toasters

toasters@lists.teaparty.net

13531 discussions

RE: Preventative/proactive filer maintenance
by Glenn Walker 12 Jan '07

12 Jan '07

I'd recommend the scheduled WAFL reallocates to help defrag. I'm curious about the fact they question the last time it was wafl_ironed - this looks for and fixes corruption, not poor layout. I'd start by monitoring performance - stats output\sysstat and statit. Perfstat (from the now site) is a good tool to collect a lot of data, but unless you've been working on filers for a number of years, it will be mostly gibberish (though some output is similar to what you'd find on unix systems). Glenn -----Original Message----- From: owner-toasters(a)mathworks.com [mailto:owner-toasters@mathworks.com] On Behalf Of Nick Silkey Sent: Thursday, January 11, 2007 5:11 PM To: toasters(a)mathworks.com Subject: Preventative/proactive filer maintenance Greetings, I inherited a production F810 some time ago. It has since been replaced with a newer 3020C. During the 810->3020 data migration, I had severe NDMP enumeration latency. NetApp support inquired about various details on the 810, such as the last time it was wafl_ironed, etc. Indeed, the 810 had spun in production for years with minimal admin intervention. Apparently this contributed to the performance hit we took during our data migration. My question to the list is what are some 'best practices' for caring-and-feeding of a 7.x filer, ala preventative steps to take within OnTAP in order to prevent said problem from happening again in the future. Preferably steps to take on a live filer without interrupting service (impacting read/write/throughput ok, downed filer not). Much appreciated. -- Nick Silkey | silkey(a)ece.utexas.edu Senior Operating Systems Specialist Electrical & Computer Engineering The University of Texas at Austin ENS 526W | 512.475.8284 | 0x35EB31E2

2 1

Preventative/proactive filer maintenance
by Nick Silkey 11 Jan '07

11 Jan '07

Greetings, I inherited a production F810 some time ago. It has since been replaced with a newer 3020C. During the 810->3020 data migration, I had severe NDMP enumeration latency. NetApp support inquired about various details on the 810, such as the last time it was wafl_ironed, etc. Indeed, the 810 had spun in production for years with minimal admin intervention. Apparently this contributed to the performance hit we took during our data migration. My question to the list is what are some 'best practices' for caring-and-feeding of a 7.x filer, ala preventative steps to take within OnTAP in order to prevent said problem from happening again in the future. Preferably steps to take on a live filer without interrupting service (impacting read/write/throughput ok, downed filer not). Much appreciated. -- Nick Silkey | silkey(a)ece.utexas.edu Senior Operating Systems Specialist Electrical & Computer Engineering The University of Texas at Austin ENS 526W | 512.475.8284 | 0x35EB31E2

1 0

Re: Vista and Netapp??
by Davies,Matt 11 Jan '07

11 Jan '07

Both are in wins. However the one that fails is dynamic and the one that works is a static. Both are in dns. It doesn't seem to help. Cheers Matt -----Original Message----- From: Willeke, Jochen <Jochen.Willeke(a)wincor-nixdorf.com> To: Davies,Matt; Brent Ellis <interi(a)bu.edu>; Callaway, Michael <Mcallaway(a)ntta.org> CC: toasters(a)mathworks.com <toasters(a)mathworks.com> Sent: Thu Jan 11 18:18:21 2007 Subject: RE: Vista and Netapp?? Hi, is it possible that the name which does not work is equal to the wins-name, and the second name is not registered with wins? Regards Jochen ________________________________ From: owner-toasters(a)mathworks.com [mailto:owner-toasters@mathworks.com] On Behalf Of Davies,Matt Sent: Thursday, January 11, 2007 6:04 PM To: Brent Ellis; Callaway, Michael Cc: toasters(a)mathworks.com Subject: RE: Vista and Netapp?? I found a way round this problem, or at least it seems to work for me. From a vista machine I am unable to connect to the shares using the filer host name, but we have our filers advertise an additional netbios name (for DR reasons), and for some reason I can connect to the shares by using the additional netbios name. Hope this helps Matt __________________________________________________ Matt Davies General Atlantic 83 Pall Mall London SW1Y 5ES UK Tel: +44 (0) 20 7484 3203 Fax: +44 (0) 20 7484 2803 Mobile: +44 (0) 77 7559 4265 http://www.generalatlantic.com/ Email: mdavies(a)generalatlantic.com <mailto:mdavies@generalatlantic.com> __________________________________________________ ________________________________ From: owner-toasters(a)mathworks.com [mailto:owner-toasters@mathworks.com] On Behalf Of Brent Ellis Sent: 11 January 2007 16:21 To: Callaway, Michael Cc: toasters(a)mathworks.com Subject: Re: Vista and Netapp?? We currently use this filer in production with windows 2000 and windows xp clients. I have had no user permission problems up until this point. The filer allowed us to join it to our domain and we can access the filer from windows clients and set AD permissions on folders in the file share using windows xp or 2000. I am guessing this is Microsofts way of making windows more secure or maybe a small protocol difference with CIFS in Vista that the filer is not able to deal with. BTW as I said I can connect to the filer with CIFS using accounts I explicitly setup in the filer, just not active directory accounts. Brent Ellis Computing Services Group Boston University 617-358-2486 interi(a)bu.edu cashelp(a)bu.edu On Jan 11, 2007, at 11:14 AM, Callaway, Michael wrote: Can other non-visa clients access this CIFS share in the way you want your vista box to access it? Just because your user is in AD, doesn't give it permissions on the share. You need to make sure that user has access on the filer through group and user permissions as well as the shares have to be given to that user or a group that user is in. I would first make the exact same setup on an XP or 2000 box (whichever you have) and determine if it's a user setup problem or something that can be directly attributed to Vista. -- *--------------------------------------- Michael Callaway (Server Administrator) North Texas Tollway Authority http://www.ntta.org <http://www.ntta.org/> 214-461-2033 o 214-325-5523 m 972-930-2633 f ---------------------------------------- ________________________________ From: owner-toasters(a)mathworks.com [mailto:owner-toasters@mathworks.com] On Behalf Of Brent Ellis Sent: Thursday, January 11, 2007 9:09 AM To: toasters(a)mathworks.com Subject: Vista and Netapp?? I am just starting to test Vista against our netapp FAS 3020c filers. We use these machines with the CIFS license for basic file sharing. The shares have Active Directory permissions applied to them and the servers have been added to AD. In Vista, I cannot connect to the servers using an AD account. Only the accounts created on the filer itself will allow me to connect from Vista. Has anyone run into this? Any solutions? Brent Ellis Computing Services Group Boston University 617-358-2486 interi(a)bu.edu cashelp(a)bu.edu ____________________________________________________________ This e-mail (including all attachments) is confidential and may be privileged. It is for the exclusive use of the addressee only. If you are not the addressee, you are hereby notified that any dissemination of this communication is strictly prohibited. If you have received this communication in error, please erase all copies of the message and its attachments and notify us immediately at help(a)generalatlantic.com. Thank You.

