toasters

toasters@lists.teaparty.net

13531 discussions

RE: SQL2000 on F740 w/ Log Shipping?
by Todd Phillips 05 Oct '01

05 Oct '01

Hi Brian. What Cluster App are you running on the SQL Servers? Veritas, Legato, other? Have you checked the White Papers on NetApps Now site? Todd -----Original Message----- From: Wollermann, Brian To: 'toasters(a)mathworks.com' Sent: 10/5/2001 2:28 PM Subject: SQL2000 on F740 w/ Log Shipping? I'm trying to do some testing with our F740 and SQL2000. With the DBs hosted on the filer the stupid checkbox is greyed out for log shipping. Has anyone been able to setup a standby server that accesses databases on the filer w/ SQL2000? Any pointers would be appreciated. We are trying to have two servers in a failover configuration with DBs loaded on the filer. Thanks.

1 0

RE: Faceplate colors: the secret memo
by Todd Phillips 05 Oct '01

05 Oct '01

Hey folks. I signed on here to get infromation on Filers. Please don't inundate me with joke email or things not seriously pertinent. I don't mean to be a stick in the mud but, we all get junk email all day and the last thing I need is another source of it. Please, lets keep this wounderful Toaster Board Posting on a professional level. Thank you. -----Original Message----- From: Chris Lamb To: toasters(a)mathworks.com Sent: 10/5/2001 12:53 PM Subject: Faceplate colors: the secret memo Wow, this shocking news just in: In light of the spirited Faceplate Debate (and previous archived threads) an anonymous source from deep within the company revealed that this is in fact a serious issue, causing considerable conflict between the aesthetic sensibilities of the industrial designers and the marketing department. After extensive psychological consultation and research into the impact of faceplate color on file server administrators, some very interesting color choices were vetoed. So here now, (with apologies to David Letterman) I present to you, the Top Ten Rejected NetApp Faceplate Color Schemes 10. Charcoal "where my NVRAM battery used to be" Grey 9. Harvest "every bad kitchen appliance from the 70's" Gold 8. Smoked "power supply" Salmon 7. Burnt "fan motor" Sienna 6. Dusty "choked floppy drive" Rose 5. Rhodamine "reformat" Red 4. Chocolate "YooHoo-in-the-air-intakes" Brown 3. Electric "static discharge" Blue 2. British Racing "for the fire extinguisher" Green And the number one Rejected NetApp Faceplate Color Scheme: 1. Deep "parity error" Purple I guess the good news is that "sea foam green with woodgrain panels" is still in the running! Yes! I want my next filer painted like a '74 Pinto! :-) -- Chris

3 2

Re: Faceplate colors: the secret memo
by Clark Turner 05 Oct '01

05 Oct '01

I don't mind it. Its nice to break things up a bit. Besides, Everyone knows that Wednesday's and Friday's are fair game on listservs CT >>> "Toal, Dave" <dave.toal(a)t-t.com> 10/5/2001 2:50:22 PM >>> Hmmm, as a regular list-lurker, I'd have to say that my vote is: precise, in-depth technical discussion _PLUS_ off-the-wall puns and vaguely relevant threads is what makes the toasters list great. I'm on others that generate more items; this one's always worth the time. Patent leather & brass studs, mmmm. Black leather & chrome studs. Burl walnut with ruby and cobalt glass LED covers. I mean, injection-molded plastic is fine, but doesn't reflect the level of engineering inside the box. dave toal unix guy, t&t, ma, usa Todd Phillips wrote: > > Hey folks. I signed on here to get infromation on Filers. Please > don't inundate me with joke email or things not seriously pertinent. > I don't mean to be a stick in the mud but, we all get junk email all > day and the last thing I need is another source of it. > > Please, lets keep this wounderful Toaster Board Posting on a > professional level. > > Thank you. > > -----Original Message----- > From: Chris Lamb > To: toasters(a)mathworks.com > Sent: 10/5/2001 12:53 PM > Subject: Faceplate colors: the secret memo > > Wow, this shocking news just in: In light of the spirited Faceplate > Debate (and previous archived threads) an anonymous source from deep > within the company revealed that this is in fact a serious issue, > causing > considerable conflict between the aesthetic sensibilities of the > industrial designers and the marketing department. > > After extensive psychological consultation and research into the > impact > of > faceplate color on file server administrators, some very interesting > color > choices were vetoed. > > So here now, (with apologies to David Letterman) I present to you, the > > Top Ten Rejected NetApp Faceplate Color Schemes > > 10. Charcoal "where my NVRAM battery used to be" Grey > > 9. Harvest "every bad kitchen appliance from the 70's" Gold > > 8. Smoked "power supply" Salmon > > 7. Burnt "fan motor" Sienna > > 6. Dusty "choked floppy drive" Rose > > 5. Rhodamine "reformat" Red > > 4. Chocolate "YooHoo-in-the-air-intakes" Brown > > 3. Electric "static discharge" Blue > > 2. British Racing "for the fire extinguisher" Green > > And the number one Rejected NetApp Faceplate Color Scheme: > > 1. Deep "parity error" Purple > > I guess the good news is that "sea foam green with woodgrain panels" > is > still in the running! Yes! I want my next filer painted like a '74 > Pinto! > > :-) > > -- Chris

1 0

Re: Ack! I can't take it anymore!
by ScottUCE＠aol.com 05 Oct '01

05 Oct '01

Action's picking up! Latest bid: .....$150. I'll throw it on my 520 at home, or maybe my 880 in the lab!.... Two hours to go! Remember, the winning bidder will be publicly humiliated. Scott Fischmann Union Computer Exchange, Inc. 6233 Idylwood Lane Minneapolis, MN 55436 Phone: 952 935 7282 FAX: 952 935 5056 scott(a)unioncomputer.com

1 0

SQL2000 on F740 w/ Log Shipping?
by Wollermann, Brian 05 Oct '01

05 Oct '01

I'm trying to do some testing with our F740 and SQL2000. With the DBs hosted on the filer the stupid checkbox is greyed out for log shipping. Has anyone been able to setup a standby server that accesses databases on the filer w/ SQL2000? Any pointers would be appreciated. We are trying to have two servers in a failover configuration with DBs loaded on the filer. Thanks.

