toasters April 2005

toasters@lists.teaparty.net

59 participants
67 discussions

R100 with 256 meg cf card
by George, Andrew 01 Mar '06

01 Mar '06

I've tried to upgrade two r100's from 32 meg CF cards to 256 meg CF cards (so we can have a backup boot image with OnTap 6.5) On both occasions it's pretty much choked as soon as it's tried to see the 256 meg card and we've had to do some messing around to get a single image onto the card I'm beginning to think that an R100 running 6.4.x just can't see a 256meg cf card correctly and was wondering if anyone else has had a problem doing this? Andrew

3 2

RE: IPsec NFS to Unix clients
by Muhlestein, Mark 17 Jun '05

17 Jun '05

Gee, 30,000 * 300 is not even 10 million entries! :-) Yes, you are right that this isn't going to work in every case. But I wanted to mention it because it is useful in some situations. As to the MultiStore comment I made, I was thinking of a case where you want to use the same physical filer to serve an unprotected network (such as your normal campus network, it sounds like) and also serve a trusted network (on a different NIC or VLAN, say). As long as there is no way to access a vfiler's IP address using a client on the untrusted network, the vfiler boundary checks will prevent all access from all protocols (including NFS handle spoofing) coming from those untrusted clients. Mark -----Original Message----- From: Brian Parent [mailto:bparent@calvin.ucsd.edu] Sent: Friday, August 20, 2004 2:41 PM To: toasters(a)mathworks.com Subject: Re: IPsec NFS to Unix clients Thanks Mark. We do have CIFS. However, we have >30,000 accounts, and >300 NFS clients. And besides, any account is allowed access from any NFS client. Plus, it doesn't solve the problem of spoofing IPs. We don't have MultiStore, but even if we did, I don't see how it solves the problem of spoofing IPs. Spoofing IPs is painfully simple here, (as at most Universities, I would think) where labs aren't supervised, and network jacks are not physically secured. Re: > Subject: RE: IPsec NFS to Unix clients > Date: Fri, 20 Aug 2004 13:31:42 -0700 > From: "Muhlestein, Mark" <mark.muhlestein(a)netapp.com> > To: "Steve Losen" <scl(a)sasha.acc.virginia.edu>, > "Brian Parent" <bparent(a)calvin.ucsd.edu> > Cc: <toasters(a)mathworks.com> > > Here are a couple of other things you can do to improve NFS security: > > 1. If you have CIFS you might consider using the > nfs.require_valid_mapped_uid option. That allows you to set up the > usermap.cfg file to do things like this: > > # allow the following UIDs NFS access from the specified IP addresses > tom <= 192.168.3.34:tom > jerry <= jerrypc.dorm.foo.edu:jerry > jerry <= lab1.foo.edu:jerry > jerry <= lab2.foo.edu:jerry # etc. > > # allow root from the admin network > Administrator <= 10.10.20.0/24:root > > # prevent all other NFS access > "" <= * > > The nfs.require_valid_mapped_uid option causes the usermap.cfg entries > to be consulted even for access to data on qtrees with UNIX security. > Combined with the normal export controls, this approach works as long as > clients are not allowed to successfully spoof source IP addresses. It is > also more manageable if the number of combinations of users/hosts is not > overly large or dynamic; however I know we have had sites that have used > this type of approach with a script-generated usermap.cfg. > > 2. If you have MultiStore available you can also use that to fence off > NFS access. NFS clients accessing an IP address associated with a vfiler > are not allowed to access storage assigned to another vfiler. This is > enforced at the WAFL layer, so even if clients attempt handle spoofing > the access is denied as long as the potentially rogue clients are not > allowed to access the other vfilers' IP addresses (e.g. different > networks on separate NICs). > > Mark

2 2

RE: SMB tuning/understanding
by Alan Biren 29 Apr '05

29 Apr '05

OpLkBkDelayedBreak is when an oplock break is sent too soon after an open request completes, some clients lock up. This variable counts the number of times that Data ONTAP must delay before sending an oplock break. The delay is controlled by the cifs.oplocks.opendelta option. In case you need a definition of oplock here it is: Oplocks (opportunistic locks) enable a CIFS client in certain file-sharing scenarios to perform client-side caching of read-ahead, write-behind, and lock information. A client can then read from or write to a file without regularly reminding the server that it needs access to the file in question. This improves performance by reducing network traffic. The NOW site has some fairly simplistic documentation into CIFS Performance Tuning. Alan -----Original Message----- From: owner-toasters(a)mathworks.com [mailto:owner-toasters@mathworks.com] On Behalf Of Simon Waters Sent: Friday, April 29, 2005 6:04 AM To: toasters(a)mathworks.com Subject: SMB tuning/understanding Pondering some Microsoft tuning guidelines in one window, and the Filer report in another. What is "OpLkBkDelayedBreak"? And better yet where do I find an idiots guide to the innards of Microsofts networking? ***************************************************************************************************** If you have received this email in error please notify the the system manager or the sender immediately and do not disclosed the to anyone or make copies. ** eSafe scanned this email for viruses, vandals or malicious content ** ** To find out eSafe(TM) and other Aladdin Security Products, contact AMC Corporation at (212) 736-0111 *****************************************************************************************************

