toasters

toasters@lists.teaparty.net

13531 discussions

Start a nNew thread

RE: NDMPcopy speed, GbE utilization
by Mohler, Jeff 28 Feb '01

28 Feb '01

Jeff: There is an RFE for a 'turbo' button (ALA 80286 days) Ive been meaning to ask for. *heh*

1 0

RE: NDMPcopy speed, GbE utilization
by Mohler, Jeff 28 Feb '01

28 Feb '01

*heh* Never? Or..not soon. That would be nearly a 6x improvement in how fast it operates on the recieving end. I dont knowd if it is a disk thing..a java thing..or what. But it stinks. -----Original Message----- From: Jeffrey Krueger [mailto:jkrueger@qualcomm.com] Sent: Wednesday, February 28, 2001 9:51 AM To: toasters(a)mathworks.com Subject: NDMPcopy speed, GbE utilization Anyone want to speculate when we'll be able to fully light up a Gigabit Ethernet link with an NDMPcopy? Right now, a non-busy F630 is using about 45% CPU pumping 4-5 MBytes/sec through a single GbE link which is on the same switch blade as another single GbE link going into an F760 spending about 85% CPU to write it out. But I want to push something like 50MBytes/sec between the two. Is the problem that there isn't enough CPU to manage that GbE port or what? Does anyone else find this to be a pain in the butt? -- Jeff

1 0

NDMPcopy speed, GbE utilization
by Jeffrey Krueger 28 Feb '01

28 Feb '01

Anyone want to speculate when we'll be able to fully light up a Gigabit Ethernet link with an NDMPcopy? Right now, a non-busy F630 is using about 45% CPU pumping 4-5 MBytes/sec through a single GbE link which is on the same switch blade as another single GbE link going into an F760 spending about 85% CPU to write it out. But I want to push something like 50MBytes/sec between the two. Is the problem that there isn't enough CPU to manage that GbE port or what? Does anyone else find this to be a pain in the butt? -- Jeff

1 0

legato ndmp and filer
by neil lehrer 27 Feb '01

27 Feb '01

hi, we have loaded legato 6.01 on a solaris 2.6 box. we have attached a spectralogic treefrog by scsi to an f760 ontap5.36r2 filer. the filer sees the treefrog and its tape drives[2 ait2drives]. legato sees the treefrog, inventory commands work, but we cannot label any tapes, we just get back i/o error. has anybody gotten something like this to work with legato? thanks.

1 0

migration from netware 4.x to filer with ntfs security
by neil lehrer 27 Feb '01

27 Feb '01

hi, if anyone has migrated from a netware 4.x environment to a filer with ntfs security i'd really like to talk with you. thanks -- regards

1 0

migrating from unix to ntfs
by neil lehrer 27 Feb '01

27 Feb '01

i am migrating from sun servers with nfs clients to netapp server with ntfs security and cifs clients. if anybody has done this on a large scale i would like to hear from them. thanks. -- regards

1 0

Veritas Netbackup 3.4 for Solaris & Breecehill Q6.210 DLT Library
by Douglas Ritschel 27 Feb '01

27 Feb '01

Does anyone have experience with Veritas Netbackup 3.4 for Solaris and a Breecehill Q6.210 DLT Library? We have a Breecehill Q6.210 with 6 Quantum DLT 7000 drives in it. The first two drives are daisy chained to a NetApp 740. The second two are daisy chained to the robot, which is connected to a Sun 450, running Solaris 2.6. The third pair of drives are daisy chained to a NetApp 760. The problem, is that when I come in every Monday morning, after the our Full backups are scheduled to run, 4 of the 6 drives are reported as being down in Veritas Device Monitor. The 4 drives that are down are not the same every week. To get the backups going again, I have to shutdown the Veritas daemons, reboot the Library, reinventory the Library and Verites, then restart the backups that did not complete. The following day, after some of the backups completed, some of the drives are down again, and I have to repeat the process.

