toasters February 2004

toasters@lists.teaparty.net

57 participants
48 discussions

F760 question
by Scott Baker 04 Mar '04

04 Mar '04

I was hoping to find an answer in the archives, but no luck. We've picked up a NetApp F760 and have had no problems with the system. Recently we've tried adding more disks to the system, but seem to be hitting a limit. The config looks like 14x72GB disks (FC9 BCS) 14x144GB disks (DS14) This takes us to the maximum of the F760, 3TB, but we can only seem to add 14x72GB disks (1 72GB for spare, 2 RAID groups) 8x144GB disks (1 144GB for spare, 1 RAID group) These disks are all in one volume, /… [View More]

2 2

Re: Cluster failover question
by Davin Milun 28 Feb '04

28 Feb '04

At 15:20, on Feb 25, 2004, jeff.mery(a)ni.com wrote: > We've also done rolling upgrades of DOT as mentioned below on our old F760 > cluster. Upgrade one head, fail over, reboot that head, giveback, upgrade > the other head, fail over, reboot the second head, and giveback. The > first head will complain that it's not at the same DOT level as its > partner, but we've never had a problem with data integrity. This also > only happens for a short period between the first … [View More]

2 1

RE: F760 question
by Reinoud Reynders 28 Feb '04

28 Feb '04

The max volume size of a F760 is 2 TB. So you must create at least 2 volumes. Best regards, Reinoud Reynders University Hospital Leuven Belgium -----Oorspronkelijk bericht----- Van: Scott Baker [mailto:buyandsell2k5@yahoo.com] Verzonden: za 28/02/2004 4:17 Aan: toasters(a)mathworks.com CC: Onderwerp: F760 question I was hoping to find an answer in the archives, but no luck. We've picked up a NetApp F760 and have had no problems with the system. Recently we've tried adding … [View More]

1 0

RV: CPU workload increase after upgrade
by Carlos Alvarez 27 Feb '04

27 Feb '04

-----Mensaje original----- De: Carlos Alvarez [mailto:carlosa@ddmsa.com] Enviado el: Viernes, 27 de Febrero de 2004 10:35 a.m. Para: 'Jack Lyons' Asunto: RE: CPU workload increase after upgrade I have 18GB ZCS in F740 so, does this feature count? if it so could I disable? Thanks -----Mensaje original----- De: Jack Lyons [mailto:jack.lyons@martinagency.com] Enviado el: Viernes, 27 de Febrero de 2004 10:13 a.m. Para: 'Carlos A. Alvarez' Asunto: RE: CPU workload increase after upgrade … [View More]

3 3

CPU workload increase after upgrade
by Carlos A. Alvarez 27 Feb '04

27 Feb '04

Hi All, I recently upgrade a F740 from 5.3.4 to 6.4.1 without problems except that the CPU workload increase 10 % with the same traffic. Is this performace correct? Are new releases more CPU intensive than olders? Any comment would be apreciated. Thanks

2 1

RE: rsh on NetCache 5.6
by Heal, Kenneth 26 Feb '04

26 Feb '04

Hi There is an RFE (Request for Enhancement) to allow you to use the /etc/hosts.equiv for this in a similar way to what is possible on the filer; it is not currently scheduled. The RFE number is 73672. It might be worth contacting Sales to push to get this implemented. Best regards Kenneth Heal -----Original Message----- From: Kerry Herschel [mailto:margaret.k.herschel@jpl.nasa.gov] Sent: Thursday, February 26, 2004 8:15 PM To: Armstrong, Larry Cc: toasters(a)mathworks.com Subject: Re: rsh … [View More]

1 0

rsh on NetCache 5.6
by Kerry Herschel 26 Feb '04

26 Feb '04

Hi, I haven't found any documentation for rsh on Netcache 5.6. Does anyone know if it is supported? Thanks, Kerry ================================================================ Margaret.K.Herschel(a)jpl.nasa.gov JPL Information Services Jet Propulsion Laboratory Phone 818.354.1111 DISCLAIMER: The personal and professional opinions presented herein are my own and do not, in any way, represent the opinion or policy of JPL.

2 3

RE: Oracle on CIFS?
by Jeff Asher 26 Feb '04

26 Feb '04

You will probably also want to modify the host registry so that the Oracle services are dependant on and start after the lanmanworkstation service. Without those edits the oracle services may fail to start on reboot because they can't access the remote shares. Jeff Asher ________________________________ From: owner-toasters(a)mathworks.com [mailto:owner-toasters@mathworks.com] On Behalf Of Yarmas, Tom Sent: Thursday, February 26, 2004 10:39 AM To: Dirk Seidel; toasters(a)mathworks.com … [View More]

1 0

RE: Oracle on CIFS?
by Yarmas, Tom 26 Feb '04

26 Feb '04

Biggest issue with CIFS and database is stateful nature of the CIFS protocol and "robustness" (is that a word?) of the re-director on Windows. What this means is that if the re-director gets overwhelmed (can happen, but you may never see it) the CIFS connection will be lost then re-established, but the Oracle Service will crash. Usually not a big problem, but you do need to manually re-start it. Also, be aware that when using UNC pathnames or drive letter access to CIFS shares with Oracle (… [View More]

1 0

MX records.
by Jerry 26 Feb '04

26 Feb '04

doh. Bug 104202 already exists. I would tend to think it's more than a level 5 "suggestion", but as long as it's logged I suppose. Jerry __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Mail SpamGuard - Read only the mail you want. http://antispam.yahoo.com/tools

2 3

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 2004