1 0

Vista and Netapp??
by Brent Ellis 11 Jan '07

11 Jan '07

I am just starting to test Vista against our netapp FAS 3020c filers. We use these machines with the CIFS license for basic file sharing. The shares have Active Directory permissions applied to them and the servers have been added to AD. In Vista, I cannot connect to the servers using an AD account. Only the accounts created on the filer itself will allow me to connect from Vista. Has anyone run into this? Any solutions? Brent Ellis Computing Services Group Boston University 617-358-2486 interi(a)bu.edu cashelp(a)bu.edu

3 2

Fwd: Vista and Netapp??
by Brent Ellis 11 Jan '07

11 Jan '07

I forgot to forward this to the group, I thought it might be useful for the rest of you. -Brent > Pat, > > I looked up the article you are talking about. I am running 7.1p1, > apparently this bug affects my version of DataONTAP. I tested it > and I can connect via IP, just not using the DNS Name. Looks like > I need to upgrade the filer. > > Brent Ellis > Computing Services Group > Boston University > > > On Jan 11, 2007, at 11:05 AM, Allen, Pat wrote: > >> What version of ONTAP are you running? I’m still on 6.5 and ran >> into a similar problem when trying to connect to the filers by >> name. But it would let me connect to the shares via IP address. >> Check out this article on NOW: >> http://now.netapp.com/NOW/cgi-bin/bol?Type=Detail&Display=174785 >> >> >> On 1/11/07 7:08 AM, "Brent Ellis" <interi(a)bu.edu> wrote: >> >>> I am just starting to test Vista against our netapp FAS 3020c >>> filers. We use these machines with the CIFS license for basic >>> file sharing. The shares have Active Directory permissions >>> applied to them and the servers have been added to AD. In Vista, >>> I cannot connect to the servers using an AD account. Only the >>> accounts created on the filer itself will allow me to connect >>> from Vista. >>> >>> Has anyone run into this? Any solutions? >>> >>> >>> Brent Ellis >>> Computing Services Group >>> Boston University >>>