1 0

Filers & Disk Shelves
by Malek Hamdan 27 Feb '01

27 Feb '01

Hi all, I have two NetApp F740 filers. I would like to shutdown the filer with the disk shelves and attach the disk shelves to a newly configured filer - Will volumes/qtrees and their attributes be kept once I bring the disks online with the new head. Kind Regards, Malek Hamdan Senior Systems Engineer Core Engineering Team Davnet Telecommunications Level 7, 209 Castlereagh Street Sydney NSW 2000 Direct: 612 9272 9669 Tel: 612 9272 9600 Fax: 612 9272 9605 mailto:malek.hamdan@davnet.com.au PGP: http://mzanet.com/mh.asc Web: http://www.davnet.com.au Disclaimer: http://mzanet.com/disclaimer.txt

2 1

converting from unix to ntfs qtree
by neil lehrer 26 Feb '01

26 Feb '01

hi, first, i have read the whitepapers and the security docs, faqs, etc. i still have questions. i converted qtree with user dirs from unix to ntfs. if i look at a users home dir with secure share tool it says no acl. i look at the ntfs security perms and it says the user has full,full and that everyone has rx,rx. i understand this is coming from the unix perms that were there. i give domain admins full control over that dir, subdirs and files. i look at it with secure share and it says root is owner [but greyed out] and there is an acl. i look at the dir and sub dirs with the nt security tab and i see domain admins full, the user full, and everyone rx,rx. example, before creating acl G:\o\odragan\ Owner: domain\odragan domain\nlehrer (RWX)(RWX)* domain\odragan (All)(All)* G:\o\odragan\Marti\ Owner: domain\odragan domain\nlehrer (RWX)(RWX)* domain\odragan (All)(All)* Everyone (RX)(RX) G:\o\odragan\Oksana\ Owner: domain\odragan domain\nlehrer (RWX)(RWX)* domain\odragan (All)(All)* Everyone (RX)(RX) after G:\o\odragan\ Owner: Administrators (lg) domain\Domain Admins (gg) (All)(All)* domain\nlehrer (RWX)(RWX)* domain\odragan (All)(All)* G:\o\odragan\Marti\ Owner: Administrators (lg) domain\Domain Admins (gg) (All)(All)* domain\nlehrer (RWX)(RWX)* domain\odragan (All)(All)* G:\o\odragan\Oksana\ Owner: Administrators (lg) domain\Domain Admins (gg) (All)(All)* domain\nlehrer (RWX)(RWX)* domain\odragan (All)(All)* ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ the question is, the domain admins ace was set up when i created the acl. but, the user's ace is it still from the unix perms or from where, since i did not create it. i have to set up ntfs acls for all copied over data so this is important. should i recreate the user's access or just leave the one that is there? i will remove the ace for everyone, but i don't understand what the user's own access represents. any guidance would be appreciated. thanks. --

2 3

RE: F85 series
by White, Lance 24 Feb '01

24 Feb '01

No, it uses FW Ultra SCSI-3 disks, not FC. Yes, NDMP backup is supported. Limitations? Well, as it's positioned to be the NEW entry level Netapp (at 3300 NFS ops/sec, it actually about 30% faster than the old low end F720, and about 30% less expensive), it IS limited to 648GB MAX storage (6 internal plus 12 external in 18GB & 36GB flavors), as opposed to the F720's limit of ~500GB. Still doin' hot swap, RAID4, snapshots, OnTap, WAFL, everything that's cool about a Filer and more! :-D -----Original Message----- From: Clawson, Simon [mailto:simon_clawson@mentorg.com] Sent: Tuesday, February 20, 2001 7:30 AM To: 'toasters(a)mathworks.com' Subject: F85 series Has anyone had any experince with the F85? Does it use the same disks as the 700 & 800's? Is it possible to back it up via NDMP? What are its limitations? Simon Simon Clawson HDS Team Systems Administrator Mentor Graphics Uk Rivergate London Road Newbury Berkshire RG14 2QB <<Clawson, Simon.vcf>>

5 4

RE: vol copy from 5.3.6R2 to 6.0.1R1
by Fox, Adam 24 Feb '01

24 Feb '01

> Yes, the reversion did finish after 80 minutes (for four 72 > GB drives in > an F760), and now I can happily vol copy from the 230. > Cool! > During the migration, though, my destination volume on the > F760 will be > a newly created volume of ten 18 GB drives--I will be unable to create > that volume until I first migrate data from the existing volumes using > those drives. Therefore, I won't want to create my new volume under > ONTAP 6.0 and wait for the reversion before I can continue my data > migration. > > Under 6.0, is there a way to create a new volume without checksums > instead of waiting for a forced reversion? Not that I'm aware of. Remember, it's not just checksums, there are other filesystems changes (like the split blockmap for snapshots) that have to be converted as well. I'm honestly not sure which parts of the reversion take the most time...I'm just not that deep into WAFL. Was there any data on the volume that took 80 minutes? I would think that an empty volume with no snapshots should be quicker than a volume with data and snapshots. Again, haven't tried this in a lab, but it makes sense. Hope this helps...good luck! -- Adam Fox NetApp Professional Services, NC adamfox(a)netapp.com

