toasters

toasters@lists.teaparty.net

13531 discussions

RE: Multiple cifs.homedir paths (Was: RE: Optimal volume size)
by Benn, Paul 29 Sep '00

29 Sep '00

Hi Gang, As it turns out, tilde "~' support does not exist in Data ONTAP 6.0. Sorry for the misinformation. Regards, Paul Benn -----Original Message----- From: Benn, Paul Sent: Friday, September 29, 2000 9:24 AM To: 'Todd C. Merrill'; Brookes, Matt Cc: 'Chris Lamb'; toasters(a)mathworks.com Subject: RE: Multiple cifs.homedir paths (Was: RE: Optimal volume size) We have a two more new features related to CIFS shares that you might find useful: 1) Data ONTAP now provides tilde "~" support, so you can specify: \\<filer's net BIOS name>\~<your login name> to access or map to your home directory or.... \\<filer's net BIOS name>\~<someone else's login name> to access or map to someone else's home directory. 2) There's a new option called "cifs.home_dir_namestyle" and it has three parameters: ntname, domain or mapped. This option allows you to specify the style of user name which is used to determine the home directory. ntname: Uses the NT user name to look up the home directory (same as 5.3.x) domain: Picks up the user's user AND domain name and maps to appropriate subdirectory. For this, the directories beneath the root home directory would be named the same as your NT domains. The user directories would then reside under the appropriate domain directory. mapped: This is used to map to home directories that are named the same as the users' UNIX login names. Regards, Paul Benn Network Appliance -----Original Message----- From: Todd C. Merrill [mailto:tmerrill@mathworks.com] Sent: Friday, September 29, 2000 7:42 AM To: Brookes, Matt Cc: 'Chris Lamb'; toasters(a)mathworks.com Subject: Re: Multiple cifs.homedir paths (Was: RE: Optimal volume size) On Fri, 29 Sep 2000, Brookes, Matt wrote: > No, you weren't dreaming! :) 6.0 supports multiple cifs home directory paths: > > http://now.netapp.com/NOW/knowledge/docs/ontap/rel60/html/sag/cifs19.htm > > And a few other neat tricks worth checking out if you use this feature. That is fan-fscking-tastic! Thanks very much for a feature I never even though to ask for, but we will certainly use now that we know about it. Is it coincidence or deliberate that NetApp now recommends that volume sizes do not exceed ~500 GB? ;) And, Chris, I hope you got some sleep last night. You were bobbing and weaving all over the place. Until next time... The Mathworks, Inc. 508-647-7000 x7792 3 Apple Hill Drive, Natick, MA 01760-2098 508-647-7001 FAX tmerrill(a)mathworks.com http://www.mathworks.com ---

1 0

RE: Multiple cifs.homedir paths (Was: RE: Optimal volume size)
by Benn, Paul 29 Sep '00

29 Sep '00

We have a two more new features related to CIFS shares that you might find useful: 1) Data ONTAP now provides tilde "~" support, so you can specify: \\<filer's net BIOS name>\~<your login name> to access or map to your home directory or.... \\<filer's net BIOS name>\~<someone else's login name> to access or map to someone else's home directory. 2) There's a new option called "cifs.home_dir_namestyle" and it has three parameters: ntname, domain or mapped. This option allows you to specify the style of user name which is used to determine the home directory. ntname: Uses the NT user name to look up the home directory (same as 5.3.x) domain: Picks up the user's user AND domain name and maps to appropriate subdirectory. For this, the directories beneath the root home directory would be named the same as your NT domains. The user directories would then reside under the appropriate domain directory. mapped: This is used to map to home directories that are named the same as the users' UNIX login names. Regards, Paul Benn Network Appliance -----Original Message----- From: Todd C. Merrill [mailto:tmerrill@mathworks.com] Sent: Friday, September 29, 2000 7:42 AM To: Brookes, Matt Cc: 'Chris Lamb'; toasters(a)mathworks.com Subject: Re: Multiple cifs.homedir paths (Was: RE: Optimal volume size) On Fri, 29 Sep 2000, Brookes, Matt wrote: > No, you weren't dreaming! :) 6.0 supports multiple cifs home directory paths: > > http://now.netapp.com/NOW/knowledge/docs/ontap/rel60/html/sag/cifs19.htm > > And a few other neat tricks worth checking out if you use this feature. That is fan-fscking-tastic! Thanks very much for a feature I never even though to ask for, but we will certainly use now that we know about it. Is it coincidence or deliberate that NetApp now recommends that volume sizes do not exceed ~500 GB? ;) And, Chris, I hope you got some sleep last night. You were bobbing and weaving all over the place. Until next time... The Mathworks, Inc. 508-647-7000 x7792 3 Apple Hill Drive, Natick, MA 01760-2098 508-647-7001 FAX tmerrill(a)mathworks.com http://www.mathworks.com ---

