toasters

toasters@lists.teaparty.net

13515 discussions

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

RE: When will Netapp begin supporting SDLT drives?
by Collie, Michael 02 Oct '01

02 Oct '01

Support for HP LTO is targeted in Data ONTAP 6.2, which should be release in the February 02 timeframe. -----Original Message----- From: Tom Wike [mailto:t-wike@ti.com] Sent: Monday, October 01, 2001 1:26 PM To: Collie, Michael Cc: toasters(a)mathworks.com Subject: RE: When will Netapp begin supporting SDLT drives? While we are on the subject how about HP LTO drives? Thanks! Collie, Michael writes: > NetApp will have support for SDLT in Data ONTAP 6.1.2 which is targeted for release in the November timeframe. > > Michael. > > > -----Original Message----- > From: Mike Ball [mailto:MBall@datalink.com] > Sent: Monday, October 01, 2001 12:25 PM > To: 'toasters(a)mathworks.com' > Subject: When will Netapp begin supporting SDLT drives? > > When is Netapp planning on supporting SDLT tape drives? > > > Mike > -- Tom Wike UNIX System Administration FDAO Productivity Infrastructure Texas Instruments, Inc. E-Mail: t-wike(a)ti.com Regular Mail: 7839 Churchill Way Phone: (972) 917-1252 M/S 3984 Fax: (972) 917-3891 Dallas, TX 75251 Cell PH:(214) 212-4497 E-Mail my Cell Phone: 2142124497(a)mobile.mycingular.com ----------------------------------------------------------------------

3 2

RE: When will Netapp begin supporting SDLT drives?
by Collie, Michael 01 Oct '01

01 Oct '01

NetApp will have support for SDLT in Data ONTAP 6.1.2 which is targeted for release in the November timeframe. Michael. -----Original Message----- From: Mike Ball [mailto:MBall@datalink.com] Sent: Monday, October 01, 2001 12:25 PM To: 'toasters(a)mathworks.com' Subject: When will Netapp begin supporting SDLT drives? When is Netapp planning on supporting SDLT tape drives? Mike

2 1

boot volume with no data
by neil lehrer 01 Oct '01

01 Oct '01

are there any particular advantages or disadvantages to just having ontap on vol0 and data on other volumes? -- regards

8 8

When will Netapp begin supporting SDLT drives?
by Mike Ball 01 Oct '01

01 Oct '01

When is Netapp planning on supporting SDLT tape drives? Mike

1 0

DFM useage?
by Alexei Rodriguez 01 Oct '01

01 Oct '01

Greetings. I had not seen any running commentary regarding the use of DFM (Data Fabric Manager) on the list. Are any folks on the list using it? What are your thoughts thus far? thanks. Alexei