2 1

Disk usage recomendations...
by svawter＠c-cube.com 24 Feb '01

24 Feb '01

Having a set of Filers that have been poorly planned and poorly configured, I would ask for a hand from fellow admins about how to proceed. (okay, I know the best way, buy a new cluster of 840's and migrate it all!) Given that I have 12 "36GB" disks (plus a hot spare) that have been added to one of my filers, should I: a) Build one large volume and control it's space via qtrees? a1) If so, should I lower the raidgroup size or leave it at 14? b) Build multiple (2? 3? 4?) volumes of smaller size Pro's & Con's for each approach would be greatly appreciated! Steve Vawter voice: 408-490-5310 fax: 408-490-8615 Staff UNIX Systems Administrator Steve.Vawter(a)C-Cube.COM

2 1

RE: supported tape drives
by Cormier, Darleen 22 Feb '01

22 Feb '01

Hi Neil, PVR stands for "Policy Variation Request" We use the term in-house when a customer needs to order a configuration that is not released yet. As to the AIT2 drives, they will work on your F760 as long as you are running 5.3.4 and above, so don't worry about it. -----Original Message----- From: neil lehrer [mailto:nlehrer@ibb.gov] Sent: Thursday, February 22, 2001 7:49 AM To: toasters Cc: John Ederma Subject: supported tape drives Importance: High on the netapp list of supported tape drives it says for an f760 and ait2: FWD-HVD (Requires Data ONTAP 5.3.4R2 or above and a PVR. PVR not required with Data ONTAP 6.0 and above.) what is a PVR?? thanks. -- regards +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ + Neil Lehrer + + United States International Broadcasting Bureau + System Development Division + + voice 202 619-2524 + fax 202 619-3576 + nlehrer(a)ibb.gov + + " is this crisis an opportunity or just + another grab the fire extinguisher moment?" + +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

1 0

Netbackup problem...
by Premanshu Jain 22 Feb '01

22 Feb '01

Scenerio: NetApps 840's backed up Using Veritas Netbackup (NDMP) 3.2 on an NT server. Problem : Lost all the .jpg files on a particular volume on the NetApp filer, which is beyond the snapshots, Courtsey Virus... . Need to look for all these .jpg files from the backup and restore them to the same location. I don't find any option allowing searching for all .jpg type files recursively in a Netbackup index. Any solutions...????

1 0

RE: backup via ndmp
by Itzik Meirson D.Sc. 22 Feb '01

22 Feb '01

If you read carefully the Legato documentation you will find out the in order to create the indexes for a NDMP dump legato will use temporary space on the server. You should have enough free space (and maybe swap too) to accomodate the indexes creation. Regards, Itzik -----Original Message----- From: owner-toasters(a)mathworks.com [mailto:owner-toasters@mathworks.com]On Behalf Of Jean-Francois Aupee Sent: Thursday, February 22, 2001 12:20 PM To: toasters Subject: backup via ndmp Hello, I have a problem to backup my netapps via ndmp : My server is a HP9000 serie K420 , 2Go RAM, 2Go swap, with networker 6.0.1 ( patch 1 ). The jukebox is attached directly to one netapp. I run the backup and I receive the following message : It's a part of the message: * netapp3:/vol/ApplCAD/.snapshot/netapp3_backup NDMP Service Log: DUMP IS DONE * netapp3:/vol/ApplCAD/.snapshot/netapp3_backup nsrdmpix: error, out of memory * netapp3:/vol/ApplCAD/.snapshot/netapp3_backup ****************************************************************** * netapp3:/vol/ApplCAD/.snapshot/netapp3_backup ------ E R R O R ------- * netapp3:/vol/ApplCAD/.snapshot/netapp3_backup Failed to store index entries * netapp3:/vol/ApplCAD/.snapshot/netapp3_backup ****************************************************************** netapp3: /vol/ApplCAD/.snapshot/netapp3_backup level=full, 1969 GB 07:38:47 7935328 files bckserv1: index:netapp3 level=full, 1 KB 00:00:04 2 files The backup of data is done, but networker don't save the index !!! Caould you help me ? -- _____________________________________________________________________ Jean-Francois AUPEE AtosOrigin - Philips Semiconductors Caen 2, rue de la girafe - B.P. 5120 14079 Caen Cedex, France Tel: (+33) 2 31 45 22 77 Fax: (+33) 2 31 45 22 60 SERI: aupee@rtccnh1 E-MAIL: mailto:Jean-Francois.Aupee@atosorigin.com aupee(a)caen.sc.philips.com _____________________________________________________________________