1 0

RE: add bigger disk into raidgroup with smaller disks
by Glenn Walker 11 Jan '07

11 Jan '07

The great Will Stroh has provided the following link: http://now.netapp.com/Knowledgebase/solutionarea.asp?id=kb17958 Explains it perfectly! Maybe the rest of you lot will get some use out of the example as well :) (Thanks Will and Adam) Glenn -----Original Message----- From: owner-toasters(a)mathworks.com [mailto:owner-toasters@mathworks.com] On Behalf Of Glenn Walker Sent: Wednesday, January 10, 2007 5:07 PM To: Willeke, Jochen; tmac; Fox, Adam Cc: toasters(a)mathworks.com Subject: RE: add bigger disk into raidgroup with smaller disks I can't seem to shake the memory of one other rule - if you add a 3rd disk of larger size, the extra space DOES get used. At least it used to be like that in the past, and I assume WAFL hasn't changed. For Example 100GB DP 100GB P 50GB D 50GB D Then add another 100GB data disk and it _should_ look like: 100GB DP 100GB P 100GB D 50GB D 50GB D Can anyone confirm this? Glenn -----Original Message----- From: owner-toasters(a)mathworks.com [mailto:owner-toasters@mathworks.com] On Behalf Of Willeke, Jochen Sent: Wednesday, January 10, 2007 4:19 PM To: tmac; Fox, Adam Cc: toasters(a)mathworks.com Subject: RE: add bigger disk into raidgroup with smaller disks Hi, thanks...what you said is exactly what my tests showed. If the parity and DP are big enough you can run disks with different size in a raidgroup and use the whole size but this does not work if a small disk becomes replaced via a bigger one. thanks and best regards Jochen -----Original Message----- From: tmac [mailto:tmacmd@gmail.com] Sent: Wednesday, January 10, 2007 10:14 PM To: Fox, Adam Cc: Willeke, Jochen; toasters(a)mathworks.com Subject: Re: add bigger disk into raidgroup with smaller disks Sorry Adam, I used the wrong verbiage. I meant when the disk is added...not replaced. For now, ONTAP does indeed right-size a disk down to the size of the disk that it is replacing. thanks. On 1/10/07, Fox, Adam <Adam.Fox(a)netapp.com> wrote: > No. You can't replace disks in an aggregate that way. If you do, > they will sized down to the size of the disk they replaced. > > > -- Adam Fox > adamfox(a)netapp.com > > > -----Original Message----- > From: Willeke, Jochen [mailto:Jochen.Willeke@wincor-nixdorf.com] > Sent: Wednesday, January 10, 2007 3:12 PM > To: toasters(a)mathworks.com > Subject: add bigger disk into raidgroup with smaller disks > > > Hi toasters, > > currently i am testing with my simulator and searching for a way to do > the following: > > - have a raidgroup with 5 disks > - the two parity-disks plus one data-disk are 100 MB (net) > - two other data-disks are 35 MB (net) > > I want to replace the 35MB-disks with bigger ones, but everything i > tried left the "new" disk in the raidgroup with a used size of 35MB. > > Is there a way to replace a small disk with a bigger one and use the > complete size of the disk without destroying the whole raidgroup? > > Regards and thanks in advance > > Jochen > > -- --tmac RedHat Certified Engineer #804006984323821

1 0

RE: add bigger disk into raidgroup with smaller disks
by Glenn Walker 11 Jan '07

11 Jan '07

Agreed. -----Original Message----- From: Fox, Adam [mailto:Adam.Fox@netapp.com] Sent: Wednesday, January 10, 2007 5:31 PM To: Glenn Walker; Willeke, Jochen; tmac Cc: toasters(a)mathworks.com Subject: RE: add bigger disk into raidgroup with smaller disks Yes, I can confirm that. But that doesn't *replace* any of the 50GB disks, which is what I understood as the original question. The rules are different if you add a disk vs. fail out a disk. If you were to fail out one of the 50GB disks in your scenario, and only a 100GB disk was available, WAFL would only use 50GB of the 100GB disk and even if you failed out both 50GB disks, the two 100GB disks that replaced them would still be 50GB. That's the catch. -- Adam Fox NGS Tools Developer adamfox(a)netapp.com -----Original Message----- From: Glenn Walker [mailto:ggwalker@mindspring.com] Sent: Wednesday, January 10, 2007 5:07 PM To: Willeke, Jochen; tmac; Fox, Adam Cc: toasters(a)mathworks.com Subject: RE: add bigger disk into raidgroup with smaller disks I can't seem to shake the memory of one other rule - if you add a 3rd disk of larger size, the extra space DOES get used. At least it used to be like that in the past, and I assume WAFL hasn't changed. For Example 100GB DP 100GB P 50GB D 50GB D Then add another 100GB data disk and it _should_ look like: 100GB DP 100GB P 100GB D 50GB D 50GB D Can anyone confirm this? Glenn -----Original Message----- From: owner-toasters(a)mathworks.com [mailto:owner-toasters@mathworks.com] On Behalf Of Willeke, Jochen Sent: Wednesday, January 10, 2007 4:19 PM To: tmac; Fox, Adam Cc: toasters(a)mathworks.com Subject: RE: add bigger disk into raidgroup with smaller disks Hi, thanks...what you said is exactly what my tests showed. If the parity and DP are big enough you can run disks with different size in a raidgroup and use the whole size but this does not work if a small disk becomes replaced via a bigger one. thanks and best regards Jochen -----Original Message----- From: tmac [mailto:tmacmd@gmail.com] Sent: Wednesday, January 10, 2007 10:14 PM To: Fox, Adam Cc: Willeke, Jochen; toasters(a)mathworks.com Subject: Re: add bigger disk into raidgroup with smaller disks Sorry Adam, I used the wrong verbiage. I meant when the disk is added...not replaced. For now, ONTAP does indeed right-size a disk down to the size of the disk that it is replacing. thanks. On 1/10/07, Fox, Adam <Adam.Fox(a)netapp.com> wrote: > No. You can't replace disks in an aggregate that way. If you do, > they will sized down to the size of the disk they replaced. > > > -- Adam Fox > adamfox(a)netapp.com > > > -----Original Message----- > From: Willeke, Jochen [mailto:Jochen.Willeke@wincor-nixdorf.com] > Sent: Wednesday, January 10, 2007 3:12 PM > To: toasters(a)mathworks.com > Subject: add bigger disk into raidgroup with smaller disks > > > Hi toasters, > > currently i am testing with my simulator and searching for a way to do > the following: > > - have a raidgroup with 5 disks > - the two parity-disks plus one data-disk are 100 MB (net) > - two other data-disks are 35 MB (net) > > I want to replace the 35MB-disks with bigger ones, but everything i > tried left the "new" disk in the raidgroup with a used size of 35MB. > > Is there a way to replace a small disk with a bigger one and use the > complete size of the disk without destroying the whole raidgroup? > > Regards and thanks in advance > > Jochen > > -- --tmac RedHat Certified Engineer #804006984323821

