toasters October 2008

toasters@lists.teaparty.net

44 participants
32 discussions

RE: Limits on ASIS enabled FlexVols
by Darragh, Stephen J (US SSA) 22 Oct '08

22 Oct '08

It was our hope that asis would be run on the aggregate level and that would get rid of volume limits altogether. I believe in 7.3, the metadata was moved to the aggregate and that was the first step needed. It seems to be taking longer than expected for 7.3.1 to get released, lets up its soon. Stephen Darragh -----Original Message----- From: owner-toasters(a)mathworks.com [mailto:owner-toasters@mathworks.com] On Behalf Of Chris Muellner Sent: Wednesday, October 22, 2008 2:15 PM To: Ray Van Dolson; oakley Cc: Clear, John; toasters(a)mathworks.com Subject: RE: Limits on ASIS enabled FlexVols The last speculation I heard, which was pretty recently and a conservative one, was the A-SIS limits are still going to be in effect, but the limits are going to be raised and the amount is going to depend on the filer. I heard the smaller filers like the 2020, and possibly the 2050, will see a significant increase in A-SIS volume size of up to 100% and that the higher up the line you go the smaller that percentage of increase gets. -----Original Message----- From: owner-toasters(a)mathworks.com [mailto:owner-toasters@mathworks.com] On Behalf Of Ray Van Dolson Sent: Wednesday, October 22, 2008 8:51 AM To: oakley Cc: Clear, John; toasters(a)mathworks.com Subject: Re: Limits on ASIS enabled FlexVols On Wed, Oct 22, 2008 at 04:32:35AM -0700, oakley wrote: > Where did you find that the volume limitations went away in 7.3.1? I was > under the impression that the limits stayed the same in 7.3, but simply > doubled (ie 500G -> 1TB for 2020) in 7.3.1 .. anyone know which is true? > > - oakley > So far no confirmation from NetApp directly, we've all just "heard" things. I checked with my SE and he also had heard this but advised that they'd heard a lot of things that were supposedly to be included in 7.3.0 that weren't so to take it with a grain of salt. Anyone from NetApp out there?? :) > > > ---------[ Received Mail Content ]---------- > > Subject : RE: Limits on ASIS enabled FlexVols > Date : Tue, 21 Oct 2008 12:57:19 -0700 > From : "Clear, John" <John.Clear(a)amd.com> > To : "Ray Van Dolson" <rvandolson(a)esri.com>, > <toasters(a)mathworks.com> > > > The ASIS volume size limits go away in 7.3.1, so if you > can get by with the current limits for now, you can grow > the volum! es later. > > I don't know if there is a limit to the number of ASIS > volumes on a filer. I know there are limits to the number > of active ASIS processes, but if you hit that, they just run > in sequence like when the snapmirror/snapvault concurrent > limits are hit. > > John > > -----Original Message----- > From: owner-toasters(a)mathworks.com > [mailto:owner-toasters@mathworks.com] > On Behalf Of Ray Van Dolson > Sent: Tuesday, October 21, 2008 10:30 AM > To: toasters(a)mathworks.com > Subject: Limits on ASIS enabled FlexVols > > Hello fellow toaster-ites! I am evaluating the use of NFS datastore > on > NetApp for use with ESX. Initially the potential benefits of ASIS > (dedup) had me just about sold, however, I discovered that with the > FAS2020 we're looking at there is a 500GB limit to the size of ASIS > enabled FlexVols. Bummer. > > I see this limit goes up to 1TB with the FAS2050, so I may need to > compare that option as well... > > Mor! eover, I'm wondering what the limit on the *number* of > max-sized > AS IS enabled flexvols is per filer? Could I have 15 500GB ASIS > enabled > flexvols in the FAS2020 above? That wouldn't seem to make logical > sense as I understand the limitation is tied to memory.... but this > might help us get around this size limitation. > > Thanks in advance. > > (No sales replies to this please) > > Ray >