1 0

supported tape drives
by neil lehrer 22 Feb '01

22 Feb '01

on the netapp list of supported tape drives it says for an f760 and ait2: FWD-HVD (Requires Data ONTAP 5.3.4R2 or above and a PVR. PVR not required with Data ONTAP 6.0 and above.) what is a PVR?? thanks. -- regards +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ + Neil Lehrer + + United States International Broadcasting Bureau + System Development Division + + voice 202 619-2524 + fax 202 619-3576 + nlehrer(a)ibb.gov + + " is this crisis an opportunity or just + another grab the fire extinguisher moment?" + +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

1 0

RE: backup via ndmp
by Traitel, Eyal 22 Feb '01

22 Feb '01

Can you check if you have enough free swap space on the HP ? Eyal. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- eTraitel - I'm the new eBuzzword around !!! ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Eyal Traitel - Filer Escalation Engineer CNA, MCSE, CSA, NACA Network Appliance BV Holland Office Center Kruisweg 799b 2132 NG, Hoofddorp The Netherlands Office: +31 23 567 9685 Cellular: +31 6 5497 2568 Email: eyal(a)netapp.com ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Get answers NOW! - NetApp On the Web - http://now.netapp.com ---------------------------------------------------------------------- -----Original Message----- From: Jean-Francois Aupee [mailto:aupee@caen.sc.philips.com] Sent: Thursday, February 22, 2001 11:20 AM To: toasters Subject: backup via ndmp Hello, I have a problem to backup my netapps via ndmp : My server is a HP9000 serie K420 , 2Go RAM, 2Go swap, with networker 6.0.1 ( patch 1 ). The jukebox is attached directly to one netapp. I run the backup and I receive the following message : It's a part of the message: * netapp3:/vol/ApplCAD/.snapshot/netapp3_backup NDMP Service Log: DUMP IS DONE * netapp3:/vol/ApplCAD/.snapshot/netapp3_backup nsrdmpix: error, out of memory * netapp3:/vol/ApplCAD/.snapshot/netapp3_backup ****************************************************************** * netapp3:/vol/ApplCAD/.snapshot/netapp3_backup ------ E R R O R ------- * netapp3:/vol/ApplCAD/.snapshot/netapp3_backup Failed to store index entries * netapp3:/vol/ApplCAD/.snapshot/netapp3_backup ****************************************************************** netapp3: /vol/ApplCAD/.snapshot/netapp3_backup level=full, 1969 GB 07:38:47 7935328 files bckserv1: index:netapp3 level=full, 1 KB 00:00:04 2 files The backup of data is done, but networker don't save the index !!! Caould you help me ? -- _____________________________________________________________________ Jean-Francois AUPEE AtosOrigin - Philips Semiconductors Caen 2, rue de la girafe - B.P. 5120 14079 Caen Cedex, France Tel: (+33) 2 31 45 22 77 Fax: (+33) 2 31 45 22 60 SERI: aupee@rtccnh1 E-MAIL: mailto:Jean-Francois.Aupee@atosorigin.com aupee(a)caen.sc.philips.com _____________________________________________________________________

