toasters June 2009

toasters@lists.teaparty.net

29 participants
22 discussions

RE: HSM/ILM for Netapp
by Funke, Stefan 08 Jun '09

08 Jun '09

Excuse me. Maybe that has changed since the last time I worked with a ARX box. -----Original Message----- From: Kirby Wadsworth [mailto:kirbyw@F5.com] Sent: 08 June 2009 09:53 To: Funke, Stefan; Babar Haq; Bob Blair; toasters(a)mathworks.com Subject: RE: HSM/ILM for Netapp Patently incorrect, Stefan. ARX coordinates snapshots from multiple vendors including NTAP and creates a virtual snapshot across different arrays - a function that no other technology can provide. -----Original Message----- From: owner-toasters(a)mathworks.com [mailto:owner-toasters@mathworks.com] On Behalf Of Funke, Stefan Sent: Monday, June 08, 2009 3:42 AM To: Babar Haq; Bob Blair; toasters(a)mathworks.com Subject: RE: HSM/ILM for Netapp In a typical setup you will configure the ARX to ignore .snapshot directories. F5 doesn't know anything about NetApp snapshots nor does it manage any NetApp functionality like snapshots. Stefan Funke Systems Engineer NetApp Deutschland GmbH -----Original Message----- From: Babar Haq [mailto:babarhaq@email.com] Sent: 07 June 2009 07:52 To: Bob Blair; 'toasters(a)mathworks.com' Subject: RE: HSM/ILM for Netapp > > The F5 ARX (Acopia) does support managing NetApp Snapshots. What the customers means from snapshot support is that once a file moves to other storage it also clears the blocks which are being held by previous snapshots for that specific file. Is that what Acopia does? Appreciate your response. Regards, Babar Haq -- Be Yourself @ mail.com! Choose From 200+ Email Addresses Get a Free Account at www.mail.com

1 0

Re: Use VTL shelfs with netapp head
by Mike 06 Jun '09

06 Jun '09

!!!!!!!! *Contact NetApp* before you do this!!! The VTL disks are handled a materially different way than regular ONTAP disks, and you could have serious problems: http://now.netapp.com/NOW/cgi-bin/bol?Type=Detail&Display=278652 --- On Thu, 6/4/09, Joel.Cooper(a)lvvwd.com <Joel.Cooper(a)lvvwd.com> wrote: > From: Joel.Cooper(a)lvvwd.com <Joel.Cooper(a)lvvwd.com> > Subject: Use VTL shelfs with netapp head > To: toasters(a)mathworks.com > Date: Thursday, June 4, 2009, 6:31 PM > > Hello, we are retiring our VTL 600 head > and would like add the disk shelfs to our existing Netapp > 3140. > > > > Does anyone know if this is possible or has > maybe done something similar? > > > > > > Thanks > > > >

1 0

Other OPS?
by Page, Jeremy 05 Jun '09

05 Jun '09

What causes other ops? I understand that pretty much everything that hits the filer requires something but I am seeing what looks like a very high number of other ops when I do a stats show. Does this indicate a problem or is it just a busy box? It's a mixed mode volume. Just trying to figure out what's causing it to work so hard. Instance total_ops read_ops write_ops other_ops nfs_read_ops nfs_write_op nfs_other_op cifs_read_op cifs_write_o cifs_other_o /s /s /s /s /s /s /s /s /s /s shares 1633 984 139 509 0 1 34 984 137 473 shares 2085 1173 257 654 0 2 18 1173 255 634 shares 2593 1483 253 856 0 2 221 1483 251 634 shares 3268 2306 170 791 0 1 222 2305 168 569 Please be advised that this email 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 email by replying to the sender and by telephone (call us collect at +1 202-828-0850) 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 or any amendment thereto; 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

Convert F825 to FAS940
by ifstat 05 Jun '09

05 Jun '09

Hi I have a F825, just lazying about, being absolutaley useless to me. I was wondering is there a way to reset it's bios or something along that line, so that it thinks it is a FAS940, the reason for this is my testing system is a FAS940 and i have data ontap 7.3.1 on it. The F825 only goes upto 7.2.x so i can't do snapmirror from test site "A" to test site "B". It has to be A to B because of A i have DS14MK4 and on site "B" I have DSFC9 storage. I know that this is not a supported or even midly recommended by Netapp but i just want to test the operations manager data protection, etc. Anyone done this or has any ideas, i'm keen to try. Thanks -- View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/Convert-F825-to-FAS940-tp23885543p23885543.html Sent from the Network Appliance - Toasters mailing list archive at Nabble.com.

2 1

Use VTL shelfs with netapp head
by Joel.Cooper＠lvvwd.com 04 Jun '09

04 Jun '09

Hello, we are retiring our VTL 600 head and would like add the disk shelfs to our existing Netapp 3140. Does anyone know if this is possible or has maybe done something similar? Thanks

1 0

RE: HSM/ILM for Netapp
by John Stoffel 04 Jun '09

04 Jun '09

Glenn> Honestly, moving volumes between aggregates (and controllers) Glenn> is the only thing I'm really looking forward to out of ONTAP 8. Glenn> If all blocks are just virtual pointers now, it makes no sense Glenn> that we cannot move volumes between aggregates and it is a huge Glenn> issue for us today. Hmm... will you be able to move volumes live? I assume you'll need to have the free space in the destination aggr to hold the entire vol you're moving, but that should be ok then. Just keeping the data live and in production during such moves would be a huge help. Glenn> If they bump the limit beyond 32TB, I care less - most of our Glenn> volumes we keep rather small to assist with backup limitations Glenn> and/or reduction of single points of failure. Sure, I agree too. I might even start to use more volumes then, instead of qtrees within volumes. John