1 0

RE: Net app support
by admin＠berkcom.net 10 Jan '07

10 Jan '07

1 0

RE: add bigger disk into raidgroup with smaller disks
by Fox, Adam 10 Jan '07

10 Jan '07

Yes, I can confirm that. But that doesn't *replace* any of the 50GB disks, which is what I understood as the original question. The rules are different if you add a disk vs. fail out a disk. If you were to fail out one of the 50GB disks in your scenario, and only a 100GB disk was available, WAFL would only use 50GB of the 100GB disk and even if you failed out both 50GB disks, the two 100GB disks that replaced them would still be 50GB. That's the catch. -- Adam Fox NGS Tools Developer adamfox(a)netapp.com -----Original Message----- From: Glenn Walker [mailto:ggwalker@mindspring.com] Sent: Wednesday, January 10, 2007 5:07 PM To: Willeke, Jochen; tmac; Fox, Adam Cc: toasters(a)mathworks.com Subject: RE: add bigger disk into raidgroup with smaller disks I can't seem to shake the memory of one other rule - if you add a 3rd disk of larger size, the extra space DOES get used. At least it used to be like that in the past, and I assume WAFL hasn't changed. For Example 100GB DP 100GB P 50GB D 50GB D Then add another 100GB data disk and it _should_ look like: 100GB DP 100GB P 100GB D 50GB D 50GB D Can anyone confirm this? Glenn -----Original Message----- From: owner-toasters(a)mathworks.com [mailto:owner-toasters@mathworks.com] On Behalf Of Willeke, Jochen Sent: Wednesday, January 10, 2007 4:19 PM To: tmac; Fox, Adam Cc: toasters(a)mathworks.com Subject: RE: add bigger disk into raidgroup with smaller disks Hi, thanks...what you said is exactly what my tests showed. If the parity and DP are big enough you can run disks with different size in a raidgroup and use the whole size but this does not work if a small disk becomes replaced via a bigger one. thanks and best regards Jochen -----Original Message----- From: tmac [mailto:tmacmd@gmail.com] Sent: Wednesday, January 10, 2007 10:14 PM To: Fox, Adam Cc: Willeke, Jochen; toasters(a)mathworks.com Subject: Re: add bigger disk into raidgroup with smaller disks Sorry Adam, I used the wrong verbiage. I meant when the disk is added...not replaced. For now, ONTAP does indeed right-size a disk down to the size of the disk that it is replacing. thanks. On 1/10/07, Fox, Adam <Adam.Fox(a)netapp.com> wrote: > No. You can't replace disks in an aggregate that way. If you do, > they will sized down to the size of the disk they replaced. > > > -- Adam Fox > adamfox(a)netapp.com > > > -----Original Message----- > From: Willeke, Jochen [mailto:Jochen.Willeke@wincor-nixdorf.com] > Sent: Wednesday, January 10, 2007 3:12 PM > To: toasters(a)mathworks.com > Subject: add bigger disk into raidgroup with smaller disks > > > Hi toasters, > > currently i am testing with my simulator and searching for a way to do > the following: > > - have a raidgroup with 5 disks > - the two parity-disks plus one data-disk are 100 MB (net) > - two other data-disks are 35 MB (net) > > I want to replace the 35MB-disks with bigger ones, but everything i > tried left the "new" disk in the raidgroup with a used size of 35MB. > > Is there a way to replace a small disk with a bigger one and use the > complete size of the disk without destroying the whole raidgroup? > > Regards and thanks in advance > > Jochen > > -- --tmac RedHat Certified Engineer #804006984323821

1 0

Looking for Beta Testers
by Harry McIntosh 10 Jan '07

10 Jan '07

Hi Toasters: We have a new software product for use with filers, and we are looking for beta testers for it. We can offer a free license for the product to a limited number of beta testers. The product is named Folderscape, and is a combination of Windows Explorer and FilerView. For details, please visit our website at Folderscape.com. Although future versions of Folderscape will include Unix functionality, the current version works only with NTFS volumes. If you have NTFS volumes, and would like to beta test the software, please let me know. Thanks, Harry McIntosh PAC Software, Inc. -- View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/Looking-for-Beta-Testers-tf2955517.html#a8267591 Sent from the Network Appliance - Toasters mailing list archive at Nabble.com.