1 0

backup via ndmp
by Jean-Francois Aupee 22 Feb '01

22 Feb '01

Hello, I have a problem to backup my netapps via ndmp : My server is a HP9000 serie K420 , 2Go RAM, 2Go swap, with networker 6.0.1 ( patch 1 ). The jukebox is attached directly to one netapp. I run the backup and I receive the following message : It's a part of the message: * netapp3:/vol/ApplCAD/.snapshot/netapp3_backup NDMP Service Log: DUMP IS DONE * netapp3:/vol/ApplCAD/.snapshot/netapp3_backup nsrdmpix: error, out of memory * netapp3:/vol/ApplCAD/.snapshot/netapp3_backup ****************************************************************** * netapp3:/vol/ApplCAD/.snapshot/netapp3_backup ------ E R R O R ------- * netapp3:/vol/ApplCAD/.snapshot/netapp3_backup Failed to store index entries * netapp3:/vol/ApplCAD/.snapshot/netapp3_backup ****************************************************************** netapp3: /vol/ApplCAD/.snapshot/netapp3_backup level=full, 1969 GB 07:38:47 7935328 files bckserv1: index:netapp3 level=full, 1 KB 00:00:04 2 files The backup of data is done, but networker don't save the index !!! Caould you help me ? -- _____________________________________________________________________ Jean-Francois AUPEE AtosOrigin - Philips Semiconductors Caen 2, rue de la girafe - B.P. 5120 14079 Caen Cedex, France Tel: (+33) 2 31 45 22 77 Fax: (+33) 2 31 45 22 60 SERI: aupee@rtccnh1 E-MAIL: mailto:Jean-Francois.Aupee@atosorigin.com aupee(a)caen.sc.philips.com _____________________________________________________________________

1 0

Re: Disk usage recomendations...
by Rick Hulsey 22 Feb '01

22 Feb '01

There is probably not a short answer to this one. We use Q-trees to manage all of our data so that we get some virtualization of our storage, but we break up data into volumes based on how the data is used. For instance we have our Oracle databases on our filers. In that environment, we have a separate volume for each of the following: tables, logs, and archives. The reason for this is that we use snapshots for backups and data replication. If we have table, logs, and archives in the same volume, a snapshot would take a point in time image of all of the data at the same time, but we actually need to snapshot the archives separately for recoverability. Additionally, we can lose any one entire volume and still recover our data without risking corruption. If you are just using this for plain ol' files, you probably can get away with putting everything into one volume. If it is critical data you may want to snap mirror the critical data so that the critical data is not at risk. >>> Steve Vawter <svawter(a)c-cube.com> 02/21/01 05:50PM >>> Having a set of Filers that have been poorly planned and poorly configured, I would ask for a hand from fellow admins about how to proceed. (okay, I know the best way, buy a new cluster of 840's and migrate it all!) Given that I have 12 "36GB" disks (plus a hot spare) that have been added to one of my filers, should I: a) Build one large volume and control it's space via qtrees? a1) If so, should I lower the raidgroup size or leave it at 14? b) Build multiple (2? 3? 4?) volumes of smaller size Pro's & Con's for each approach would be greatly appreciated! Steve Vawter voice: 408-490-5310 fax: 408-490-8615 Staff UNIX Systems Administrator Steve.Vawter(a)C-Cube.COM

1 0

Re: Disk usage recomendations...
by svawter＠c-cube.com 22 Feb '01

22 Feb '01

I understand that smaller raidgroup sizes and/or more volumes waste space for parity disks. I know that some of the political considerations are for just that in order to lessen the odds of the dreaded double disk failure (DDDF). What other considerations should I be looking at? Backups? Large number of qtrees? Large number of inodes? What other Pro's does a large volume with a large (or at least default of 14) raidgroup size give me? --Steve --> --> From svawter(a)c-cube.com Wed Feb 21 16:00:44 2001 --> From: svawter(a)c-cube.com (Steve Vawter) --> To: toasters(a)mathworks.com --> Subject: Disk usage recomendations... --> --> Having a set of Filers that have been poorly planned and poorly configured, --> I would ask for a hand from fellow admins about how to proceed. --> (okay, I know the best way, buy a new cluster of 840's and migrate it all!) --> --> Given that I have 12 "36GB" disks (plus a hot spare) that have been --> added to one of my filers, should I: --> --> a) Build one large volume and control it's space via qtrees? --> a1) If so, should I lower the raidgroup size or leave it at 14? --> b) Build multiple (2? 3? 4?) volumes of smaller size --> --> Pro's & Con's for each approach would be greatly appreciated! --> --> Steve Vawter voice: 408-490-5310 fax: 408-490-8615 --> Staff UNIX Systems Administrator Steve.Vawter(a)C-Cube.COM --> -->

