toasters March 2008

toasters@lists.teaparty.net

64 participants
37 discussions

Netapp and VMware... It's all so confusing!
by Timothy Hollingworth 01 Apr '10

01 Apr '10

So, say for example, I want to virtualize an Exchange server. Lets also say that I want to manage it via Snapdrive and SME. Lets also say, just for the heck of it, that I want both the new front-engined Acura NSX as well as the Porsche RC3. The cars aside, I would have to run iSCSI from within the VM, install and use Snapdrive from within the VM to provision LUNs, install Exchange and then use SME? It seems kind of silly to use iSCSI from within a VM if the ESX box were fiber attached to the Filer, just to be able to use Snapdrive and SME, no? I would love to be able to use the features of SD and SME within a completely virtual environment and am wondering what some real world implementations other VMware/Netapp customers are running. Do you run storage for the databases and logs in VMDK's and manage snapshots and backups from a VMware virtual machine perspective or do you manage them as iSCSI LUNs and use SD and SME? Or am I completely blind and missing something? Timothy L. Hollingworth Sr. Network Engineer, ePlus Technology Inc. 678.462.6698 (cell) AIM: HollingworthTim YIM: t_holling

11 15

RE: NetApp & Leopard
by Villabroza, Gerald 24 May '08

24 May '08

Patrick, Tough to mandate dave or admitmac in a diverse higher education environment. 100's of macs show up after the Christmas holidays and they all expect to use university resources immediately. Carl, Our understanding from Apple is that the next Leopard update, 10.52, will address the CIFS access issue. It's in a testing phase now but not available to folks external to Apple. -=-=- gerald villabroza <geraldv at stanford.edu> technical lead, its storage, stanford university > -----Original Message----- > From: Patrick van Helden [mailto:pvh@databasement.eu] > Sent: Wednesday, January 30, 2008 8:24 AM > To: Carl Howell; Villabroza, Gerald > Cc: toasters(a)mathworks.com > Subject: RE: NetApp & Leopard > > Hi Guys, > > Why don't you guys use a 3rd party client like "Dave" or "Admitmac" > from Thursby? > > Admitmac even has Windows DFS support > > Regards, > > Patrick van Helden > Databasement BV > pvh(a)databasement.eu > > > > -----Oorspronkelijk bericht----- > Van: owner-toasters(a)mathworks.com namens Carl Howell > Verzonden: wo 1/30/2008 15:56 > Aan: geraldv(a)stanford.edu > CC: toasters(a)mathworks.com > Onderwerp: RE: NetApp & Leopard > > Gerald, > > Thanks for the feedback, and yes, feel free to reference us. > > --Carl > > -----Original Message----- > From: Villabroza, Gerald [mailto:geraldv@stanford.edu] > Sent: Wednesday, January 30, 2008 8:49 AM > To: Carl Howell > Cc: toasters(a)mathworks.com > Subject: Re: NetApp & Leopard > > Carl, > > We're experiencing the same issue when accessing DOT 7.2.2 CIFS in Win > 2k3 AD with OS X 10.5.1. > > We've opened a case with Apple and here's what they came back with: > > ##### > When a Leopard client opens a session, it sends three mechanisms in > this > > order, KRB5, some OID I don't what it is, and MS KRB5. The filer > returns an unsupported error. > > Apple thinks DOT is just bailing on the first unsupported mechanism and > not checking the whole list. Tiger only sent the MS KRB5 mechanism so > that is why it works. > > Apple is working on building a test of their kerberos library that puts > MS KRB5 as the first mechanism to validate the hypothesis. > ##### > > Leopard can authenticate via K5 against MS WIN 2k3 systems fine in our > environment, just not against DOT. > > Luckily Apple and NetApp are both TSAnet members and can collaborate on > the support case. > > Do you mind if reference your experience at UWF with NetApp and Apple? > And if you don't, do you have a case # with NetApp? > > Its interesting to hear of other hi-ed's with this issue. Any others > out there? Like other issues in our space it helps to band together. > > -=-=- > gerald villabroza <geraldv at stanford.edu> > technical lead, its storage, stanford university > > > Carl Howell wrote: > > I've stumbled across a problem we're having accessing filer hosted > CIFS > > shares from Mac OS X Leopard 10.5.1. The Leopard boxes I've tried > this > > on are all bound to our Win2k3 Active Directory. If you log into > Leopard > > with your domain credentials and try to access a share on a > filer(this > > happens on all of our filers and all are at 7.x and above), you will > be > > prompted for your password. If you try to access the same CIFS share > > hosted on a Win2k3 box, you will get right in. > > > > > > > > Has anyone else seen this? > > > > > > > > Thanks, > > > > > > > > --Carl > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >

4 5

UTF-8 appended to language code.
by Milazzo Giacomo 08 Apr '08

08 Apr '08

Hi all I need to append the .UTF-8 to the language code of some volume with a mixed security. I need to know if this can change or alter the name of the files there contained, accessing them both from NFS and CIFS. This because using Enterprise Vault SP2 on a NetApp share and placeholder (policy ad hoc for ev) the size of archived files reports "0" bytes instead of the real value reflecting the original data... My EV is 7.5 SP2 but I've only found a doc related to EV v.6 SP2 (http://seer.entsupport.symantec.com/docs/282785.htm) and I put here an extract of the readme attached to EV installation: Anyway supposing that they're right, can I add this UTF-8 and be sure? Thanks a lot NetApp Filer placeholder shortcuts appear to be 0 KB [Ref E1029910, E1017992, DOR1006] Placeholder shortcuts created on NetApp Filers fail to reflect the original file size, appearing instead to be 0 KB, if either of the following conditions applies: * The language setting on the NetApp Filer is Shift JIS (Japanese) * The language setting on the NetApp Filer is not appended with .UTF-8, and the name of the file that is converted to a placeholder contains Unicode characters. To avoid the second condition, you can append .UTF-8 to the language setting on the NetApp Filer. To do this, enter the following command from the NetApp Filer's administration console: vol lang volume_name language_code.UTF-8 where volume_name specifies the volume, and language_code is the code for the language setting. For example: vol lang vol0 en.UTF-8 Note: You can view a list of the language settings the NetApp Filer supports by entering the following command: vol lang

2 1

Performance impact of in-lined firewalls/IDS
by Tom Yates 01 Apr '08

01 Apr '08

I have a bunch of filers that we use from various hosts for CIFS, NFS and iSCSI. Powers That Be are planning to put both a firewall and an adaptive IDS between my filers and my hosts. Does anyone have any rough and ready (ir ndeed, shiny and precise) numbers about what sort of performance impact this can have, recommendations for how to do it properly, or indeed solid data suggesting not to do it at all? Any experience with this? -- Tom Yates - http://www.teaparty.net

8 9

RAC install on NetApp
by Robert K. Borowicz 01 Apr '08

01 Apr '08

Toasters, My DBA just came to me and complained that a Ora RAC 10g build took 18 hours when using a Filer NFS mount. Seems I've heard of this issue before but forget the fix. Has someone seen this before ? TIA -Rob

6 6

Re: Some thoughts and questions on A-sis
by John Stoffel 31 Mar '08

31 Mar '08

Scott> no symlinks, automounter sub-mount maps. I have 600+ qtrees in Scott> 3 sites with NFS caches in between, in a single name space Scott> using a gory mesh of automount maps and automounter variables Scott> defined on clients. We've done that, but when a single project out grows a volume, then we start needing to shuffle data... it's a pain. If I could have more volumes, then I'd use them over qtrees, but then when an Aggr fills, I need to move volumes. It's a pain. That's why I like the idea of the Acopia product. I wish NetApp would realize that and come out with their own storage virtualization product to put in front of backend NetApps. Would be really nice. Course I'm a mostly NFS only shop. Scott> this is worth doing if the data set is A-sis friendly. >> >> It probably is actually, but hard to know. >> Scott> Future OnTap versions are going to make A-sis an aggregate Scott> behavior, not a volume one, which removes the volume size Scott> limit. >> Scott> and reinforces the silly 16T aggregate limit ;-) >> >> Yeah, that's another silly limit, esp with raid sets and RaidDP >> stuff. They should just let it scale and scale and scale. Scott> really a problem with 1 TB disks; 16 drives, onr Raid-DB group Scott> per aggregate. stinky performance. >> I personally *like* one big volume, with bunches of qtrees. What I'd >> really like is qtrees on multiple levels, or the raising of the number >> of volumes that are supported in an aggregate. That would help. >> >> And speeing up SnapVault. And a pony... :] >> >> John