1 0

Re: Ack! I can't take it anymore!
by ScottUCE＠aol.com 05 Oct '01

05 Oct '01

Bidding on the chrome heirloom ends at 5pm Pacific time today; the latest bid: .....I'm in for $100, and I plan on affixing it to my Keg-O-Rator, with the spigot coming through the front.... Can we do a little better? Remember, your check to the September 11th Fund will be tax deductible! Regards, Scott Fischmann Union Computer Exchange, Inc. 6233 Idylwood Lane Minneapolis, MN 55436 Phone: 952 935 7282 FAX: 952 935 5056 scott(a)unioncomputer.com

1 0

Faceplate colors: the secret memo
by Chris Lamb 05 Oct '01

05 Oct '01

Wow, this shocking news just in: In light of the spirited Faceplate Debate (and previous archived threads) an anonymous source from deep within the company revealed that this is in fact a serious issue, causing considerable conflict between the aesthetic sensibilities of the industrial designers and the marketing department. After extensive psychological consultation and research into the impact of faceplate color on file server administrators, some very interesting color choices were vetoed. So here now, (with apologies to David Letterman) I present to you, the Top Ten Rejected NetApp Faceplate Color Schemes 10. Charcoal "where my NVRAM battery used to be" Grey 9. Harvest "every bad kitchen appliance from the 70's" Gold 8. Smoked "power supply" Salmon 7. Burnt "fan motor" Sienna 6. Dusty "choked floppy drive" Rose 5. Rhodamine "reformat" Red 4. Chocolate "YooHoo-in-the-air-intakes" Brown 3. Electric "static discharge" Blue 2. British Racing "for the fire extinguisher" Green And the number one Rejected NetApp Faceplate Color Scheme: 1. Deep "parity error" Purple I guess the good news is that "sea foam green with woodgrain panels" is still in the running! Yes! I want my next filer painted like a '74 Pinto! :-) -- Chris

1 0

RE: Ack! I can't take it anymore!
by jwitham＠takedapharm.com 05 Oct '01

05 Oct '01

For those who care... Saw our shiny new F880 today. Impressions? Hate the faceplate. It's that damn Burnt Cyan color Crayola that always survived my grade school years unscathed. It's also "bubbly". It looks _so_ out of place next to my 760s. Love the DS14. It's absolutely beautiful. The cabling is a little confusing to me though, I'm going to have to RTFM to figure out why there are 2 optical inputs on the 2 LRCs, and only copper outs. Also, there looks to be a PS2-like adapter on the LRC... ? NetApp changed the new Racks. There's now a screen door at the rear, and 30A 250v power supplies instead of 20A 250v power supplies... We have to have an electrician come in and ensure this facility can handle the amperage, and also change the outlets as 30A plugs are different than 20A plugs. Bummer! Can't even fire the box up yet! The guts of the F880 look to be the exact same as the 840... big honking NVRAM car battery, dual processor capable motherboard (the F880 does have 2 processors), and no LVD SCSI onboard. I really wish the old chrome faceplates would make a comeback. I'd kill to have one hanging on my wall... -john John Witham Senior Data Networking Engineer Takeda Pharmaceuticals North America, Inc. V://847.383.3304 F://847.383.3205 mailto://jwitham@takedapharm.com <mailto://jwitham@takedapharm.com> Confucius say he who play as root eventually kill tree. -----Original Message----- From: jwitham(a)takedapharm.com [mailto:jwitham@takedapharm.com] Sent: Wednesday, September 26, 2001 4:55 PM To: skeezics(a)measurecast.com; toasters(a)mathworks.com Subject: RE: Ack! I can't take it anymore! Should have my 880 in the data center on Friday. I'll let you know what the general consensus is... Yeah, the faceplate will be nice, but I'm looking more forward to the flawless Outhouse-like crate the racks ship in. I'm planning on bringing in my sawzall to cut a half-moon in the door. Oh yeah, it should perform well too. Almost forgot about that. John Witham Senior Data Networking Engineer Takeda Pharmaceuticals North America, Inc. V://847.383.3304 F://847.383.3205 mailto://jwitham@takedapharm.com <mailto://jwitham@takedapharm.com> Confucius say he who play as root eventually kill tree. -----Original Message----- From: Chris Lamb [mailto:skeezics@measurecast.com <mailto:skeezics@measurecast.com> ] Sent: Wednesday, September 26, 2001 4:19 PM To: toasters(a)mathworks.com Subject: Ack! I can't take it anymore! Time for a diversion. :-) It's been two weeks since the F880 was announced. And nobody here has any comments whatsoever? How can that be? Yeah, SMP, new benchmarks, tech specs, blah blah blah - that's not even relevant (yet). What's *really* at issue here is the new Jetsons-inspired faceplate. I can't believe that nobody has anything to say about that! It's the new fall fashion lineup in geek gear, and nary a peep! I vote for "skinnable" filers. I think it'd be _cool_ to have a selection of colors and styles. I loved the gleam of the F630 - I think most folks would agree that was one of the coolest designs ever. The elegant, understated blue of the F700's is nice. Fits in elegantly with the purple (er, "periwinkle") of the Sun gear. I think next we ought to have a gleaming black, or maybe a rich charcoal... or better yet, just have a custom grille color selection and paint 'em to order. :-) Right. Now back to our regularly scheduled programming. Cheers, -- Chris -- Chris Lamb, Unix Guy MeasureCast, Inc. 503-241-1469 x247 <skeezics(a)measurecast.com>