1 0

RE: VFM and DFS
by Alan Biren 29 Apr '05

29 Apr '05

To add, NetApp can participate in a Windows DFS, but a key component is File Replication Service(FRS). NetApp does not particpate with the Windows Servers. If you are going to implement DFS and want the NetApp boxes to be in sync with your Windows Servers and eventually migrate off of the Windows File Servers VFM is the way to go. It'll manage the replication between Windows and DOT and share migration. Alan -----Original Message----- From: owner-toasters(a)mathworks.com [mailto:owner-toasters@mathworks.com] On Behalf Of Charles Bartels Sent: Thursday, April 28, 2005 6:37 PM To: toasters(a)mathworks.com Subject: VFM and DFS Hi, My company currently has a couple of Netapps in the office along with a couple of Dell PC file servers. The windows admins would like to implement DFS. I don't really know what that is, but it sounded kind of like the Netapp VFM (Virtual File Manager). Could someone give me a short explanation of the two systems? Ideally I would like to consolidate our file servers onto the Netapps or at least avoid having to add unnecessary windows boxes. (These DFS servers sounded unnecessary to me, but if they are needed I wouldn't have a problem). Thanks. -C. ***************************************************************************************************** If you have received this email in error please notify the the system manager or the sender immediately and do not disclosed the to anyone or make copies. ** eSafe scanned this email for viruses, vandals or malicious content ** ** To find out eSafe(TM) and other Aladdin Security Products, contact AMC Corporation at (212) 736-0111 *****************************************************************************************************

1 0

SMB tuning/understanding
by Simon Waters 29 Apr '05

29 Apr '05

Pondering some Microsoft tuning guidelines in one window, and the Filer report in another. What is "OpLkBkDelayedBreak"? And better yet where do I find an idiots guide to the innards of Microsofts networking?

2 1

RE: VFM and DFS
by Palmer, Jason (EMEA) 29 Apr '05

29 Apr '05

Hi - VFM is a version of StorageX from Nuview (http://www.nuview.com which Network Appliance use to create a GSN (Global Storage Namespace) Nuview also has addition functionality that plugs into StorageX which is called ILM (Information Lifecycle Management) which takes advantage of virtulising the file system down to a file level. From what I can see there is an SQL database behing the application that holds information about where everything is in the storage environment. I have had StorageX installed on eval, and have recommended that we use it in favour of the Standard Windows DFS. It enables complex distributed storage environments to be presented, and manipulated very easily in comparison to the DFS with Windows. I hope this info is of help - Jason -----Original Message----- From: owner-toasters(a)mathworks.com [mailto:owner-toasters@mathworks.com]On Behalf Of Charles Bartels Sent: 28 April 2005 23:37 To: toasters(a)mathworks.com Subject: VFM and DFS Hi, My company currently has a couple of Netapps in the office along with a couple of Dell PC file servers. The windows admins would like to implement DFS. I don't really know what that is, but it sounded kind of like the Netapp VFM (Virtual File Manager). Could someone give me a short explanation of the two systems? Ideally I would like to consolidate our file servers onto the Netapps or at least avoid having to add unnecessary windows boxes. (These DFS servers sounded unnecessary to me, but if they are needed I wouldn't have a problem). Thanks. -C.

1 0

RE: Use minra or not?
by Derek Lai 29 Apr '05

29 Apr '05

Steve, Nice to have new toys to play with, isn't it? Minra is one of those things that depends heavily on your application's I/O pattern. If you have an application that is pretty sequential in I/O access, then you want read ahead. From experience, I can tell you that our Oracle Loan servicing application were beating the heck out of the disks we had. We were only using about 50% of the disk space but the utilization were very high. We turned on minra=on and right away cut about 30% disk utilization off. The good thing is that there were no noticeable cut in application performance. One other thing you might want to try (not sure how production it really is in your environment) is no_atime_update. Might help if your email application does not depend on it. Again, Oracle does not seem to need this. Derek -----Original Message----- From: Steve Losen [mailto:scl@sasha.acc.virginia.edu] Sent: Wednesday, April 27, 2005 3:03 PM To: toasters(a)mathworks.com Subject: Use minra or not? Please forgive all these questions to the list -- new toy syndrome. We have deployed a FAS960c pair in a University wide email system with about 30,000 accounts. We have 3 large Sun Solaris servers running Communigate Pro and they connect to the filer pair over a FC SAN. We have mapped 2 LUNs to each server, one from each filer, and striped them with Veritas. This has nicely balanced the load across both filers. We built a Veritas vxfs filesystem out of the two striped LUNs on each mail server and copied the inboxes over. Each mail server holds 1/3 of the inboxes and operates independently of the other two. It went into production today and the netapps appear to be more than up to the task. We are using mbox format where an email folder is one sequential file. Consequently our email servers read a LOT more KB/sec than they write, by a factor of more than ten to one. This afternoon I noticed that our filers were each reading about 100 MB/sec to 120 MB/sec from the disks. But I also noticed that this was 25% to 30% more than was being written to the FC SAN. Each filer has 6G of RAM. Reading disk data at a rate of 100MB/sec should completely turn over the RAM cache in about a minute, and sure enough, the cache age was typically 1 minute or less. I figured that we were reading 25% to 30% more from the disks than we were writing to the FC SAN because of read ahead. So I set "minra on" on the volume. Immediately we started reading a little less from the disks than we were writing to the FC SAN. Also disk util dropped from around 22% to around 15%. Cache hit percentage dropped a little from 97% to 96%, but then went back up. (How can cache hits be so high with the RAM cache being turned over every minute?) So it appears that in this situation that minra=on is a winner or is there something I have missed? Steve Losen scl(a)virginia.edu phone: 434-924-0640 University of Virginia ITC Unix Support