3 2

Re: Limits on ASIS enabled FlexVols
by Ray Van Dolson 22 Oct '08

22 Oct '08

On Wed, Oct 22, 2008 at 04:32:35AM -0700, oakley wrote: > Where did you find that the volume limitations went away in 7.3.1? I was > under the impression that the limits stayed the same in 7.3, but simply > doubled (ie 500G -> 1TB for 2020) in 7.3.1 .. anyone know which is true? > > - oakley > So far no confirmation from NetApp directly, we've all just "heard" things. I checked with my SE and he also had heard this but advised that they'd heard a lot of things that were supposedly to be included in 7.3.0 that weren't so to take it with a grain of salt. Anyone from NetApp out there?? :) > > > ---------[ Received Mail Content ]---------- > > Subject : RE: Limits on ASIS enabled FlexVols > Date : Tue, 21 Oct 2008 12:57:19 -0700 > From : "Clear, John" <John.Clear(a)amd.com> > To : "Ray Van Dolson" <rvandolson(a)esri.com>, > <toasters(a)mathworks.com> > > > The ASIS volume size limits go away in 7.3.1, so if you > can get by with the current limits for now, you can grow > the volum! es later. > > I don't know if there is a limit to the number of ASIS > volumes on a filer. I know there are limits to the number > of active ASIS processes, but if you hit that, they just run > in sequence like when the snapmirror/snapvault concurrent > limits are hit. > > John > > -----Original Message----- > From: owner-toasters(a)mathworks.com > [mailto:owner-toasters@mathworks.com] > On Behalf Of Ray Van Dolson > Sent: Tuesday, October 21, 2008 10:30 AM > To: toasters(a)mathworks.com > Subject: Limits on ASIS enabled FlexVols > > Hello fellow toaster-ites! I am evaluating the use of NFS datastore > on > NetApp for use with ESX. Initially the potential benefits of ASIS > (dedup) had me just about sold, however, I discovered that with the > FAS2020 we're looking at there is a 500GB limit to the size of ASIS > enabled FlexVols. Bummer. > > I see this limit goes up to 1TB with the FAS2050, so I may need to > compare that option as well... > > Mor! eover, I'm wondering what the limit on the *number* of > max-sized > AS IS enabled flexvols is per filer? Could I have 15 500GB ASIS > enabled > flexvols in the FAS2020 above? That wouldn't seem to make logical > sense as I understand the limitation is tied to memory.... but this > might help us get around this size limitation. > > Thanks in advance. > > (No sales replies to this please) > > Ray >

2 1

Re: Question about SnapMirror, cascade, and deleting old snapshots. [SOLVED]
by Nathan Patwardhan 22 Oct '08

22 Oct '08

On Tue, Oct 21, 2008 at 6:04 PM, George T Chen <gtchen(a)yahoo-inc.com> wrote: > I know you say that you did the snapmirror release, so maybe there's a bug somewhere, but the presence of the snapmirror tag on snapshot "filerA(0101195225)_preforce.7" would indicate that the release never completed. That snapshot would have been created from when filerA was a snapmirror destination. Regardless, I believe you can safely remove the Aug 20 snapshot. > > I do not believe the presence of the snapmirror tag means that "snapmirror status" will automatically include it. If you modify the /etc/snapmirror.conf file to include the old filerB-filerA entry, you should see the entry with a lag of months. This by itself didn't work. I ended up doing the following: - Reviewed 'snapmirror status -l' on each of the filers to ensure that the old snapshot was in fact NOT my baseline snapshot. :-) - In spite of the (snapmirror) tag on the snapshot on the SnapMirror volume, I did a 'snap delete' and this removed the snapshot. - By deleting the snapshot on the source, this caused each of the destinations to throw a snapmirror.dst.snapDelErr as they expected the source to have this snapshot when it didn't. - I did a 'snapmirror quiesce' and 'snapmirror break' on each of the destinations and tried to 'snapmirror update'. This failed. - I did a 'snap delete' on each of the destinations to remove the snapshot. - I did a 'snapmirror resync' on each of the destinations and this made the snapmirror.dst.snapDelErr go away. SnapMirror got into a happier state after that. I believe we've probably bumped up against a SnapMirror bug in 7.2.3 as this behavior (old snapshots persist long after a SnapMirror release) is not quite what I'd expect. -- Nathan Patwardhan "Of course, the US has many elements of socialism already since capitalists, like cats, tend to get themselves stuck up a tree every so often." -- Joe Johnston