7 6

RE: NetApp response on Microsoft Support for SQL Server and Excha nge
by Bunce, Ken 05 Oct '01

05 Oct '01

Reading e-mails like one from Clark is really making me nervous, I just convinced my corporation to migrate our SQL 7.0 database to a F840 based on assurances from Sandy and our local representatives from NetApp of MS support for SQL in a NAS environment. I, too, have gotten my email from NetApp regarding signing a NDA. Quit worrying about protecting your tails and give us an honest answer. Ken Bunce -----Original Message----- From: Clark Turner To: toasters(a)mathworks.com; sandra.lake(a)netapp.com Sent: 10/5/01 10:25 AM Subject: Re: NetApp response on Microsoft Support for SQL Server and Exchange Thanks for the information Sandy. I just read the QB article 5 times. Towards the end of the article is states: Limited support is extended to only the SQL server application and DOES NOT extend to any issues that may occur as a result of the use of non windows Logo qualified products: EMC Clariion server Network Appliance Filers (specifically the Netapp F760 and F800) Nowhere in the article does it say that NAS is supported on The Netapp products. There is a line stating "limited" support for NAS devices. "Limited" is not a good enough reason for me to put my Job on the line running SQL on this 840. Here is another quote: "Microsoft generally recommends that you store Database files either on local disk subsystems or on storage area networks (SAN)." That's the one that grabs my attention. Add the lines about data corruption and I am scared. Then add in a posts that passed through this list: "It is confirmed from our Microsoft Rep. that they will not support SQL or Exchange on NAS. But it is supported on SAN. We are moving our SQL databases and exchange from NAS to a SAN. Leaving the F740 to do file services at a rather expensive cost." and "We have also noticed that some of the databases have gone suspect when there was a hiccup on the comm side. You know as well as I that's not acceptable. In some instances the databases that went suspect could not be recovered and had to be restored from a SQL backup." After all of this I thought I would test our loaner 840 out. I took a copy of a production database that was 5 gig in size and then inserted 34 million records into it. First I ran this on local Raid 5 on a Compaq DL580. It took about 10 hours. Then I offloaded a fresh copy of the database to the 840 and ran the test again. To our amazement the netapp database was missing records. It failed to write the records down to disk. Just as the above quote states and just as the MS article warns. A single missing record means that my database us useless. I was never able to fix the problem in a week of solid testing. Then a Netapp employee sent me email talking about me signing a non disclosure statement before Netapp would discuss the issue really made me step back and think. I think our data is to important to chance. I know some people are doing this but the events in the last week have told me that its just not safe.I need a solution that is GUARANTEED and officially supported by Microsoft. CT >>> "Lake, Sandy" <sandra.lake(a)netapp.com> 10/4/2001 6:12:51 PM >>> Network Appliance has more than 200 customers using filers with SQL Server 6.5, 7.0, or 2000 with databases ranging up to 800 GB. Microsoft has published knowledge base article Q304261 on the Microsoft Web site, which states support of their SQL Server product when used with Network Appliance F760 or F800 series products. The article can be found at: http://support.microsoft.com/support/kb/articles/q304/2/61.asp?id=Q30426 1 The Microsoft rep in the field may not be aware of this knowledge base article. Customers will receive SQL Server support from Microsoft Product Support Services when they log a call. Network Appliance hosts 1.1 million Exchange seats at more than 200 large Exchange accounts. Network Appliance is the primary provider of support for SnapManager and filers deployed in Exchange 5.5 or Exchange 2000 environments. When the Exchange log file and store are located on filers and the customer experiences any problems getting to their data, a support call would be opened with Network Appliance. Microsoft has published knowledge base article Q237767, which covers offline and snapshot backups in Exchange environments. That article can be found at http://support.microsoft.com/support/kb/articles/q237/7/67.asp?id=Q23776 7 Working with the customer, Network Appliance will determine if the root cause of the call is with SnapManager, filers, Exchange 5.5 or Exchange 2000. If the root cause is unrelated to NetApp products, IBM Global Services (IBMGS), NetApp's certified support partner for Exchange, is brought into the call to assist us. Network Appliance, IBMGS, and the customer work together to close the call to the customer's satisfaction. The customer's support agreement would be contracted through NetApp. There is no additional charge to the customer for the Exchange expertise provided by IBMGS. Network Appliance offers customers several service agreement levels that can be tailored to meet their specific support requirements. Network Appliance offers many solutions that protect and enhance a customers investment in the Microsoft platform, however this is not the appropriate forum for that discussion. If you need or would like more details about information in this email, please contact your local sales rep. ------------------------------------------------------------------------ ------------ ------------------------------------------------------------------------ ------------ Sandy Lake Director, Microsoft Alliances Network Appliance <<InterScan_Disclaimer.txt>>

1 0

Re: NetApp response on Microsoft Support for SQL Server and Exchange
by Clark Turner 05 Oct '01