1 0

RE: help
by Cormier, Darleen 29 Sep '00

29 Sep '00

Hi Steve, Just curious. What sort of help are you looking for? Have you been kidnapped by terrorists, lost your car keys, need to know the meaning of life, looking to borrow money, find a cure for the common cold, etc? This is a great group, but if you would be a little more specific we might be able to come up with an idea or two. ;-) -----Original Message----- From: Barr, Stephen [mailto:stephen.barr@kingsburgh.co.uk] Sent: Friday, September 29, 2000 3:49 AM To: 'toasters(a)mathworks.com' Subject: help

1 0

Multiple cifs.homedir paths (Was: RE: Optimal volume size)
by Brookes, Matt 29 Sep '00

29 Sep '00

Hi Chris, No, you weren't dreaming! :) 6.0 supports multiple cifs home directory paths: http://now.netapp.com/NOW/knowledge/docs/ontap/rel60/html/sag/cifs19.htm And a few other neat tricks worth checking out if you use this feature. Matt. ________________________________________________________________ Matthew Brookes mailto:mbrookes@netapp.com Systems Engineer http://www.netapp.com Network Appliance Tel: +353 1 4064600 Unit 36, Rathfarnham Gate Fax: +353 1 4064601 Dublin 14, IRELAND Mob: +353 86 8575127 > -----Original Message----- > From: Chris Lamb [mailto:skeezics@measurecast.com] > Sent: 29 September 2000 08:05 > To: toasters(a)mathworks.com > Subject: Re: Optimal volume size > > > > On Thu, 28 Sep 2000, Todd C. Merrill wrote: > > On Tue, 26 Sep 2000, Moshe Linzer wrote: > > > Jeffrey Krueger wrote: > > > > On Wed, Sep 20, 2000 at 09:23:04AM +0200, Eli Lopez wrote: > > Aieee! EATTRIB2DEEP! > > > > > > BTW, you can create a soft link on the filer called > QTREE1 pointing to > > > > > /vol/vol1/QTREE1 and mount using the link name. > > > > > > > > Cool! I didn't know the NetApp could internally > resolve symlinks for > > > > NFS/CIFS exports/shares and still give us the "right > stuff" from rquotad > > > > and what not. > > > > > > Yeah, the same trick allows us to share our CIFS homedirs > under a single > > > root, without actually moving the user's home directory. > > > > Whoa. What's this? I knew symlinks if resolved on the same > > filesystem on a filer work correctly under CIFS, but this seems > > different. You can symlink across *volumes* on the same > filer and it is > > transparent to NFS and CIFS clients??? > > <Scratches chin, tries to think back, way back, to the late 1900's...> > > Y'know, I can't recall exactly now, but I thought we tried > that trick on a > filer running an early 5.x release... when we went from a > pure, pristine > NFS-only shop to the bag of rabid weasels that is a mixed CIFS/NFS > environment, we had to figure out how to map a flat /home/users/* > namespace into CIFS shares. Only our /home/users was really populated > with symlinks to about a dozen separate subdirectories of a > users qtree, > which segregated them according to groups, so that NFS > exports of those > groups could be divided into netgroups of machines that were > owned by said > groups. (Phew! Say that five times fast.) I.e., we could restrict > exports to some machines so that they could only "see" home > directories > for users in that group, but on shared central servers we > could mount the > parent of the users tree and see everything. Given the (political) > circumstances that necessitated this somehwat bizarre > arrangement, this > was Very clean. Nee, even elegant in its own way. > > And, of course, Windows choked on it like month-old leftovers. > > Because cifs.home_dir only accepted one directory argument to do its > magic, we were stuck. We had a bunch of separate roots, not > just