1 0

RE: add bigger disk into raidgroup with smaller disks
by Glenn Walker 10 Jan '07

10 Jan '07

I can't seem to shake the memory of one other rule - if you add a 3rd disk of larger size, the extra space DOES get used. At least it used to be like that in the past, and I assume WAFL hasn't changed. For Example 100GB DP 100GB P 50GB D 50GB D Then add another 100GB data disk and it _should_ look like: 100GB DP 100GB P 100GB D 50GB D 50GB D Can anyone confirm this? Glenn -----Original Message----- From: owner-toasters(a)mathworks.com [mailto:owner-toasters@mathworks.com] On Behalf Of Willeke, Jochen Sent: Wednesday, January 10, 2007 4:19 PM To: tmac; Fox, Adam Cc: toasters(a)mathworks.com Subject: RE: add bigger disk into raidgroup with smaller disks Hi, thanks...what you said is exactly what my tests showed. If the parity and DP are big enough you can run disks with different size in a raidgroup and use the whole size but this does not work if a small disk becomes replaced via a bigger one. thanks and best regards Jochen -----Original Message----- From: tmac [mailto:tmacmd@gmail.com] Sent: Wednesday, January 10, 2007 10:14 PM To: Fox, Adam Cc: Willeke, Jochen; toasters(a)mathworks.com Subject: Re: add bigger disk into raidgroup with smaller disks Sorry Adam, I used the wrong verbiage. I meant when the disk is added...not replaced. For now, ONTAP does indeed right-size a disk down to the size of the disk that it is replacing. thanks. On 1/10/07, Fox, Adam <Adam.Fox(a)netapp.com> wrote: > No. You can't replace disks in an aggregate that way. If you do, > they will sized down to the size of the disk they replaced. > > > -- Adam Fox > adamfox(a)netapp.com > > > -----Original Message----- > From: Willeke, Jochen [mailto:Jochen.Willeke@wincor-nixdorf.com] > Sent: Wednesday, January 10, 2007 3:12 PM > To: toasters(a)mathworks.com > Subject: add bigger disk into raidgroup with smaller disks > > > Hi toasters, > > currently i am testing with my simulator and searching for a way to do > the following: > > - have a raidgroup with 5 disks > - the two parity-disks plus one data-disk are 100 MB (net) > - two other data-disks are 35 MB (net) > > I want to replace the 35MB-disks with bigger ones, but everything i > tried left the "new" disk in the raidgroup with a used size of 35MB. > > Is there a way to replace a small disk with a bigger one and use the > complete size of the disk without destroying the whole raidgroup? > > Regards and thanks in advance > > Jochen > > -- --tmac RedHat Certified Engineer #804006984323821

1 0

RE: Net app support
by Glenn Walker 10 Jan '07

10 Jan '07

So berkcom.net redirects to zerowait - a 3rd party netapp reseller (used stuff?)... and the guy that emailed me\the list in response to the query just _happens_ to know a vendor? Convenient! Sounds like a sales pitch :-) Glenn ________________________________ From: owner-toasters(a)mathworks.com [mailto:owner-toasters@mathworks.com] On Behalf Of Timothy Naple Sent: Wednesday, January 10, 2007 4:26 PM To: toasters(a)mathworks.com Subject: RE: Net app support This post by "Jack" (admin(a)berkcom.net) has nothing to do with us here at Berkeley Communications. I didn't even know there was a berkcom.net <http://www.berkcom.net> site that redirects to the company Zerowait until I saw that email and checked it out. Just to be clear and for the record, Berkeley Communications and Zerowait have no affiliation whatsoever. Thank you, Tim Timothy Naple tnaple(a)berkcom.com (510) 644-1599 x308 Berkeley Communications Corporation ________________________________ From: owner-toasters(a)mathworks.com on behalf of admin(a)berkcom.net Sent: Wed 1/10/2007 12:59 PM To: Glenn Walker Cc: Toaster Admins; Chris Shenton; Coder,James (STP) Subject: RE: Net app support The vendor I am familiar with on hardware support will overnight hardware replacements or have a on-site spares kit to pull from. For sales usually the next business day, as all equipment is tested again before it goes out the door. Email me direct for the name of this vendor if you are interested as I don't want this to turn into a big sales pitch pissing match! Jack -------- Original Message -------- Subject: RE: Net app support From: "Glenn Walker" <ggwalker(a)mindspring.com> Date: Wed, January 10, 2007 1:32 pm To: "Chris Shenton" <chris.shenton(a)nasa.gov>, "Coder, James (STP)" <James.Coder(a)guidant.com> Cc: "Toaster Admins" <toasters(a)mathworks.com> Out of curiosity, what type of turn-around time do all of these 3rd party vendors offer? Glenn -----Original Message----- From: owner-toasters(a)mathworks.com [mailto:owner-toasters@mathworks.com] On Behalf Of Chris Shenton Sent: Wednesday, January 10, 2007 12:38 PM To: Coder, James (STP) Cc: Toaster Admins Subject: Re: Net app support On Jan 10, 2007, at 09:56, Coder, James (STP) wrote: > > Looking at other options other than netapp for hardware / software > support - was wondering who others on the list are using - both > stateside and outside the US (OUS). Net app seems a little too > rigid in > their pricing / support structure. I've had good experience with ZeroWait.com back in the dot-com days and for a system here we built out. They know their products and are responsive, both on purchasing and parts/support. For systems, their quotes were significantly lower than NetApp's and their advice was right-on -- no sleazy overselling. Hooked us up with a spare head on-site for less than a kit o' parts, which will make swapping out a lot faster in the event of a serious failure. Nice folks to work with.