1 0

RE: F85 series
by White, Lance 21 Feb '01

21 Feb '01

Reason we/I quote raw is that you can carve up the volumes in a myriad of ways, and depending on how you do so, it will impact useable space. Probably a more accurate measurement (but not necessarily meaningful) is "What is LARGEST useable storage configuration for the storage system?" i.e. in this situation, you COULD use 36GB drives, set aside 1 disk for parity, factor in WAFL/OnTap overhead, set snap reserve to zero, and come up with a single data drive value x 17 disks (of course, in reality, you would LIKELY have a SR of 10-20% and set aside 1 disk as hot spare, but you get the idea). Would you increase Max RG Size to 18? Hmm, that's another topic for discussion...one might go with small RG's and hence, increase overhead, decrease likelihood of double disk failure, and decrease SOME performance...so, I ask again (hypothetically, that is), realistically, how SHOULD a vendor quote storage capacity?!? I, personally, explain this to ALL of my customers so that they can understand the correlation of max storage to useable...NetApp employees are HIGHLY encouraged to do so when they are hired, particularly SE's. Lance -----Original Message----- From: Luke Mewburn [mailto:lukem@wasabisystems.com] Sent: Tuesday, February 20, 2001 9:29 AM To: White, Lance Cc: 'toasters(a)mathworks.com' Subject: Re: F85 series On Tue, Feb 20, 2001 at 08:16:55AM -0800, White, Lance wrote: > No, it uses FW Ultra SCSI-3 disks, not FC. Yes, NDMP backup is supported. > Limitations? Well, as it's positioned to be the NEW entry level Netapp (at > 3300 NFS ops/sec, it actually about 30% faster than the old low end F720, > and about 30% less expensive), it IS limited to 648GB MAX storage (6 > internal plus 12 external in 18GB & 36GB flavors), as opposed to the F720's > limit of ~500GB. Still doin' hot swap, RAID4, snapshots, OnTap, WAFL, > everything that's cool about a Filer and more! :-D The box sounds cool. It's about time a box of this price point was available again :) I have a (long-time) gripe in the way it's advertised. It's a gripe I have with every vendor. I wish NetApp would advertise the *usable* diskspace of the machine (as seen by a client OS or df, for example), not the raw diskspace calculated by taking the disk vendor size and multiplying by the number of disks. I know this makes the boxes appear more expensive per usable megabyte, but it's being more honest to the client, and once you explain to the client to take into account all the overheads, and how to do the same math on competing options (e.g, h/w raid + vxfs on Solaris, EMC, etc), then you (NetApp) appear to be delivering accurate technical information. For example, there's no WAY an F720 has 500 GB of usable space. Out of the box, with default snap reserve, it barely has 300 GB, where GB == 2^30, which is what client based tools (such as df and the `Properties' box in Windows) use, not 10^9, which is what (overzealous) disk vendors use. The usuable capacity of an F720 is trivial to calculate: 14 x 36 GB disks, utilised as: 1 hot spare, 1 parity, 12 data disks Each data disk has 24840 MB usable, calculated as: 34500 megabytes (rightsized by OnTAP) - 10% wafl overhead (is this 8% in OnTAP 6.x?) - 20% snap reserve (default; but often reduced to 10%) = 24840 megabytes So, 12 x 24840 = 298080 MB = ~ 291 GB Tweaking the numbers to 8% wafl overhead (from OnTAP 6) and 10% snap reserve gives an F720 approximately 334 GB of space (from 500 GB `raw'). Based on the info Lance White gives above, an F85 with 36 GB drives, consisting of 15 data disks, 1 hot spare, 2 parity, 8% wafl overhead, 10% snap reserve would have a usuable capacity at the client of: 15 x (34500 - 8% - 10%) = 15 x 28556 = 428490 MB = 418 GB 418 GB is a bit less than the ``648 GB MAX storage'' that Lance quotes above. In general, take away approximately one third of the raw capacity that NetApp quote and that will give you an guestimate on the usuable capacity that will suit most client's needs. Luke. PS: I'm sure some people have seen or heard this rant before :) Disclaimer: I like NetApp. I worked at NetApp for a while as an SE. I just believe in being honest to the technical people you're selling to, especially those who have to justify to their management why the (not cheap) 500 GB box they bought ran out of space at 300 GB. -- Luke Mewburn <lukem(a)wasabisystems.com> http://www.wasabisystems.com Luke Mewburn <lukem(a)netbsd.org> http://www.netbsd.org Wasabi Systems - providing NetBSD sales, support and services.