1 0

RE: Limits on ASIS enabled FlexVols
by Page, Jeremy 22 Oct '08

22 Oct '08

No, but if you deploy from template or Storage VMotion them they become fat :( -----Original Message----- From: Maxwell Reid [mailto:slinkywizard@integra.net] Sent: Tuesday, October 21, 2008 4:12 PM To: Page, Jeremy Cc: Ray Van Dolson; toasters(a)mathworks.com Subject: Re: Limits on ASIS enabled FlexVols Quick question: Does the bug affect thin VMDKs ? By default when we setup VM's on NFS they are thin, and the only time they become thick is by using storage vmotion or cloning. ~Max On Oct 21, 2008, at 10:57 AM, Page, Jeremy wrote: > I do not think there is a limit, but before rolling out ASIS on your > primary storage you should look into the bug that makes sequential > data > reads on VMDK files EXTREMELY slow. It's killing our production system > and no end dates yet for a patch. > > Bug ID 281669 > > NDMP/NFS reads on dense VMware files could encounter slow access. This > is > because the portion of the VMDK file that has not been allocated by > the > guest OS is filled with zeros. Activities that are likely to be > affected are the use of tools which read the entire VMDK file (such as > cp from the ESX console and dump from the FAS systems). Normal guest > performance will not be effected. > > -----Original Message----- > From: owner-toasters(a)mathworks.com [mailto:owner-toasters@mathworks.com > ] > On Behalf Of Ray Van Dolson > Sent: Tuesday, October 21, 2008 1:30 PM > To: toasters(a)mathworks.com > Subject: Limits on ASIS enabled FlexVols > > Hello fellow toaster-ites! I am evaluating the use of NFS datastore > on > NetApp for use with ESX. Initially the potential benefits of ASIS > (dedup) had me just about sold, however, I discovered that with the > FAS2020 we're looking at there is a 500GB limit to the size of ASIS > enabled FlexVols. Bummer. > > I see this limit goes up to 1TB with the FAS2050, so I may need to > compare that option as well... > > Moreover, I'm wondering what the limit on the *number* of max-sized > ASIS enabled flexvols is per filer? Could I have 15 500GB ASIS > enabled > flexvols in the FAS2020 above? That wouldn't seem to make logical > sense as I understand the limitation is tied to memory.... but this > might help us get around this size limitation. > > Thanks in advance. > > (No sales replies to this please) > > Ray > > > Please be advised that this email may be a confidential communication > and may contain confidential information. If you are not the > intended > recipient, please do not read, copy or re-transmit this email. If you > have received this email in error, please notify us by e-mail by > replying to the sender and by telephone (call us collect at > 202-828-0850) and delete this message and any attachments. Thank you > in > advance for your cooperation and assistance. > > In addition, Danaher and its subsidiaries disclaim that the content of > this email constitutes an offer to enter into, or the acceptance of, > any > contract or agreement; provided, that the foregoing disclaimer does > not > invalidate the binding effect of any digital or other electronic > reproduction of a manual signature that is included in any attachment > to > this email. > Please be advised that this email may be a confidential communication and may contain confidential information. If you are not the intended recipient, please do not read, copy or re-transmit this email. If you have received this email in error, please notify us by e-mail by replying to the sender and by telephone (call us collect at 202-828-0850) and delete this message and any attachments. Thank you in advance for your cooperation and assistance. In addition, Danaher and its subsidiaries disclaim that the content of this email constitutes an offer to enter into, or the acceptance of, any contract or agreement; provided, that the foregoing disclaimer does not invalidate the binding effect of any digital or other electronic reproduction of a manual signature that is included in any attachment to this email.