1 0

RE: Netapp support
by Glenn Walker 10 Jan '07

10 Jan '07

Out of curiosity, what type of turn-around time do all of these 3rd party vendors offer? Glenn -----Original Message----- From: owner-toasters(a)mathworks.com [mailto:owner-toasters@mathworks.com] On Behalf Of Chris Shenton Sent: Wednesday, January 10, 2007 12:38 PM To: Coder, James (STP) Cc: Toaster Admins Subject: Re: Netapp support On Jan 10, 2007, at 09:56, Coder, James (STP) wrote: > > Looking at other options other than netapp for hardware / software > support - was wondering who others on the list are using - both > stateside and outside the US (OUS). Netapp seems a little too > rigid in > their pricing / support structure. I've had good experience with ZeroWait.com back in the dot-com days and for a system here we built out. They know their products and are responsive, both on purchasing and parts/support. For systems, their quotes were significantly lower than NetApp's and their advice was right-on -- no sleazy overselling. Hooked us up with a spare head onsite for less than a kit o' parts, which will make swapping out a lot faster in the event of a serious failure. Nice folks to work with.

2 1

RE: Net app support
by admin＠berkcom.net 10 Jan '07

10 Jan '07

2 1

RE: add bigger disk into raidgroup with smaller disks
by Fox, Adam 10 Jan '07

10 Jan '07

No. You can't replace disks in an aggregate that way. If you do, they will sized down to the size of the disk they replaced. -- Adam Fox adamfox(a)netapp.com -----Original Message----- From: Willeke, Jochen [mailto:Jochen.Willeke@wincor-nixdorf.com] Sent: Wednesday, January 10, 2007 3:12 PM To: toasters(a)mathworks.com Subject: add bigger disk into raidgroup with smaller disks Hi toasters, currently i am testing with my simulator and searching for a way to do the following: - have a raidgroup with 5 disks - the two parity-disks plus one data-disk are 100 MB (net) - two other data-disks are 35 MB (net) I want to replace the 35MB-disks with bigger ones, but everything i tried left the "new" disk in the raidgroup with a used size of 35MB. Is there a way to replace a small disk with a bigger one and use the complete size of the disk without destroying the whole raidgroup? Regards and thanks in advance Jochen

3 2

add bigger disk into raidgroup with smaller disks
by Willeke, Jochen 10 Jan '07

10 Jan '07

Hi toasters, currently i am testing with my simulator and searching for a way to do the following: - have a raidgroup with 5 disks - the two parity-disks plus one data-disk are 100 MB (net) - two other data-disks are 35 MB (net) I want to replace the 35MB-disks with bigger ones, but everything i tried left the "new" disk in the raidgroup with a used size of 35MB. Is there a way to replace a small disk with a bigger one and use the complete size of the disk without destroying the whole raidgroup? Regards and thanks in advance Jochen

2 1

Netapp support
by Coder, James (STP) 10 Jan '07

10 Jan '07

Looking at other options other than netapp for hardware / software support - was wondering who others on the list are using - both stateside and outside the US (OUS). Netapp seems a little too rigid in their pricing / support structure. Thanks in advance for replies. Jc James C. Coder "We're all leaders, and we're leading all the time, well or poorly." - Chris Lowney Sr. UNIX Administrator Boston Scientific Corporation 4100 Hamline Avenue North, M/S F309 St. Paul, MN 55112 email: james.coder(a)guidant.com www.bostonscientific.com Tel: 651-582-4797 Cell: 612-747-5377 Fax 651-582-4285 "Any views expressed in this e-mail are not those of Boston Scientific Corporation."

4 3

testmail
by Willeke, Jochen 10 Jan '07

10 Jan '07

i just want to test if i am still able to post on this list. Sorry for spamming! Regards Jochen

1 0

RE: Netapp support
by Glenn Walker 10 Jan '07

10 Jan '07

We use both NetApp and resellers - I cannot see a LOT of difference in their pricing. I'll tell you this, though: if you buy a LOT from them, they'll work with you on the price. Very easy to deal with, in my opinion. Glenn -----Original Message----- From: owner-toasters(a)mathworks.com [mailto:owner-toasters@mathworks.com] On Behalf Of Coder, James (STP) Sent: Wednesday, January 10, 2007 9:56 AM To: Toaster Admins Subject: Netapp support Looking at other options other than netapp for hardware / software support - was wondering who others on the list are using - both stateside and outside the US (OUS). Netapp seems a little too rigid in their pricing / support structure. Thanks in advance for replies. Jc James C. Coder "We're all leaders, and we're leading all the time, well or poorly." - Chris Lowney Sr. UNIX Administrator Boston Scientific Corporation 4100 Hamline Avenue North, M/S F309 St. Paul, MN 55112 email: james.coder(a)guidant.com www.bostonscientific.com Tel: 651-582-4797 Cell: 612-747-5377 Fax 651-582-4285 "Any views expressed in this e-mail are not those of Boston Scientific Corporation."