1 0

RE: Anyone out there do backups via a share?
by Honeycutt, Michael 30 Sep '01

30 Sep '01

Well, I wasnt specifically referring to backups. However, I had problems sharing the snapshot dir as a hidden share for faster restores from snapshot. Sometimes it would work, sometimes it will not let you copy the file out with a share error. I had to stop the share and make it visible to get the restores to work correctly. -----Original Message----- From: Jordan Share [mailto:iso9@phantasticant.com] Sent: Friday, September 28, 2001 3:23 PM To: Honeycutt, Michael; Muhlestein, Mark; NetApp List Cc: Benn, Paul Subject: RE: Anyone out there do backups via a share? What do you mean by "share errors" ? I did one backup, and it seemed to go fine. Thanks, Jordan -----Original Message----- From: owner-toasters(a)mathworks.com [mailto:owner-toasters@mathworks.com]On Behalf Of Honeycutt, Michael Sent: Friday, September 28, 2001 5:10 AM To: 'Jordan Share'; Muhlestein, Mark; NetApp List Cc: Benn, Paul Subject: RE: Anyone out there do backups via a share? The only thing about sharing the snapshot is you may get share errors when trying to pull files out. Just an FYI! -----Original Message----- From: Jordan Share [mailto:iso9@phantasticant.com] Sent: Thursday, September 27, 2001 6:26 PM To: Muhlestein, Mark; NetApp List Cc: Benn, Paul Subject: RE: Anyone out there do backups via a share? Super-sweet. Thanks very much for this pointer. I didn't realize you could create a share of a snapshot. I just did a trial run, and everything works smoothly. Oh, I did have to specify a user:password in the rsh command. This is not indicated in that URL that you sent. The URL only shows "rsh -l root filer-command-here", whereas I had to use "rsh -l root:password filer-command-here". Jordan -----Original Message----- From: owner-toasters(a)mathworks.com [mailto:owner-toasters@mathworks.com]On Behalf Of Muhlestein, Mark Sent: Wednesday, September 26, 2001 7:56 PM To: 'Jordan Share'; NetApp List Cc: Benn, Paul Subject: RE: Anyone out there do backups via a share? You should create a share on the snapshot. See the example in section 5 of http://www.netapp.com/tech_library/3052.html Mark -----Original Message----- From: Jordan Share [mailto:iso9@phantasticant.com] Sent: Wednesday, September 26, 2001 5:58 PM To: NetApp List Subject: Anyone out there do backups via a share? So, does anyone out there do backups via a share? What I've been doing is mapping a drive to the appropriate place, then backing up from the ~snapshot/nightly.0/ directory. Then I found out that this is quite a pain to restore, since my backup software (Backup Exec) insists on either using an identical tree structure (which fails, because ~snapshot is read-only) or no tree structure at all (as far as I can tell). Is there a better way? It'd be sweet to be able to restore directly to the filer. :) The resources I have are: Treefrog tape library attached to Win2k box with Backup Exec 8.6 (with remote-server-backup license whatnot). Any ideas? I definitely can't use NDMP, or attach directly to the filer, because then we'd need another filer to restore to (which is not a viable option for us at this time. :( ) Thanks, Jordan

2 1

Any Netapp Certified Tech guy out there need your inputs
by Manoj Kolekar 29 Sep '01

29 Sep '01

Hello Friends, I am planning to give the NSO300 Netapp Certification exams. Is there any tech guy who have completed the exams. I need info on the type of questions more details on the same. Thanks & Regards, Manoj kolekar

1 0

Ok I think I get it
by Julius Talbot 28 Sep '01

28 Sep '01

So, if both filers in a partner pair retain their identities, does this suggest that in performance sensitive environments you would be better off with many small filer pairs than a few large filer pairs? I'm concerned with hotspots and the like. Also, how are disks handled? Can you have asymmetrix configurations with one filer seeing some disks that the other filer doesn't see? For instance filer A would see disks 1-10, and filer B would see disks 6-15? And if this is possible how does one compute the complete disk capacity for a cluster? Can you use the NodeWWN from sysconfig? How could a unique sum of all disks based on the output of sysconfig be done? And thanks again for all your help. I've tried to read the documentation, but it doesn't step through the output of the commands or how to calculate certain things. -- _______________________________________________ Have you downloaded the latest calling software from Net2Phone? Click here to get it now! http://www.net2phone.com/cgi-bin/adforward.cgi?p_key=NH211JK&url=http://com…

2 1

RE: boot volume with no data
by jwitham＠takedapharm.com 28 Sep '01

28 Sep '01

That would be nice, wouldn't it? Freeing up 2 36GB drives would be awesome. $5 says it just replaces the floppy disk as a way to boot/load media Just got word our 880 is on the dock. We're leaving tomorrow to steal 3 FC9s from an existing implementation and plug 'em in to the 880, along with 1 DS14 shelf. Can't wait to see the DS14; fiber all the way, baby! Any recommendations where I store the root volume? FC9 or DS14? I'm inclined to store it on the FC9, as it's the most legacy. Come to think of it, am I supported on what I plan to do with my 880? We plan on running a hybrid environment of shelves; FC9s on the FC adapter, and DS14s on the new fiber adapter... -john 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: kevin graham [mailto:kgraham@dotnetdotcom.org] Sent: Friday, September 28, 2001 5:08 PM To: toasters Subject: Re: boot volume with no data On Tue, 14 Aug 2001, neil lehrer wrote: > are there any particular advantages or disadvantages to just having ontap on > vol0 and data on other volumes? ...glancing at the 880 info today, I noticed: "An integrated CompactFlash boot device simplifies management in remote or multifiler environments" Does this effectivley replace the root volume? If so, is it automagically mirrored to a cluster partner's compactflash for failover? (since an ATA disk wouldn't be visible by both heads). Nice going. ..kg..