3 4

Re: HSM/ILM for Netapp
by Weeks, Roger 04 Jun '09

04 Jun '09

This is not the case. Upgrades to Data ONTAP 8.0 can be performed non-disruptively from 7.3 releases. If you have not yet upgraded to a 7.3 release you will need to follow the guidelines to non-disruptively upgrade to the latest 7.3 release before upgrading to 8.0. Roger Weeks Technical Marketing Engineer MultiStore Security HA NetApp 408.822.6365 Direct rweeks(a)netapp.com www.netapp.com > -----Original Message----- > From: Nick Silkey [mailto:silkey@ece.utexas.edu] > Sent: Tuesday, 02 June, 2009 12:52 > To: Page, Jeremy > Cc: James Beal; toasters(a)mathworks.com > Subject: Re: HSM/ILM for Netapp > > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- > Hash: SHA1 > > On 6/2/09 1:34 PM, Page, Jeremy wrote: >> I thought they where planning to move to 100TB volumes in the very > near >> future (7.4?) > > DOT 8.0 is supposedly bringing WAFL improvements to allow for 100TB > aggrs/vols (rumored to be dropping this summer). > > I also hear jumping any 7.x variant to 8.0 will be a disruptive upgrade. > > Cheers. > > - -- > Nick Silkey > > > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- > Version: GnuPG v1.4.8 (Darwin) > > iEYEARECAAYFAkolgtEACgkQrDQjhjXrMeK+cACgqJtAvcin5cpurMh1sNyIjJMF > Zh4AoI8kZw+DWA4Xvo5YrG0VgGN4orMH > =ERgH > -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

3 2

FAS2050C questions (clustering)
by Ray Van Dolson 03 Jun '09

03 Jun '09

I'm the proud new owner of an IBM N3600 A20 (rebranded FAS2050C) with 20x30GB SAS disks. I'm trying to determine the best way to get this thing set up, and realized I have only a bit of a fuzzy understanding as to how the clustering or failover filer head should work. My initial thoughts were to aim for the following setup: - Set up all 20 disks in a RAID-DP aggregate with one spare (17 data, 2 parity and one spare, or maybe two spares). - Bond a NIC from the first controller with a NIC from the second controller to give us a 2Gbps connection to our "storage network". - Third and fourth NIC's would go to our regular network. My hope was that I could lose one filer head and the other would take over seamlessly. We'd lose half of our network bandwidth but still be up and running. However, it sounds like my understanding of how the clustering works might have been a bit flawed and that I actually need to treat the filer heads as two separate filers. So I may be forced to do something like the following: - Split my disks up between the two filers (7 data, 2 parity, one spare -- or maybe I can have one spare available to both heads). - Probably can't team NIC's from multiple filer heads meaning if I team the two NIC's on the filer I can no longer connect to my management network. I probably need to order more NIC's :( - If I lose one head, I lose one aggregate unless manual intervention is taken. - Each filer has a different hostname/IP for network access. This maybe gives me better performance, but at the expense of total disk space and flexibility if my understanding is correct. Maybe someone could help clear this up. It doesn't appear IBM has a RedBook on clustering... I'm searching around in NOW and have come across the Data ONTAP 7.3 Active/Active Configuration Guide which I am now reading. Is there something similar for Active/Passive setups (which seems to be more what I am after) or other documents that would be recommended reading? Any advice or best practices? This filer will be serving NFS to a pair of ESX servers. We plan to add a second shelf of disks later this year. Thanks in advance. No sales inquiries please. Ray

5 6

Re: FAS2050C questions (clustering)
by Ray Van Dolson 03 Jun '09

03 Jun '09

On Tue, Jun 02, 2009 at 09:26:17AM -0700, Steve Francis wrote: > You can get a performance boost by splitting it up. > Which is why I don't like to do that, in general, for performance > sensitive workloads. :-) > > Otherwise, in the event of a head failure, the surviving head may not > have the CPU/cache to deal with the extra work - even if both heads > are normally under 50% load. > Most workloads grow linearly - until they hit an elbow an don't grow linearly. > The only true way to be sure you have failover capacity is to run that > way all the time. > > Your mileage/budget/workload/performance requirements may vary. Thanks all. Great advice. So, my question is: if the second head can take over the personality of the failed head, why do I need to allocate any disks at all to the second head to begin with? Just a design thing? I'll probably do the even split thing.... and look into ordering additional NIC's. Can I have a "spare" that is available to either aggregate on either filer? This way I could do two RAID-DP's on each head with one common "spare" disk and rely on 4hr support to get me replacement disks quickly. Ray

3 3

HSM/ILM for Netapp
by Babar Haq 03 Jun '09

03 Jun '09

Hi all, IHAC who is searching for a product that can provide HSM/ILM function for massive NAS environment. This product can be either a hardware appliance, a software, or combination of both that can provide a total transparent solution for our user (i.e. regardless where is the physical data location, user can remain using it old logical path to access the same data) with tiered storage. So far I can only identify two products one hardware Acopia and the other one is software approach CommVault. Both have it pros and cons but the biggest challenges for both products are not able to manage snapshot and do not go down to qtree level. Thanks in advance. Regards, Babar Haq -- Be Yourself @ mail.com! Choose From 200+ Email Addresses Get a Free Account at www.mail.com

9 9

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 June 2009