05 Oct '01

Thanks for the information Sandy. I just read the QB article 5 times. Towards the end of the article is states: Limited support is extended to only the SQL server application and DOES NOT extend to any issues that may occur as a result of the use of non windows Logo qualified products: EMC Clariion server Network Appliance Filers (specifically the Netapp F760 and F800) Nowhere in the article does it say that NAS is supported on The Netapp products. There is a line stating "limited" support for NAS devices. "Limited" is not a good enough reason for me to put my Job on the line running SQL on this 840. Here is another quote: "Microsoft generally recommends that you store Database files either on local disk subsystems or on storage area networks (SAN)." That's the one that grabs my attention. Add the lines about data corruption and I am scared. Then add in a posts that passed through this list: "It is confirmed from our Microsoft Rep. that they will not support SQL or Exchange on NAS. But it is supported on SAN. We are moving our SQL databases and exchange from NAS to a SAN. Leaving the F740 to do file services at a rather expensive cost." and "We have also noticed that some of the databases have gone suspect when there was a hiccup on the comm side. You know as well as I that's not acceptable. In some instances the databases that went suspect could not be recovered and had to be restored from a SQL backup." After all of this I thought I would test our loaner 840 out. I took a copy of a production database that was 5 gig in size and then inserted 34 million records into it. First I ran this on local Raid 5 on a Compaq DL580. It took about 10 hours. Then I offloaded a fresh copy of the database to the 840 and ran the test again. To our amazement the netapp database was missing records. It failed to write the records down to disk. Just as the above quote states and just as the MS article warns. A single missing record means that my database us useless. I was never able to fix the problem in a week of solid testing. Then a Netapp employee sent me email talking about me signing a non disclosure statement before Netapp would discuss the issue really made me step back and think. I think our data is to important to chance. I know some people are doing this but the events in the last week have told me that its just not safe.I need a solution that is GUARANTEED and officially supported by Microsoft. CT >>> "Lake, Sandy" <sandra.lake(a)netapp.com> 10/4/2001 6:12:51 PM >>> Network Appliance has more than 200 customers using filers with SQL Server 6.5, 7.0, or 2000 with databases ranging up to 800 GB. Microsoft has published knowledge base article Q304261 on the Microsoft Web site, which states support of their SQL Server product when used with Network Appliance F760 or F800 series products. The article can be found at: http://support.microsoft.com/support/kb/articles/q304/2/61.asp?id=Q304261 The Microsoft rep in the field may not be aware of this knowledge base article. Customers will receive SQL Server support from Microsoft Product Support Services when they log a call. Network Appliance hosts 1.1 million Exchange seats at more than 200 large Exchange accounts. Network Appliance is the primary provider of support for SnapManager and filers deployed in Exchange 5.5 or Exchange 2000 environments. When the Exchange log file and store are located on filers and the customer experiences any problems getting to their data, a support call would be opened with Network Appliance. Microsoft has published knowledge base article Q237767, which covers offline and snapshot backups in Exchange environments. That article can be found at http://support.microsoft.com/support/kb/articles/q237/7/67.asp?id=Q237767 Working with the customer, Network Appliance will determine if the root cause of the call is with SnapManager, filers, Exchange 5.5 or Exchange 2000. If the root cause is unrelated to NetApp products, IBM Global Services (IBMGS), NetApp's certified support partner for Exchange, is brought into the call to assist us. Network Appliance, IBMGS, and the customer work together to close the call to the customer's satisfaction. The customer's support agreement would be contracted through NetApp. There is no additional charge to the customer for the Exchange expertise provided by IBMGS. Network Appliance offers customers several service agreement levels that can be tailored to meet their specific support requirements. Network Appliance offers many solutions that protect and enhance a customers investment in the Microsoft platform, however this is not the appropriate forum for that discussion. If you need or would like more details about information in this email, please contact your local sales rep. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Sandy Lake Director, Microsoft Alliances Network Appliance

1 0

NetApp response on Microsoft Support for SQL Server and Exchange
by Lake, Sandy 05 Oct '01

05 Oct '01

Network Appliance has more than 200 customers using filers with SQL Server 6.5, 7.0, or 2000 with databases ranging up to 800 GB. Microsoft has published knowledge base article Q304261 on the Microsoft Web site, which states support of their SQL Server product when used with Network Appliance F760 or F800 series products. The article can be found at: http://support.microsoft.com/support/kb/articles/q304/2/61.asp?id=Q304261 The Microsoft rep in the field may not be aware of this knowledge base article. Customers will receive SQL Server support from Microsoft Product Support Services when they log a call. Network Appliance hosts 1.1 million Exchange seats at more than 200 large Exchange accounts. Network Appliance is the primary provider of support for SnapManager and filers deployed in Exchange 5.5 or Exchange 2000 environments. When the Exchange log file and store are located on filers and the customer experiences any problems getting to their data, a support call would be opened with Network Appliance. Microsoft has published knowledge base article Q237767, which covers offline and snapshot backups in Exchange environments. That article can be found at http://support.microsoft.com/support/kb/articles/q237/7/67.asp?id=Q237767 Working with the customer, Network Appliance will determine if the root cause of the call is with SnapManager, filers, Exchange 5.5 or Exchange 2000. If the root cause is unrelated to NetApp products, IBM Global Services (IBMGS), NetApp's certified support partner for Exchange, is brought into the call to assist us. Network Appliance, IBMGS, and the customer work together to close the call to the customer's satisfaction. The customer's support agreement would be contracted through NetApp. There is no additional charge to the customer for the Exchange expertise provided by IBMGS. Network Appliance offers customers several service agreement levels that can be tailored to meet their specific support requirements. Network Appliance offers many solutions that protect and enhance a customers investment in the Microsoft platform, however this is not the appropriate forum for that discussion. If you need or would like more details about information in this email, please contact your local sales rep. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Sandy Lake Director, Microsoft Alliances Network Appliance