1 0

RE: NetApp 840 vs EMC Celerra
by Joe Luchtenberg 28 Sep '01

28 Sep '01

I am interested. Would like to know more about the specific config. #disks/RAID config/# file systems/any tuning/ etc... This could be useful, considering the previously standard benchmark for Unix performance (SpecSFS) has been retired, and the previously published results are supposed to be a poor basis for comparison due to three identified problems. Posted a question to this effect on the NOW Forum for NFS performance, but haven't gotten (to my point of view) a satisfactory answer. 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: Mark Bentley [mailto:mark.bentley@attws.com] > Sent: Friday, September 28, 2001 4:39 PM > To: toasters > Subject: NetApp 840 vs EMC Celerra > > > > 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 >

3 2

RE: na_admin for #
by Klinkner, Steve 28 Sep '01

28 Sep '01

The Filer web administrative ports are currently non-configurable, and are port 80 (HTTP) and port 443 (HTTPS, should you license SecureAdmin 2.0 or higher). Steve Klinkner > -----Original Message----- > From: Ziller, Frank [mailto:FZiller@IKON.com] > Sent: Friday, September 28, 2001 11:47 AM > To: toasters(a)mathworks.com > Subject: na_admin for # > > > Has anyone been successful in changing the IP port > http://[filername]/na_admin runs on? > > > Thanks > > _________ > Frank L. Ziller > Senior Manager, Web Hosting Operations > IKON Office Solutions > Digital Express > >

1 0

RE: Anyone out there do backups via a share?
by Muhlestein, Mark 28 Sep '01

28 Sep '01

Hmm. We don't do anything special with hidden shares. The only thing that makes them "hidden" is that the clients don't display shares that end with "$". The server doesn't do anything different. If this happens again, please take a packet trace of the failure, and open a case with customer support. Mark -----Original Message----- From: Honeycutt, Michael [mailto:MichaelHoneycutt@NC.SLR.com] Sent: Friday, September 28, 2001 12:54 PM To: Jordan Share; Muhlestein, Mark; NetApp List Cc: Benn, Paul Subject: RE: Anyone out there do backups via a share? Well, I wasnt specifically referring to backups. However, I had problems sharing the snapshot dir as a hidden share for faster restores from snapshot. Sometimes it would work, sometimes it will not let you copy the file out with a share error. I had to stop the share and make it visible to get the restores to work correctly. -----Original Message----- From: Jordan Share [mailto:iso9@phantasticant.com] Sent: Friday, September 28, 2001 3:23 PM To: Honeycutt, Michael; Muhlestein, Mark; NetApp List Cc: Benn, Paul Subject: RE: Anyone out there do backups via a share? What do you mean by "share errors" ? I did one backup, and it seemed to go fine. Thanks, Jordan -----Original Message----- From: owner-toasters(a)mathworks.com [mailto:owner-toasters@mathworks.com]On Behalf Of Honeycutt, Michael Sent: Friday, September 28, 2001 5:10 AM To: 'Jordan Share'; Muhlestein, Mark; NetApp List Cc: Benn, Paul Subject: RE: Anyone out there do backups via a share? The only thing about sharing the snapshot is you may get share errors when trying to pull files out. Just an FYI! -----Original Message----- From: Jordan Share [mailto:iso9@phantasticant.com] Sent: Thursday, September 27, 2001 6:26 PM To: Muhlestein, Mark; NetApp List Cc: Benn, Paul Subject: RE: Anyone out there do backups via a share? Super-sweet. Thanks very much for this pointer. I didn't realize you could create a share of a snapshot. I just did a trial run, and everything works smoothly. Oh, I did have to specify a user:password in the rsh command. This is not indicated in that URL that you sent. The URL only shows "rsh -l root filer-command-here", whereas I had to use "rsh -l root:password filer-command-here". Jordan -----Original Message----- From: owner-toasters(a)mathworks.com [mailto:owner-toasters@mathworks.com]On Behalf Of Muhlestein, Mark Sent: Wednesday, September 26, 2001 7:56 PM To: 'Jordan Share'; NetApp List Cc: Benn, Paul Subject: RE: Anyone out there do backups via a share? You should create a share on the snapshot. See the example in section 5 of http://www.netapp.com/tech_library/3052.html Mark -----Original Message----- From: Jordan Share [mailto:iso9@phantasticant.com] Sent: Wednesday, September 26, 2001 5:58 PM To: NetApp List Subject: Anyone out there do backups via a share? So, does anyone out there do backups via a share? What I've been doing is mapping a drive to the appropriate place, then backing up from the ~snapshot/nightly.0/ directory. Then I found out that this is quite a pain to restore, since my backup software (Backup Exec) insists on either using an identical tree structure (which fails, because ~snapshot is read-only) or no tree structure at all (as far as I can tell). Is there a better way? It'd be sweet to be able to restore directly to the filer. :) The resources I have are: Treefrog tape library attached to Win2k box with Backup Exec 8.6 (with remote-server-backup license whatnot). Any ideas? I definitely can't use NDMP, or attach directly to the filer, because then we'd need another filer to restore to (which is not a viable option for us at this time. :( ) Thanks, Jordan