1 0

RE: VFM and DFS
by Michael Schipp 29 Apr '05

29 Apr '05

The (possibly) best feature of DFS is that once created the underlining file shares can be moved from the current server(s) and consolidated on the Netapp (or any other file server) without having to change login script(s)/persistent connections etc. The DFS links just need to be changed. -----Original Message----- From: owner-toasters(a)mathworks.com [mailto:owner-toasters@mathworks.com] On Behalf Of Sto Rage(c) Sent: Friday, 29 April 2005 10:22 AM To: Charles Bartels Cc: toasters(a)mathworks.com Subject: Re: VFM and DFS DFS (Distributed File System) - is a component of Microsoft Windows and runs on Windows 2000 or 2003 servers. Its a powerful feature but like everything else with Microsoft, they provide very basic tools to manage or implement it. Using DFS by itself was a disaster for us. VFM from Netapp - Provides an excellent wrapper around Microsoft's DFS, and provides lots of additional features. You can compare DFM - VFM to ntbackup - Netbackup from Veritas. Both DFS and ntbackup (builtin windows utilities) provides rudimentary features with hard to use GUI. Just enough to get you started. Whereas VFM and Netbackup provides a much better GUI and tons of other value adds. Hope you get the picture. We have been using DFS/VFM for almost 2 years and are very very happy wiith it. -G PS: Am just an end user and not affiliated to any of the vendors mentioned :) On 4/28/05, Charles Bartels <Charles.Bartels(a)tradebeam.com> wrote: > Hi, > > My company currently has a couple of Netapps in the office along with a > couple of Dell PC file servers. > > The windows admins would like to implement DFS. I don't really know > what that is, but it sounded kind of like the Netapp VFM (Virtual File > Manager). > > Could someone give me a short explanation of the two systems? Ideally I > would like to consolidate our file servers onto the Netapps or at least > avoid having to add unnecessary windows boxes. (These DFS servers > sounded unnecessary to me, but if they are needed I wouldn't have a > problem). > > Thanks. > > -C. >

1 0

VFM and DFS
by Charles Bartels 29 Apr '05

29 Apr '05

Hi, My company currently has a couple of Netapps in the office along with a couple of Dell PC file servers. The windows admins would like to implement DFS. I don't really know what that is, but it sounded kind of like the Netapp VFM (Virtual File Manager). Could someone give me a short explanation of the two systems? Ideally I would like to consolidate our file servers onto the Netapps or at least avoid having to add unnecessary windows boxes. (These DFS servers sounded unnecessary to me, but if they are needed I wouldn't have a problem). Thanks. -C.

2 1

Use minra or not?
by Steve Losen 27 Apr '05

27 Apr '05

Please forgive all these questions to the list -- new toy syndrome. We have deployed a FAS960c pair in a University wide email system with about 30,000 accounts. We have 3 large Sun Solaris servers running Communigate Pro and they connect to the filer pair over a FC SAN. We have mapped 2 LUNs to each server, one from each filer, and striped them with Veritas. This has nicely balanced the load across both filers. We built a Veritas vxfs filesystem out of the two striped LUNs on each mail server and copied the inboxes over. Each mail server holds 1/3 of the inboxes and operates independently of the other two. It went into production today and the netapps appear to be more than up to the task. We are using mbox format where an email folder is one sequential file. Consequently our email servers read a LOT more KB/sec than they write, by a factor of more than ten to one. This afternoon I noticed that our filers were each reading about 100 MB/sec to 120 MB/sec from the disks. But I also noticed that this was 25% to 30% more than was being written to the FC SAN. Each filer has 6G of RAM. Reading disk data at a rate of 100MB/sec should completely turn over the RAM cache in about a minute, and sure enough, the cache age was typically 1 minute or less. I figured that we were reading 25% to 30% more from the disks than we were writing to the FC SAN because of read ahead. So I set "minra on" on the volume. Immediately we started reading a little less from the disks than we were writing to the FC SAN. Also disk util dropped from around 22% to around 15%. Cache hit percentage dropped a little from 97% to 96%, but then went back up. (How can cache hits be so high with the RAM cache being turned over every minute?) So it appears that in this situation that minra=on is a winner or is there something I have missed? Steve Losen scl(a)virginia.edu phone: 434-924-0640 University of Virginia ITC Unix Support

1 0

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 April 2005