distributing or using any of this information. If you received this communication in error, please contact the sender immediately and destroy the material in its entirety, whether electronic or hard copy. Confidential, proprietary or time-sensitive communications should not be transmitted via the Internet, as there can be no assurance of actual or timely delivery, receipt and/or confidentiality. This is not an offer, or solicitation of any offer to buy or sell any security, investment or other product.

1 0

Fwd: "hobbyist" licenses?
by John Enger 07 May '03

07 May '03

>Does NetApp have an official or unofficial "hobbyist" or "home user" >program, for people who want to play with older systems at home in a >non-production/non-profit environment, and cant afford a service contract? > >I've acquired a FA520 with four v2 SCSI disk shelves (full of 9G drives) and >a full spares kit. > >The unit came with a NFS license, but no CIFS - and I'd like to experiment >with CIFS on this unit without having to build a UNIX box and serve NFS via >SAMBA. > >I'm running OnTap 5.3.7. I've tried to obtain NetApp OnTap software for my F330, but with no luck. I ended up with a copy of a netapp simulator for linux... Not exactly why I purchased my NetApp system. I have had exellent service with both Sun, SGI, HP and Digital when it comes to lisencing for home use. But the NetApp system is not in any way linked to a software lisence as other systems are. Or vise versa actually.. So my filer is at ease in the basement as a way too large book-support. And I am still ignorant when it comes to NetApp's and Data OnTap software. Perhaps EMC Symmetrix is an easier path to walk with home use and lisencing? John Enger http://www.johnenger.com

6 8

RE: "hobbyist" licenses?
by James Beal 07 May '03

07 May '03

I agree with John: I don't see a piracy issue here. We've got 50,000 systems out there already, and I don't see why home users would be more likely to try to steal something than the people who already have access to those 50,000 systems. Plus we've got the Data ONTAP simulator which we are letting lots of folks have. I would like to support any move in this direction, I would also be interested in knowing what the correct path is for getting access to the ONTAP simulator is.

1 0

← Newer
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
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 May 2003