1 0

7.2 stability
by Grey Friday 10 Jan '07

10 Jan '07

So what's the word on 7.2 ready for install or still hold off?

7 8

Snapmirror transferrates??
by Thomas Bleek 09 Jan '07

09 Jan '07

Hello, I wonder what transferrate I could expect for snapmirror volumes (an/or qtrees) between 2 FAS270 directly connected with Gigabit Ethernet. We use one filer as NFS backing store for our Mailsystem (Communigate Pro) with mdir mailbox format, so we have many small files here. I see abnormal high lags with really moderate sizes of the transferred data. For instance we need about 20 to 40 minutes to transfer 100 to 600 MBytes! The filesystems a 50% filled 250 GByte Volume/qtree with 10.3 million files (with 7 mio free inodes). so the average filesize is about 12KByte. We use Ontap 7.0.4 here and will upgrade to 7.0.5 next week. But I don't really have much hope that this will change the problem. Could anybody give me some data about his/her transfer rates? I really can't believe, that this slow transfers are normal. An repeatedly snapmirror status command on the filer shows this: at first the transfer startet and transferred about 68 MByte in 80 seconds. after that it paused for 15 minutes (output constantly "transferring 68MB done"). from minute 16 to 26 it says "transferring inodes". in these 11 minutes it transferred 225.000 inodes. after that it transfers data again. in minute 28 it has transferred 550 MBytes. after that one minute pause and then the status is idle. Has netapp/snapmirror a big problem with small files? I don't want to switch to mailbox format because I like the advantages of mdir (single copy mailstore, easier backup?) Thanks for any hints, thomas

5 6

RE: Single file restore from a tape
by Glenn Walker 08 Jan '07

08 Jan '07

I know this is possible using NDMP if the controlling software supports DAR (Legato, for example). 'restore' should have the same capabilities: http://now.netapp.com/NOW/knowledge/docs/ontap/rel705/html/ontap/cmdref/ man1/na_restore.1.html Glenn -----Original Message----- From: owner-toasters(a)mathworks.com [mailto:owner-toasters@mathworks.com] On Behalf Of Brian Pascal Sent: Monday, January 08, 2007 6:09 AM To: toasters(a)mathworks.com Subject: Single file restore from a tape Hi, I'm using native ontap "dump" utility to backup full volumes of a filer. I find difficult in restoring a single data file from a backup taken to a tape to it's original location using "restore" command (i need to replace a single file in the active file system from the tape and not SFSR from snapshots). I take full volume backups (dump 0f rst0a /vol/volume_name), can i do a single file restore if i take full volume backups? Thanks. This Mail Has Been Scanned For Virus By Scanmail For Lotus Notes Enterprise/Kbsl

1 0

RE: Snap restore monitoring
by Glenn Walker 08 Jan '07

08 Jan '07

Snap Status might be what you're looking for. I know it shows creating status, and if I recall it will show volume rollback. Worst case scenario, they will be logged into the messages file. It's a very quick process (except for SFSR), so I'm unsure if you'll get much out of monitoring it actively. Glenn ________________________________ From: owner-toasters(a)mathworks.com [mailto:owner-toasters@mathworks.com] On Behalf Of Steven Mandrake Sent: Thursday, January 04, 2007 10:06 AM To: toasters(a)mathworks.com Subject: Snap restore monitoring Anyway to monitor the restore from a snap shot as it's happening?