1 0

Re: Ack! I can't take it anymore!
by ScottUCE＠aol.com 04 Oct '01

04 Oct '01

In a message dated 10/4/01 11:41:00 AM Central Daylight Time, kgraham(a)dotnetdotcom.org writes: > > > I really wish the old chrome faceplates would make a comeback. I'd kill > to > > > have one hanging on my wall... > > > > We have a beautiful chrome faceplate set > > Does it include a transferrable license? Hello, Kevin: The kind folks in NetApp's legal department have informed us that ALL LICENSES TRANSFER with this beautiful F540 faceplate! As such, Mike Linnett at Zero Wait has allowed that he plans to use his artistic license to transform the faceplate into a stunning wall clock. Even NetApp's museum curator has indicated an interest buying this chrome gem back (maybe along with some of their stock). Current high bid is $75.00, which is clearly a steal; and remember -- your winning bid is tax-deductible. Regards, Scott Fischmann Union Computer Exchange, Inc. 6233 Idylwood Lane Minneapolis, MN 55436 Phone: 952 935 7282 FAX: 952 935 5056 scott(a)unioncomputer.com

1 0

CIFS Security auditing
by Drew O'Donnell 04 Oct '01

04 Oct '01

We want to be able to monitor security changes on our filers for CIFS users. I have enabled CIFS auditing on our filer, and it is working, but I am having some additional issues. The EVT format of the event log presents us with a problem because it is a binary file. We currently scan the NT event logs with a service that runs on each of our servers. Any unauthorized access strings are picked up and forwarded to our paging\mail system. Since we cannot run this service on a Netapp, we are unable to scan these files. I have seen some Perl Scripts that can convert the EVT log to a text file, which we can scan, but I would rather not do this. How are admins monitoring CIFS security changes on your Filers? Drew

1 0

Re: Ack! I can't take it anymore!
by ScottUCE＠aol.com 04 Oct '01

04 Oct '01

In a message dated 10/3/01 7:55:37 PM Central Daylight Time, jwitham(a)takedapharm.com writes: > I really wish the old chrome faceplates would make a comeback. I'd kill to > have one hanging on my wall... Hello, John: We have a beautiful chrome faceplate set from an F540 that would be PERFECT for your basement wall. All Toasters' readers are hereby invited to bid on this classic collectors' item! Bidding will end tomorrow, Friday, at 5pm Pacific time. The winning bidder will send his/her check to the "September 11th Fund", United Way of New York City, 2 Park Avenue, New York, NY 10016; the faceplates will be shipped free of charge. The winning bidder will be publicly recognized for his/her generosity and/or foolishness. Good luck! Regards, Scott Fischmann Union Computer Exchange, Inc. 6233 Idylwood Lane Minneapolis, MN 55436 Phone: 952 935 7282 FAX: 952 935 5056 scott(a)unioncomputer.com

2 1

Re: Ack! I can't take it anymore!
by Waters, G Scott DSTI 04 Oct '01

04 Oct '01

Extra $100??? Correct me if I am wrong ... I think it is a lot more than $100. - Scott W -----Original Message----- From: Pete Ehlke <pde(a)foad.org> To: toasters(a)mathworks.com <toasters(a)mathworks.com> Sent: Thu Oct 04 11:56:32 2001 Subject: Re: Ack! I can't take it anymore! * Dave Hitz <hitz(a)netapp.com> said, on [011003 21:40]: > > The F840 has been shipping for ages now, and nobody has complained > loudly about the color. > I think I can speak for everyone here when I say: Bring back the chrome faceplates! The 630 was just... well.. it was just badass. I don't think there's *anyone* who wouldn't pay the extra $100 for a chrome faceplate. -Pete

1 0

RE: Another strong-arm move by Micro$oft
by Honeycutt, Michael 04 Oct '01

04 Oct '01

Yea, but you are still at the mecry of an os like NT/2K, solaris in a SAN enviroment. That was one of the main reason my company went with NAS. We have had our filer 4 10 months, and have had about 4 minutes of outage. Not too shabby compared to NT huh? Also, it is true that MS does not support Exchange on a filer, however some companies do (IE - IBM). Not sure about SQL. -----Original Message----- From: Thomas.L.White(a)chase.com [mailto:Thomas.L.White@chase.com] Sent: Thursday, October 04, 2001 11:29 AM To: Hall, John L Cc: 'Clark Turner'; toasters(a)mathworks.com; PMAGLINGER(a)scvl.com Subject: RE: Another strong-arm move by Micro$oft I guess its a good thing those SANs are so cheap. "Hall, John L" <HallJL(a)MapleLeaf.ca>@mathworks.com on 10/04/2001 10:54:38 AM Sent by: owner-toasters(a)mathworks.com To: "'Clark Turner'" <cturner(a)phx1.bcbsaz.com>, toasters(a)mathworks.com, PMAGLINGER(a)scvl.com cc: Subject: RE: Another strong-arm move by Micro$oft It is confirmed from our Microsoft Rep. that they will not support SQL or Exchange on NAS. But it is supported on SAN. We are moving our SQL databases and exchange from NAS to a SAN. Leaving the F740 to do file services at a rather expensive cost. -----Original Message----- From: Clark Turner [mailto:cturner@phx1.bcbsaz.com] Sent: Thursday, October 04, 2001 10:29 AM To: toasters(a)mathworks.com; PMAGLINGER(a)scvl.com Subject: Re: Another strong-arm move by Micro$oft I would like to know as well. I do not think we can go ahead with the roll out of our SQL DB's an 840 If MS says they do not support it. Clark >>> "Maglinger, Paul" <PMAGLINGER(a)scvl.com> 10/4/2001 6:05:55 AM >>> Can't Microsoft leave well enough alone? What's Network Appliance's view on this? http://www.zdnet.com/zdnn/stories/comment/0,5859,2816142,00.html <http://www.zdnet.com/zdnn/stories/comment/0,5859,2816142,00.html>