3 2

Used equipment
by Knight, Jason 21 Feb '01

21 Feb '01

Does anyone who has purchased used Network Appliance equipment from 3rd parties have any suggestions on who I can call to ask about a few items I would like to purchase? Thanks in advance, Jason Knight

1 0

RE: ndmp and legato
by Traitel, Eyal 21 Feb '01

21 Feb '01

FYI, there is already an RFE for it - Bug 13327. As Tim described, you can push us by opening a case, refering to the burt, or keep track on this bug using the Bug Notifying tool in NOW... Hope it helps, a little... Eyal. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- eTraitel - I'm the new eBuzzword around !!! ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Eyal Traitel - Filer Escalation Engineer CNA, MCSE, CSA, NACA Network Appliance BV Holland Office Center Kruisweg 799b 2132 NG, Hoofddorp The Netherlands Office: +31 23 567 9685 Cellular: +31 6 5497 2568 Email: eyal(a)netapp.com ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Get answers NOW! - NetApp On the Web - http://now.netapp.com ---------------------------------------------------------------------- -----Original Message----- From: Timothy A. McCarthy [mailto:tmac@netapp.com] Sent: Wednesday, February 21, 2001 1:26 AM To: neil lehrer Cc: toasters; John Ederma Subject: Re: ndmp and legato No, it is not available right now. I would suggest pushing support if you really need it. --tmac neil lehrer wrote: > hey tim, > > that's what we thought. i used useradmin to set up ndmpuser as an acct. this > should work ok also - accts set up with useradmin are root equiv right? > > "Timothy A. McCarthy" wrote: > > > > That would be "root" and whatever the "root" password > > is on your filer. > > > > --tmac > > > > neil lehrer wrote: > > > > > hi, > > > > > > we are going to hook a spectralogic treefrog to our f760 and try using legato > > > 6.01[we already own it, so no point recommending something else] to do ndmp > > > backups. > > > > > > the legato doc refers to an ndmp userid and password. we don't know what that > > > is, does anyone out there know? > > > > > > thanks. > > > -- > > -- > > regards -- ******All New Numbers!!!****** ************* ************* Timothy A. McCarthy --> System Engineer, Eastern Region Network Appliance http://www.netapp.com 240-268-2034 Office \ / Page Me at: 240-268-2001 Fax \/ 888-971-4468

1 0

ndmp and legato
by neil lehrer 21 Feb '01

21 Feb '01

hi, we are going to hook a spectralogic treefrog to our f760 and try using legato 6.01[we already own it, so no point recommending something else] to do ndmp backups. the legato doc refers to an ndmp userid and password. we don't know what that is, does anyone out there know? thanks. --

2 3

RE: NDMP to legato
by Myren, Ben 20 Feb '01

20 Feb '01

Hi all, I have made Legato work sharing a library between a filer and a Solaris server. When you add the jukebox via jbconfig you will configure some of the tape drives as NDMP devices. Ben -----Original Message----- From: Marion Hakanson [mailto:hakanson@cse.ogi.edu] Sent: Tuesday, February 20, 2001 2:49 PM To: Cormier, Darleen Cc: 'Peter D. Gray'; toasters(a)mathworks.com Subject: Re: NDMP to legato > Hi Peter, Legato 6.0.1 with Patch 1 is NDMP compliant. That package allows > backups to a library attached to a filer. To backup a filer to a library > attached to a SUN server, you must also add their Networker SnapImage > module. The info can be found on Legato's web site at > www.legato.com/support/documentation/compatibility What about "library sharing" between a Sun/Solaris backup server and a NetApp filer? By this I mean our situation: BudTool backup server on the Sun, which controls the library and 3 tape drives, with a 4th tape drive attached via SCSI to the filer. I haven't so far found the answer in the above compatibility guide(s). Thanks and regards, -- Marion Hakanson <hakanson(a)cse.ogi.edu> CSE Computing Facilities

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