3 4

"How to" help needed
by Milazzo Giacomo 29 Mar '08

29 Mar '08

Hi I'm going to expand available size to a 980C with only 2 shelves filled with 14 72G FC disks Customer buyed other 28 disks (144) to substitute the old 72. I've only one third shelf available, temporarely. As with the '3 card game' J which is the best way in your opinion to do this job? Could this be correct? 1. Disable cf 2. Attach the temporary shelf to one head, copy in it both 72G shelves content on two different volumes 3. Remove the 72 G disks from the 2nd head shelf and fill it with the 144 ones 4. Install Data Ontap on the 2nd head disks and boot it 5. Copy in this last the content saved at point 2

3 2

Optimal Filesize
by Sebastien Campion 28 Mar '08

28 Mar '08

Hi, i manage a NetApp Filer for scientific applications and i have to choose an optimal file size to store my data. My range is 4Mo to 40Go. This data must be read by a grid computing based on NFS and Linux. If my NVRAM size is 512Mo, a optimal filesize is < 512 Mo ? Maybe, filesize is not important for filer performance, i don't know. Thanks in advance, Sébastien.

2 1

Re: Some thoughts and questions on A-sis
by John Stoffel 28 Mar '08

28 Mar '08

Scott> 6T on 6070's Heh. I'm running on 960s and 980s now, so this won't help me much, even with an upgrade planned for later this year. Maybe. Scott> in a few cases, I split big volumes into smaller chunks Scott> and stiched them back together with automount maps an DFS Scott> links (my filesystem namespace is already built that way). We've don't this too, but it's a total hassle when one volume has to grow, and I don't want to go down symlink hell again if I can help it. Scott> this is worth doing if the data set is A-sis friendly. It probably is actually, but hard to know. Scott> Future OnTap versions are going to make A-sis an aggregate Scott> behavior, not a volume one, which removes the volume size Scott> limit. Scott> and reinforces the silly 16T aggregate limit ;-) Yeah, that's another silly limit, esp with raid sets and RaidDP stuff. They should just let it scale and scale and scale. I personally *like* one big volume, with bunches of qtrees. What I'd really like is qtrees on multiple levels, or the raising of the number of volumes that are supported in an aggregate. That would help. And speeing up SnapVault. And a pony... :] John

1 0

Some thoughts and questions on A-sis
by Adam McDougall 27 Mar '08

27 Mar '08

I started testing sis on one of our 3040's last weekend. Sorry if theres more extensive information on NOW, but the things I've found so far were fairly rudimentry. Some impressions and questions: I found out quickly that my 5T test volume was too big. Looked up the limits because I had no idea there were volume size limits. 3T for 3040 hmm. I have an existing volume that holds 2.5T, so that is pushing it, and while I would like to split it up, it won't happen overnight. I'm not desperate to use sis on it, although I am almost done copying it and so far have realized 26% savings from dedupe for testing. I wonder why the max size scales with the system model, I haven't thought of a good reason for this yet since you could easily have lots of 3T volumes. I was wondering if you can get sis to shrink say 2.8T to 2.0, is the 2.0 what counts for the sis volume limit size? Even so, would I run into trouble if trying to do a full volume restore and the full data set is over 3.0 but would have shrunk? Once I write over 3T into a volume, it sounds like I cannot run sis on it. I'm not too worried about having to do a full restore of a volume from tape, but I don't want to limit my future options if the short term payoff isn't worth it. I'm pretty sure I'll use it on all or most of all of my other volumes since they are much smaller. I noticed during my data copy, the snapshot reserve was blowing out big time. It seemed like almost any savings from sis went into snapshots for some reason. 100, 200, 400% full, and it started trimming itself back after a while. Since this was a non-production copy, I didn't care, and deleted those snapshots this morning, but I thought that was rather odd, and couldn't think what the snapshots would have to offer since if the data was unmodified at the filesystem level, the snapshot should contain the same data. While not a problem for an initial copy, I would expect the same thing to happen when sis runs during production, and although it wouldn't be as large and would eventually flush out, why am I expending space to store duplicate copies of data that I asked it to deduplicate? :) Maybe its just because wafl identifies them as "changed blocks" and insists on storing them in the snapshot. A 1 gig file of zeros still takes several tens of megabytes after sis. hmm :) And roughly twice as much for a second copy of it.

6 5

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 March 2008