1 0

RE: Another strong-arm move by Micro$oft
by Thomas.L.White＠chase.com 04 Oct '01

04 Oct '01

I guess its a good thing those SANs are so cheap. "Hall, John L" <HallJL(a)MapleLeaf.ca>@mathworks.com on 10/04/2001 10:54:38 AM Sent by: owner-toasters(a)mathworks.com To: "'Clark Turner'" <cturner(a)phx1.bcbsaz.com>, toasters(a)mathworks.com, PMAGLINGER(a)scvl.com cc: Subject: RE: Another strong-arm move by Micro$oft It is confirmed from our Microsoft Rep. that they will not support SQL or Exchange on NAS. But it is supported on SAN. We are moving our SQL databases and exchange from NAS to a SAN. Leaving the F740 to do file services at a rather expensive cost. -----Original Message----- From: Clark Turner [mailto:cturner@phx1.bcbsaz.com] Sent: Thursday, October 04, 2001 10:29 AM To: toasters(a)mathworks.com; PMAGLINGER(a)scvl.com Subject: Re: Another strong-arm move by Micro$oft I would like to know as well. I do not think we can go ahead with the roll out of our SQL DB's an 840 If MS says they do not support it. Clark >>> "Maglinger, Paul" <PMAGLINGER(a)scvl.com> 10/4/2001 6:05:55 AM >>> Can't Microsoft leave well enough alone? What's Network Appliance's view on this? http://www.zdnet.com/zdnn/stories/comment/0,5859,2816142,00.html <http://www.zdnet.com/zdnn/stories/comment/0,5859,2816142,00.html>

1 0

RE: Another strong-arm move by Micro$oft
by Bunce, Ken 04 Oct '01

04 Oct '01

This is very interesting considering that my NetApp representatives in conjunction with their SQL experts maintain that SQL and Exchange is supported on NetApp NAS appliances. They brought to point earlier mentioned MS knowledge Base documents. Even the NetApp's SQL engineering interface, her name eludes me now, in Redmond, stated the support exists. My corporation just purchased a F840 based on this information. Let's hear from NetApp! Ken Bunce Manager of Networking & Computer Technology Juno Lighting, Inc. -----Original Message----- From: Hall, John L To: 'Clark Turner'; toasters(a)mathworks.com; PMAGLINGER(a)scvl.com Sent: 10/4/01 9:54 AM Subject: RE: Another strong-arm move by Micro$oft It is confirmed from our Microsoft Rep. that they will not support SQL or Exchange on NAS. But it is supported on SAN. We are moving our SQL databases and exchange from NAS to a SAN. Leaving the F740 to do file services at a rather expensive cost. -----Original Message----- From: Clark Turner [mailto:cturner@phx1.bcbsaz.com] Sent: Thursday, October 04, 2001 10:29 AM To: toasters(a)mathworks.com; PMAGLINGER(a)scvl.com Subject: Re: Another strong-arm move by Micro$oft I would like to know as well. I do not think we can go ahead with the roll out of our SQL DB's an 840 If MS says they do not support it. Clark >>> "Maglinger, Paul" <PMAGLINGER(a)scvl.com> 10/4/2001 6:05:55 AM >>> Can't Microsoft leave well enough alone? What's Network Appliance's view on this? http://www.zdnet.com/zdnn/stories/comment/0,5859,2816142,00.html <http://www.zdnet.com/zdnn/stories/comment/0,5859,2816142,00.html>

1 0

RE: Another strong-arm move by Micro$oft
by Hall, John L 04 Oct '01

04 Oct '01

It is confirmed from our Microsoft Rep. that they will not support SQL or Exchange on NAS. But it is supported on SAN. We are moving our SQL databases and exchange from NAS to a SAN. Leaving the F740 to do file services at a rather expensive cost. -----Original Message----- From: Clark Turner [mailto:cturner@phx1.bcbsaz.com] Sent: Thursday, October 04, 2001 10:29 AM To: toasters(a)mathworks.com; PMAGLINGER(a)scvl.com Subject: Re: Another strong-arm move by Micro$oft I would like to know as well. I do not think we can go ahead with the roll out of our SQL DB's an 840 If MS says they do not support it. Clark >>> "Maglinger, Paul" <PMAGLINGER(a)scvl.com> 10/4/2001 6:05:55 AM >>> Can't Microsoft leave well enough alone? What's Network Appliance's view on this? http://www.zdnet.com/zdnn/stories/comment/0,5859,2816142,00.html <http://www.zdnet.com/zdnn/stories/comment/0,5859,2816142,00.html>

1 0

Re: Another strong-arm move by Micro$oft
by Clark Turner 04 Oct '01

04 Oct '01

I would like to know as well. I do not think we can go ahead with the roll out of our SQL DB's an 840 If MS says they do not support it. Clark >>> "Maglinger, Paul" <PMAGLINGER(a)scvl.com> 10/4/2001 6:05:55 AM >>> Can't Microsoft leave well enough alone? What's Network Appliance's view on this? http://www.zdnet.com/zdnn/stories/comment/0,5859,2816142,00.html <http://www.zdnet.com/zdnn/stories/comment/0,5859,2816142,00.html>

1 0

Re: Ack! I can't take it anymore!
by Thomas.L.White＠chase.com 04 Oct '01

04 Oct '01

I have not seen one in the flesh is there a goo photo representation on the web somewhere ?? thanks tw Dave Hitz <hitz(a)netapp.com>@mathworks.com on 10/04/2001 12:05:29 AM Sent by: owner-toasters(a)mathworks.com To: jwitham(a)takedapharm.com cc: toasters(a)mathworks.com Subject: Re: Ack! I can't take it anymore! On Oct 03, jwitham(a)takedapharm.com wrote: > Hate the faceplate. It's that damn Burnt Cyan color Crayola that always > survived my grade school years unscathed. It's also "bubbly". It looks > _so_ out of place next to my 760s. Newsflash!: We are going to change that exciting "Burt Orange" color to the same "champagne" color as the F840. The F840 has been shipping for ages now, and nobody has complained loudly about the color. Of course, we have had a few people who said, "I wish it was something more 'flashy'." Now I personally love bright, highly-saturated colors, and I love the F840 face plate. But the problem is that, whatever direction of 'flashy' color you try to go, someone will have a bad association with it. Like for you, it sounds like you had a traumatic experience with a grade school teacher and a crayola. I am so sorry to have triggered this awful flashback for you. Hopefully the "champagne" will have more positive associations for people. :-) Dave