1 0

RE: Anyone out there do backups via a share?
by Honeycutt, Michael 28 Sep '01

28 Sep '01

The only thing about sharing the snapshot is you may get share errors when trying to pull files out. Just an FYI! -----Original Message----- From: Jordan Share [mailto:iso9@phantasticant.com] Sent: Thursday, September 27, 2001 6:26 PM To: Muhlestein, Mark; NetApp List Cc: Benn, Paul Subject: RE: Anyone out there do backups via a share? Super-sweet. Thanks very much for this pointer. I didn't realize you could create a share of a snapshot. I just did a trial run, and everything works smoothly. Oh, I did have to specify a user:password in the rsh command. This is not indicated in that URL that you sent. The URL only shows "rsh -l root filer-command-here", whereas I had to use "rsh -l root:password filer-command-here". Jordan -----Original Message----- From: owner-toasters(a)mathworks.com [mailto:owner-toasters@mathworks.com]On Behalf Of Muhlestein, Mark Sent: Wednesday, September 26, 2001 7:56 PM To: 'Jordan Share'; NetApp List Cc: Benn, Paul Subject: RE: Anyone out there do backups via a share? You should create a share on the snapshot. See the example in section 5 of http://www.netapp.com/tech_library/3052.html Mark -----Original Message----- From: Jordan Share [mailto:iso9@phantasticant.com] Sent: Wednesday, September 26, 2001 5:58 PM To: NetApp List Subject: Anyone out there do backups via a share? So, does anyone out there do backups via a share? What I've been doing is mapping a drive to the appropriate place, then backing up from the ~snapshot/nightly.0/ directory. Then I found out that this is quite a pain to restore, since my backup software (Backup Exec) insists on either using an identical tree structure (which fails, because ~snapshot is read-only) or no tree structure at all (as far as I can tell). Is there a better way? It'd be sweet to be able to restore directly to the filer. :) The resources I have are: Treefrog tape library attached to Win2k box with Backup Exec 8.6 (with remote-server-backup license whatnot). Any ideas? I definitely can't use NDMP, or attach directly to the filer, because then we'd need another filer to restore to (which is not a viable option for us at this time. :( ) Thanks, Jordan

2 2

Netapp Nso300 certification.
by Manoj Kolekar 28 Sep '01

28 Sep '01

Hello Friends, I am planning to give the NSO300 Netapp Certification exams. Is there any tech guy hjwo have completed the exams. I need info on the type of questions more details on the same. Thanks & Regards, Manoj kolekar

1 0

na_admin for #
by Ziller, Frank 28 Sep '01

28 Sep '01

Has anyone been successful in changing the IP port http://[filername]/na_admin runs on? Thanks _________ Frank L. Ziller Senior Manager, Web Hosting Operations IKON Office Solutions Digital Express

1 0

RE: Versions
by Mike Sphar 28 Sep '01

28 Sep '01

Your network isn't fully switched? On the other hand, if I really had to do something like this, I would set up hosts.equiv to not require the password from a secure account on the administrative host. I would still rather not do it at all though. I'm generally uncomfortable with rsh-ing administrative commands. -- Mike Sphar - Sr Systems Administrator - Engineering Support Peregrine Systems, Inc. -----Original Message----- From: Shaun T. Erickson [mailto:ste@research.bell-labs.com] Sent: Friday, September 28, 2001 9:57 AM To: Hackworth, Brian Cc: 'Julius Talbot'; toasters(a)mathworks.com Subject: RE: Versions > The most reliable way to run advanced commands via rsh is > with > > rsh -l root:{password} "priv -level secret; {command}" And have my filer's root password go across the net in the clear? No way. -ste

2 1

Jump to page:

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