2 1

RE: 3020 Cluster: which one is management interface
by Fox, Adam 04 Jan '07

04 Jan '07

It's standard on the 3050 but optional on the 3020. I pushed to make it standard on all 3000 series boxes, but, alas, lost that battle. :( -- Adam Fox adamfox(a)netapp.com _____ From: George, Andrew [mailto:georgea@anz.com] Sent: Wednesday, January 03, 2007 6:45 PM To: Linux Admin; Blake Golliher; NetApp Toasters List Subject: RE: 3020 Cluster: which one is management interface Don't the 3000 series boxes have an inbuilt RLM port for console management over IP? _____ From: owner-toasters(a)mathworks.com [mailto:owner-toasters@mathworks.com] On Behalf Of Linux Admin Sent: Thursday, 4 January 2007 10:25 AM To: Blake Golliher; NetApp Toasters List Subject: Re: 3020 Cluster: which one is management interface so i can do level 1vif : multi1 + mutli2 level 2 vif: single1 (out of 2 multi) vlans: 2 vlans on top of single 1 in cluster config? Have this been done? On 1/3/07, Blake Golliher <thelastman(a)gmail.com> wrote: There is no default management interface on a 3020 or a 3050 (or a 3070 for that matter). There are 4 interfaces that come with the system. You can use them in the way you had described in your first post, then use vlan tagging, to segment your management traffic from your production traffic. So your production still gets 4 interfaces, and your management interface is on a separate vlan from your production network. This is a different configuration then you were previously using, but that's the nature of this device. Alternately, you could purchase another nic from Netapp for management use. I'm sure you could negotiate a lower price then usual, since it's only going to be used as a management interface. -Blake On 1/3/07, Linux Admin <sysadmin.linux(a)gmail.com> wrote: > Blake, > Thanks again. > so is there a "default" management interface out the 4? > i was going to use 2 nicks to 1 switch (active) and 2 nicks to 2 switch > (passive) > 3 nics, odd number to work with vifs is very strange. > Now some people say they vif all 4 into one vif and use that for mgmt and > data. > how is it possible? > i am still confused > > > > On 1/3/07, Blake Golliher <thelastman(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > I meant using vlans to separate your management traffic from your > > production data traffic. Most filers before the 3000 had one on board > > interface. Even on the 980 it had a 100mb interface. With the 3000's > > and the 6000's there are now 4 or 6 on board 1g interfaces that can be > > used for either management or data throughput. > > > > If you workload is dispersed enough that you need 4 full 1g interfaces > > for just production traffic, or your security need to be segmented > > that management traffic can't touch production traffic, then perhaps a > > separate gig card is required. > > > > -Blake > > > > On 1/3/07, Linux Admin < sysadmin.linux(a)gmail.com <mailto:sysadmin.linux@gmail.com> > wrote: > > > Blake, > > > Thanks! So which one is managment then? > > > I see dedicated managemnet iterface on all filers but 3020. > > > Or do you manage over the data IP? > > > Thanks > > > > > > > > > On 1/3/07, Blake Golliher <thelastman(a)gmail.com > wrote: > > > > You can use vlan tagging on it that final multi mode trunk vlan. > > > > There should be 3 slots available for expansion cards if you need a > > > > dedicated interface for managment. Depending on how much storage is > > > > attached to this config, you should be able to use one of those slots > > > > for a network card. > > > > > > > > -Blake > > > > > > > > On 1/3/07, Linux Admin < sysadmin.linux(a)gmail.com > wrote: > > > > > Folks, > > > > > Not familiar with 3020 series at all. I see 4 nics (e0a, e0b, > e0c,e0d) > > > on > > > > > the back of each head. > > > > > Does it mean I have sacrifice one to be management and only 3 are > > > available > > > > > as data? > > > > > Have NetApp change things? Or can I used all 4 in single/multi vips? > > > > > I was going to do e0a and e0c in single A, e0b and and e0d in single > B, > > > and > > > > > Multi VIP C on top of Sinlge A and Single B. > > > > > Not sure what to do about management. > > > > > Thanks for help > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > "This e-mail and any attachments to it (the "Communication") is, unless otherwise stated, confidential, may contain copyright material and is for the use only of the intended recipient. If you receive the Communication in error, please notify the sender immediately by return e-mail, delete the Communication and the return e-mail, and do not read, copy, retransmit or otherwise deal with it. Any views expressed in the Communication are those of the individual sender only, unless expressly stated to be those of Australia and New Zealand Banking Group Limited ABN 11 005 357 522, or any of its related entities including ANZ National Bank Limited (together "ANZ"). ANZ does not accept liability in connection with the integrity of or errors in the Communication, computer virus, data corruption, interference or delay arising from or in respect of the Communication."

1 0

RE: Questions regarding snapshots
by Glenn Walker 04 Jan '07

04 Jan '07

There have been a few bugs in the past where multiple simultaneous snapshot creation attempts would step on one another (snapmirror and backups all create snapshots in order to function). I think most of these have been resolved in later ontap releases (beyond 7.0.2). To be safe, I wouldn't try to take an hourly snapshot and backup at the same time... As for performance, there's always the possibility of having issues due to snapmirror and backup running at the same time, but it would be based on disk I/O - if you're throttling snapmirrors you probably won't notice much. Regarding the snapshot creation process itself, you'd have to have a pretty heavily loaded filer to notice performance degradation due to snapshot creation\deletion (to the point of it being overloaded, generally). As with anything ONTAP, the bugs typically only come to the surface if the filer is at max performance capacity. Glenn ________________________________ From: owner-toasters(a)mathworks.com [mailto:owner-toasters@mathworks.com] On Behalf Of Steven Mandrake Sent: Thursday, January 04, 2007 10:05 AM To: toasters(a)mathworks.com Subject: Questions regarding snapshots Hello, Just a generic question. Can I run ndmp backups and run snapmirrors and snapshots at the same time? Will this affect my backups or snapshots in anyway? Integrity of the backup or performance? Thanks, Steve

1 0

Jump to page:

2026

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