1 0

RE: Another strong-arm move by Micro$oft
by Joe Luchtenberg 04 Oct '01

04 Oct '01

Article alludes to possible SQL based file system implementation for Exchange. It quotes MS Knowledge Base Article Q115043 ( http://support.microsoft.com/support/kb/articles/Q115/0/43.asp <http://support.microsoft.com/support/kb/articles/Q115/0/43.asp> ), which states that NAS is not supported for SQL Server. However, that KB Article is marked as being last reviewed on March 4, 2000. A more recent article (Q304261; http://support.microsoft.com/support/kb/articles/Q304/2/61.ASP <http://support.microsoft.com/support/kb/articles/Q304/2/61.ASP> ; reviewed August 24, 2001) states that Microsoft provides limited support for non-clustered SQL Server on Network Appliance F700 and F800 filers. While not explicitly clear, this does appear to leave the door open for support of future Exchange architectures with SQL-based file systems on NetApp filers. This article inplies no changes to the current (uneasy) status quo between Microsoft and NetApp with regards to Exchange. Joe Joe Luchtenberg Dataline, Inc. 757-858-0600 757-285-1223 (mobile) 757-858-0606 (fax) joe.luchtenberg(a)data-line.com www.data-line.com -----Original Message----- From: Maglinger, Paul [mailto:PMAGLINGER@scvl.com] Sent: Thursday, October 04, 2001 9:06 AM To: 'NetApps list server' Subject: Another strong-arm move by Micro$oft Can't Microsoft leave well enough alone? What's Network Appliance's view on this? http://www.zdnet.com/zdnn/stories/comment/0,5859,2816142,00.html <http://www.zdnet.com/zdnn/stories/comment/0,5859,2816142,00.html>

1 0

Another strong-arm move by Micro$oft
by Maglinger, Paul 04 Oct '01

04 Oct '01

Can't Microsoft leave well enough alone? What's Network Appliance's view on this? http://www.zdnet.com/zdnn/stories/comment/0,5859,2816142,00.html <http://www.zdnet.com/zdnn/stories/comment/0,5859,2816142,00.html>