1 0

CIFS migration
by David.Ashton＠rullion.co.uk 22 Oct '08

22 Oct '08

Hi. I'm planning to migrate a windows server full of data to a CIFS vol on my FAS3020. This volume will be snapmirrored to a remote filer over a 10Mb line. The data is 300GB+, and its already a fairly busy line. Time to initialise a mirror is going to be over a week ( and i have to throttle during the day) Moving the remote filer temporarily is not something I want to do. I'm using Secure Copy (http://www.scriptlogic.com/products/securecopy/) to do the copying. Is there anyway to bypass the complete 300GB snapmirror initialize? What is more palatable is: 1. copying data to a USB disk and transporting that to the remote site, copying over to the mirror destination vol. OR 2. Performing the secure copy twice - transporting the server (or its disks for use in another server) and copying directly to the mirror destination vol Any ideas or am I SOL? thanks, Dave. ********************************************************************** The information contained in this e-mail and any attachments are intended for the named recipient(s) only. It may also be privileged and confidential. If you are not an intended recipient, you must take no action as a result of receiving it, including, but not limited to copying, distributing and amending it. If this communication has been sent to you in error, please contact us immediately and do not show the communication to any other party. Rullion shall have no liability whatsoever in respect of the content of the communication and makes no warranty as to accuracy. Any views or opinions presented are solely those of the author. Viruses:- Although we have taken steps to ensure that this e-mail and attachments are free from viruses, we advise that in keeping with good computing practice, the recipient should ensure they are actually virus free. ********************************************************************** ________________________________________________________________________ This e-mail has been scanned for all viruses by Star. The service is powered by MessageLabs. For more information on a proactive anti-virus service working around the clock, around the globe, visit: http://www.star.net.uk ________________________________________________________________________

10 10

Question about SnapMirror, cascade, and deleting old snapshots.
by Nathan Patwardhan 21 Oct '08

21 Oct '08

We using SnapMirror for three filers in a cascade. filerA is the master so we normally cascade SnapMirror as filerA->filerB->filerC. In the case of a DR event, we'll repoint things so we end up with filerB->filerA->filerC or filerC->filerA->filerB or some combination like that. After the DR event is over, we put restructure the cascade so that it goes A->B->C as noted above. As part of this restructuring, we will do a 'snapmirror release' for any relationships that no longer exist after things are repointed. Generally this cleans up any snapshots that we don't need and things are happy. Recently, I noticed that we have a couple of old and somewhat large snapshots that never expire. These have been around for a couple of months and are hogging 5-10% of a volume that's already pretty full. I'd like to delete them but I don't see any Broken-Off relationships when I run 'snapmirror status <volume>'. I'm just not comfortable winging it with release until I get a better grasp on how SnapMirror got into this state. Looking at 'snapmirror destinations -s <volume>' I have a pretty good idea of how things were pointed in our cascade during DR events that generated these snapshots in the first place, but I remain unclear about how to (or even if I can!) do a snapmirror release in this case. Please advise! -- Nathan Patwardhan "Of course, the US has many elements of socialism already since capitalists, like cats, tend to get themselves stuck up a tree every so often." -- Joe Johnston

2 3

Limits on ASIS enabled FlexVols
by Ray Van Dolson 21 Oct '08

21 Oct '08

Hello fellow toaster-ites! I am evaluating the use of NFS datastore on NetApp for use with ESX. Initially the potential benefits of ASIS (dedup) had me just about sold, however, I discovered that with the FAS2020 we're looking at there is a 500GB limit to the size of ASIS enabled FlexVols. Bummer. I see this limit goes up to 1TB with the FAS2050, so I may need to compare that option as well... Moreover, I'm wondering what the limit on the *number* of max-sized ASIS enabled flexvols is per filer? Could I have 15 500GB ASIS enabled flexvols in the FAS2020 above? That wouldn't seem to make logical sense as I understand the limitation is tied to memory.... but this might help us get around this size limitation. Thanks in advance. (No sales replies to this please) Ray

3 3

Re: Question about SnapMirror, cascade, and deleting old snapshots.
by Nathan Patwardhan 21 Oct '08

21 Oct '08

On Mon, Oct 20, 2008 at 10:41 PM, Bassett, Oliver <oliver.bassett(a)nz.fujitsu.com> wrote: > Nathan, > > Easiest solution at this point is to delete the really large/old > snapshot in the volume on FilerA. This will replicate the snapshot to > filer b and filer c, without damaging the existing snapmirror > relationships (as long as everything is up to date with low lag times). Ah, that's a problem I'd forgotten to mention and why I'm hesitant to just go and release things. On FilerA, although the master, the snapshot is still locked by snapmirror: 5% ( 4%) 4% ( 3%) Aug 20 08:05 filerA(0101195225)_perforce.7 (snapmirror) To my surprise the snapshot is in the *same* state on filerB and filerC, so unfortunately as things stand right now, I can't just go and delete the snapshot. -- Nathan Patwardhan "Of course, the US has many elements of socialism already since capitalists, like cats, tend to get themselves stuck up a tree every so often." -- Joe Johnston

1 0

SnapMirror and NDMP ; competing snap schedules?
by Nick Silkey 21 Oct '08

21 Oct '08

Toasters -- Having abandoned synch SnapMirror due to compatibility issues, we are looking to asynch snaps for BCP/DR. Unfortunately we still need to cut the SnapMirror destination (7.2.4) to tape via NDMP. It looks like an outstanding bug <http://now.netapp.com/NOW/cgi-bin/bol?Type=Detail&Display=36554> and corresponding KB article <http://now.netapp.com/Knowledgebase/solutionarea.asp?id=kb44293> indicate that the schedules of SnapMirror and NDMP moves should never compete with one another due to tripping on one another's snaps. So we either need to 1.) break the mirror in order to blow out backups, or 2.) setup a SnapMirror schedule which leaves a window for scheduled backups. $mgmt would much prefer the first option in order to maximize replication, and since no one is able to confirm test numbers for backup time duration. So ... any production tips on hailing the SnapMirror destination to break when its time to get our NDMP on? And resync'ing upon NDMP completion? Or am I really off-base with the above? :) Insight appreciated. Thanks. -- Nick