1 0

NetApp 840 vs EMC Celerra
by Mark Bentley 04 Oct '01

04 Oct '01

For those of you who were interested in the benchmark results of the NetApp 840 and EMC Celerra read on. You'll see the NetApp 840 is the fastest for this type of benchmark, though, according to EMC, they have a new data-mover with dual processors and twice as much cache (1GB) coming out very soon. I wonder how that will compare to an 880. The following results were generated by an in-house benchmark program that attempts to measure real-world file/dir read and write speeds. The code is written in Java, and is multi-threaded, so it makes full use of the 4 processors in the E4500 I'm using for testing. The E4500 has 4GB of physical memory and is attached to both the NetApp 840 and EMC Celerra with GigE through a dedicated Cisco 6509. The NetApp 840 has 3GB of memory, and the Celerra has 512MB on the data-mover and 4GB on the Symmetrix. Both are using NFS3 over TCP. I'll also try to get the Iozone numbers posted soon. The two programs I'm using are called dirtest and readtest. dirtest writes a hierarchy of directories containing file of a specified size, and readtest reads the files in that hierarchy, each keeping track of the time it takes. Note: for the write test (dirtest is the actual program name) throughput is calculated using file space over elapsed time, even though the elapsed time includes the time to create the directories as well. Even so, since directory creation takes a relatively small amount of time compared to writing files, the throughput calculations are useful, especially with larger files. With smaller file sizes, however, much of the time taken is for directory creation, and this should be taken into consideration when trying to rationalize the results. Threads = 16, Levels = 3, Branches = 4, Files = 4 Directories to be written = 1344 Files to be written = 5376 ***** NetApp 840 ***** dirtest (writes hierarchy of directories containing files of specified length) File Length File Space Elapsed time Calculated (Bytes) (KBytes) (milliseconds) Throughput (KB/Sec) -------------- --------------- -------------- ---------- 2 10.5 4686 2 3 15.75 4669 3 4 21 4677 4 6 31.5 4707 6 8 42 4702 8 12 63 4691 13 16 84 4664 18 24 126 4723 26 32 168 4718 35 48 252 4813 52 64 336 4774 70 96 504 4864 103 128 672 4933 136 192 1008 4808 209 256 1344 4717 284 384 2016 5476 368 512 2688 4707 571 768 4032 4324 932 1024 5376 4350 1235 1536 8064 4583 1759 2048 10752 4742 2267 3072 16128 4937 3266 4096 21504 4977 4320 6144 32256 5108 6314 8192 43008 5343 8049 12288 64512 5922 10893 16384 86016 6232 13802 24576 129024 7238 17825 32768 172032 8814 19518 49152 258048 11369 22697 65536 344064 14061 24469 98304 516096 20652 24990 131072 688128 26487 25979 196608 1032192 38479 26824 262144 1376256 50039 27503 393216 2064384 74266 27797 524288 2752512 99089 27778 786432 4128768 146789 28127 1048576 5505024 195042 28224 1572864 8257536 291421 28335 readtest (reads what we just wrote with dirtest) File Length File Space Elapsed time Calculated (Bytes) (KBytes) (milliseconds) Throughput (KB/Sec) -------------- --------------- -------------- ---------- 2 10.5 3890 2 3 15.75 4383 3 4 21 4534 4 6 31.5 4673 6 8 42 4233 9 12 63 4527 13 16 84 4610 18 24 126 4784 26 32 168 4555 36 48 252 4405 57 64 336 4697 71 96 504 4847 103 128 672 4605 145 192 1008 4629 217 256 1344 4692 286 384 2016 4750 424 512 2688 4967 541 768 4032 5011 804 1024 5376 5203 1033 1536 8064 4961 1625 2048 10752 5100 2108 3072 16128 5193 3105 4096 21504 5221 4118 6144 32256 5455 5913 8192 43008 5582 7704 12288 64512 6254 10315 16384 86016 6822 12608 24576 129024 7434 17355 32768 172032 8044 21386 49152 258048 9970 25882 65536 344064 11594 29676 98304 516096 15185 33987 131072 688128 18721 36757 196608 1032192 26726 38621 262144 1376256 35415 38860 393216 2064384 52214 39536 524288 2752512 69109 39828 786432 4128768 102884 40130 1048576 5505024 136483 40334 1572864 8257536 204612 40357 ***** EMC Celerra ***** dirtest (writes directories and files) File Length File Space Elapsed time Calculated (Bytes) (KBytes) (milliseconds) Throughput (KB/Sec) -------------- -------------- -------------- -------------- 2 10.5 4872 2 3 15.75 4924 3 4 21 5271 3 6 31.5 5152 6 8 42 5168 8 12 63 5501 11 16 84 5460 15 24 126 5714 22 32 168 5584 30 48 252 5405 46 64 336 5770 58 96 504 5831 86 128 672 5923 113 192 1008 6466 155 256 1344 6009 223 384 2016 5897 341 512 2688 6142 437 768 4032 6137 656 1024 5376 5888 913 1536 8064 6177 1305 2048 10752 6135 1752 3072 16128 6315 2553 4096 21504 6469 3324 6144 32256 7139 4518 8192 43008 6730 6390 12288 64512 7764 8309 16384 86016 8384 10259 24576 129024 10431 12369 32768 172032 11049 15569 49152 258048 14560 17723 65536 344064 17897 19224 98304 516096 23960 21539 131072 688128 29263 23515 196608 1032192 42773 24131 262144 1376256 54041 25466 393216 2064384 97181 21242 524288 2752512 129826 21201 786432 4128768 240172 17190 1048576 5505024 310822 17711 1572864 8257536 454180 18181 readtest (reads what we just wrote with dirtest) File Length File Space Elapsed time Calculated (Bytes) (KBytes) (milliseconds) Throughput (KB/Sec) -------------- -------------- -------------- -------------- 2 10.5 4279 2 3 15.75 4247 3 4 21 4858 4 6 31.5 4899 6 8 42 5340 7 12 63 4724 13 16 84 5325 15 24 126 5410 23 32 168 5059 33 48 252 4888 51 64 336 5624 59 96 504 5265 95 128 672 5517 121 192 1008 5593 180 256 1344 5592 240 384 2016 5297 380 512 2688 5715 470 768 4032 6358 634 1024 5376 5333 1008 1536 8064 5348 1507 2048 10752 5526 1945 3072 16128 5592 2884 4096 21504 5617 3828 6144 32256 6289 5128 8192 43008 6055 7102 12288 64512 6368 10130 16384 86016 7624 11282 24576 129024 7738 16674 32768 172032 9099 18906 49152 258048 11597 22251 65536 344064 14100 24401 98304 516096 19976 25835 131072 688128 25949 26518 196608 1032192 41360 24956 262144 1376256 60134 22886 393216 2064384 111230 18559 524288 2752512 146978 18727 786432 4128768 230392 17920 1048576 5505024 307887 17880 1572864 8257536 457403 18053 -- Mark A Bentley Technology Development Group AT&T Wireless Services

2 1

RE: Ack! I can't take it anymore!
by jwitham＠takedapharm.com 04 Oct '01

04 Oct '01

Believe it or not, I have been on both sides of the fence. When I worked in the POS industry, we used to have to pay the manufacturer extra to spray paint some terminals black to fit the deco of an upscale bath and bodycare boutique. Different customers want different appearances. Someone had mentioned skinnable filers... Would it really be that much more work? Maybe I'll find a stellar airbrush shop to give the 880 face a flamejob?! How about beer colors? It would go well with ONTAP and the codenames... Pilsner Amber Lager Stout You could consider clustered models "Talls" Plus, I'd love to try to convince management to "buy a sixpack of Lager's" Sorry. Still think Chrome should make a comeback. John Witham Senior Data Networking Engineer Takeda Pharmaceuticals North America, Inc. V://847.383.3304 F://847.383.3205 mailto://jwitham@takedapharm.com -----Original Message----- From: Dave Hitz [mailto:hitz@netapp.com] Sent: Wednesday, October 03, 2001 11:05 PM To: jwitham(a)takedapharm.com Cc: toasters(a)mathworks.com Subject: Re: Ack! I can't take it anymore! On Oct 03, jwitham(a)takedapharm.com wrote: > Hate the faceplate. It's that damn Burnt Cyan color Crayola that always > survived my grade school years unscathed. It's also "bubbly". It looks > _so_ out of place next to my 760s. Newsflash!: We are going to change that exciting "Burt Orange" color to the same "champagne" color as the F840. The F840 has been shipping for ages now, and nobody has complained loudly about the color. Of course, we have had a few people who said, "I wish it was something more 'flashy'." Now I personally love bright, highly-saturated colors, and I love the F840 face plate. But the problem is that, whatever direction of 'flashy' color you try to go, someone will have a bad association with it. Like for you, it sounds like you had a traumatic experience with a grade school teacher and a crayola. I am so sorry to have triggered this awful flashback for you. Hopefully the "champagne" will have more positive associations for people. :-) Dave

2 1

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