3 2

R: Snapvault slow on one specific volume?
by Milazzo Giacomo 15 Oct '08

15 Oct '08

Yes of course you're right. We all know that manual paragraph that but considering this option cannot damage data contained it could be useful to test it also in this case...there are a lot of misteries in options... J Regards, Da: De Wit Tom (Consultant) [mailto:tom.de.wit@consultant.volvo.com] Inviato: mercoledì 15 ottobre 2008 16.06 A: Milazzo Giacomo; Darren Sykes; Glenn Walker; Page, Jeremy; toasters(a)mathworks.com Oggetto: RE: Snapvault slow on one specific volume? I wouldn't recommend enabling extents for volumes other than the ones holding exchange databases. The option does degrade runtime performance and only improves validation of exchange databases, so the option should only be used with Exchange databases. The DataOntap administration guide tells the following: When to enable logical extents <http://now.netapp.com/NOW/knowledge/docs/ontap/rel73/html/ontap/sysadmin/tu…> You enable logical extents for volumes that contain Microsoft Exchange data only. The decision to use logical extents involves a trade-off between improved database validation performance and runtime performance. Use logical extents when you want to improve validation performance. If runtime performance is higher priority, you might not want to use extents. Grtz, Tom ________________________________ From: owner-toasters(a)mathworks.com [mailto:owner-toasters@mathworks.com] On Behalf Of Milazzo Giacomo Sent: woensdag 15 oktober 2008 15:21 To: Darren Sykes; Glenn Walker; Page, Jeremy; toasters(a)mathworks.com Subject: R: Snapvault slow on one specific volume? Reading about this they seem the same issues with Exchange on WAFL LUNs on a volume WITHOUT the "vol options extent on". You certainly know that if you have an old Data Ontap without that options (it came fm 7.2 if I well remember) or if you leave it off and you have Exchange LUNs this can cause terribly bad performances (and fragmentation nightmares) as the one here reported. Waiting for a fix I put it so...why don't you put the extent vol options to on and try again? J Regards Da: owner-toasters(a)mathworks.com [mailto:owner-toasters@mathworks.com] Per conto di Darren Sykes Inviato: mercoledì 15 ottobre 2008 10.10 A: Glenn Walker; Page, Jeremy; toasters(a)mathworks.com Oggetto: Re: Snapvault slow on one specific volume? I'd say it was probably the bug; in theory dedup should increase performance in that situation as the block would be stored in the cache and therefore we wouldn't need to go to disk to get that data. The degradation is also really pronounced - doing a plain old rsync file copy of the VMDK's shows great performance right until it hits the sequence of dedup'd blank blocks, then the transfer literally almost stops. From speaking to a couple of people, I wouldn't expect 7.2.5.1 or 7.3 to provide many improvements over the latest P releases of of 7.2.4. The bug is more likely to be fixed in 7.3.1, so it's a good 4 months away. However, as the NOW case mentioned, this won't affect the normal operation of a VM, assuming you're not attempting to do anything horrible - like a block for block disk image. Someone also suggested that a disk format might cause problems, however I'd query that as writes are unaffected, it's just reading back those blank blocks. In normal operation a guest OS would never do that, as far as it's concerned (due to the information stored within the guest's file system) they're just unallocated blocks on the disk that'll never be read. Darren On 15/10/2008 00:43, "Glenn Walker" <ggwalker(a)mindspring.com> wrote: Guessing that it sped up access due to the bug (and/or regular performance degradation from hitting the same blocks multiple times due to de-dupe)? With some of the dedupe improvements rumored in 7.3, I'd expect that to potentially improve. ________________________________ From: Darren Sykes [mailto:Darren.Sykes@csr.com] Sent: Tuesday, October 14, 2008 9:45 AM To: Glenn Walker; Page, Jeremy; toasters(a)mathworks.com Subject: RE: Snapvault slow on one specific volume? SMotion - you'd hope (without breaking any NDA's) that they would address that in the next version, and possibly give you the option to specify thin or fat disks explicitly. Out of interest - I removed dedup on our templates volume and a VM provisioning job that took 16 mins yesterday took less than 5 mins today. Darren. ________________________________ From: Glenn Walker [mailto:ggwalker@mindspring.com] Sent: 14 October 2008 13:43 To: Darren Sykes; Page, Jeremy; toasters(a)mathworks.com Subject: RE: Snapvault slow on one specific volume? FC and iSCSI does mean FAT VMDK, unless you create them manually and specify thin provisioned (not typical). The Storage VMotion info is good to know - I hope they get that fixed soon. Thanks for the additional info - it's something for us to watch out for. We went NFS from the start (and performed P2V and V2V into the NFS-based datastores), but I know that SVMotion has been used and templates as well. I'll try to check our use of templates a bit later today... Glenn ________________________________ From: Darren Sykes [mailto:Darren.Sykes@csr.com] Sent: Tuesday, October 14, 2008 3:00 AM To: Glenn Walker; Page, Jeremy; toasters(a)mathworks.com Subject: RE: Snapvault slow on one specific volume? Glenn, That's true; by default all new VM's created on an NFS volume would be thin provisioned. I'm not sure if that's the case for templates though (I thought they were created fat on purpose for performance reasons when deploying them). Also, we migrated from FC and iSCSI LUNS (which is basically a file copy) so most of our VM's are fat anyway. From what I understand using SVMOTION also results in a fat filed VM, though that's not officially supported on NFS in ESX3.5. So, in summary there are a few reasons why you might end up with non-thin provisioned VM's on NFS and may therefore hit this bug. Darren ________________________________ From: Glenn Walker [mailto:ggwalker@mindspring.com] Sent: Tue 10/14/2008 03:23 To: Darren Sykes; Page, Jeremy; toasters(a)mathworks.com Subject: RE: Snapvault slow on one specific volume? I was under the impression that ESX over NFS used thin-provisioned VMDKs by default (that's how it is in our environment, and all of the files are appearing as thin-provisioned). Would this then be not the same bug? Thin-provisioned VMDKs means that the portion of the VMDK not allocated to the guest would be treated as a sparse file, not a file filled with zeros. (unless someone decided to perform a full format on the 'disk', perhaps?) ________________________________ From: owner-toasters(a)mathworks.com [mailto:owner-toasters@mathworks.com] On Behalf Of Darren Sykes Sent: Monday, October 13, 2008 3:51 PM To: Page, Jeremy; toasters(a)mathworks.com Subject: RE: Snapvault slow on one specific volume? Jeremy/All, Following on from our conversation offline: It would seem you (and I) have been suffering from the bug described here: http://now.netapp.com/NOW/cgi-bin/bol?Type=Detail&Display=281669 We saw it on template volumes. I'm planning to disable ASIS on that volume to attempt to speed up access. Obviously, that solution may be less than useful in your environment where it's live data volumes which benefit from ASIS. Darren ________________________________ size=2 width="100%" align=center tabIndex=-1> From: owner-toasters(a)mathworks.com on behalf of Page, Jeremy Sent: Mon 10/13/2008 13:14 To: toasters(a)mathworks.com Subject: Snapvault slow on one specific volume? I have an aggr with two volumes on it. One of them is a 3.5 TB CIFS/NFS share that is reasonably fast to snapvault and a 1 TB NFS share (ESX VMs) that is exceptionally slow. As in it's been doing it's initial copy for over a week and still has not finished. NDMP backups of this volume are also quite slow, does anyone know why it would be so much slower then the other volume using the same spindles? The filer is not under extreme load, although occasionally it's pretty busy. Here is a "normal" sysstat: CPU Total Net kB/s Disk kB/s Tape kB/s Cache Cache CP CP Disk ops/s in out read write read write age hit time ty util 12% 1007 2970 8996 15769 9117 0 0 8 93% 49% : 41% 18% 920 2792 6510 11715 6924 0 0 8 99% 84% T 39% 15% 1276 3580 10469 15942 8041 0 0 10 92% 33% T 36% 13% 1487 3416 11347 15632 4907 0 0 11 89% 42% : 43% 17% 1417 3180 9890 14000 9444 0 0 9 98% 79% T 41% 13% 972 3704 9705 15427 9934 0 0 7 92% 46% T 51% 18% 1087 2947 11911 17717 4640 0 0 9 98% 33% T 47% 11% 1204 3358 11219 14090 5159 0 0 7 88% 100% : 50% 12% 1161 2808 9085 12640 5936 0 0 9 90% 33% T 44% 13% 981 4735 11919 16125 7097 0 0 9 92% 45% : 43% 15% 1158 5780 12480 17565 8266 0 0 10 92% 88% T 41% I'm just having difficulty trying to determine why two volumes on the same spindles would be so different in the time it takes to do their initial transfer. Also, the VM's do not seem slower then those hosted on other aggregates (this one is 3 RG of 11 disks each, Ontap 7.2.4 on a 3070A IBM rebranded). To report this email as spam click here <https://www.mailcontrol.com/sr/wQw0zmjPoHdJTZGyOCrrhg==> . This message (including any attachments) contains confidential and/or proprietary information intended only for the addressee. Any unauthorized disclosure, copying, distribution or reliance on the contents of this information is strictly prohibited and may constitute a violation of law. If you are not the intended recipient, please notify the sender immediately by responding to this e-mail, and delete the message from your system. If you have any questions about this e-mail please notify the sender immediately.

1 0

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 October 2008