one, so > now typing "cifs shares" on said filer produces something > resembling the > Portland Metro Area phone book. My, how we scroll! (I'm > sure the folks > that read the autosupport mail have probably seen worse, though. :-) > > > So I put in an RFE a couple of years ago to expand the cifs.home_dir > option to accept multiple paths, rather than just a single > directory. > Like setting $PATH to a colon-separated list in any Unix shell: > > /vol/vol0/users/dirA:/vol/vol0/users/dirB:/vol/vol1/users/dirC > > I think someone else had already submitted that one too, > around the same > time. > > "So, how is any of this relevant to the discussion at hand?" > I hear you > cry. > > In glancing over the 6.0 release notes, I *thought* I read > that this very > RFE has finally been included in the release. So, rather > than worry about > directories of symlinks or the vagaries of resolving them > across volumes > in a mixed NFS/CIFS environment, you can simply set cifs.home_dir to a > collection of paths and be done with it. Hooray! Of course, > I'm far too > tired to log into NOW and look for it and see if this is, indeed, the > case, so don't take my word for it. I've had enough caffeine today to > incapacitate a large barnyard animal. > > > OKAY, so sleep is overrated. I went and looked. Bug ID > 13856 is the RFE > that caught my eye, but it doesn't quite describe the thing I > requested, > although it does appear to add some interesting > functionality, although > it's full of Windows goop and not what I was describing with the path > idea. Bzzzt. Sorry to get your hopes up. Please play again soon. > > > It's funny is that I really can't remember if we tried setting > cifs.home_dir to the directory full of symlinks or not. We > must have. > Really. I've probably blocked out the whole sordid affair. > If that had > worked in 5.2.x and we could have avoided defining and maintaining all > those separate shares, by hand, for every bloomin' user... but heck, > that's what we have NT admins for. :-) > > Nowadays I'm unencumbered by such restraints and I have one nice flat > /home, and cifs.home_dir works famously. Still, even though > I don't have > a need for it anymore, I think having cifs.home_dir take a $PATH-style > argument would be a spiffy feature. Don't you agree, > Toastadminarians? > > Cheers! > > -- Chris > > -- > Chris Lamb, Unix Guy > MeasureCast, Inc. > 503-241-1469 x247 > <skeezics(a)measurecast.com> >

2 1

Re: Optimal volume size
by Marcus Smiley 29 Sep '00

29 Sep '00

seems like they ought to fix this... On Fri, 29 Sep 2000, Moshe Linzer wrote: ! symlinks inside a CIFS share will only work if they point to other directories in the same share. What I meant ! was that we make a symlink on the filer (with NFS), and then we share that symlink, instead of sharing the actual ! directory. For example, if my homedir sits under /users1/moshel, I can make a symlink like this: ! ! /pchomes/moshel -> /users1/moshel ! ! and then say options cifs.home_dir /pchomes or share /pchomes/moshel explicitly, and the share will work. ! ! Moshe ! ! Marcus Smiley wrote: ! ! > I tried using sym links to other directories (on the same volume) from a directory that is "cifs shared", and ! > cd'ing into these symlinks works just find over nfs from a unix box, but through windoze ! > they show up as files. Am I doing something wrong?

1 0

help
by Barr, Stephen 29 Sep '00

29 Sep '00

1 0

Solaris 2.5.1, stat/read/fcntl random freezes on NFS
by Graydon Dodson 29 Sep '00

29 Sep '00

This is similar to a problem we have been experiencing with increasing frequency. We run large batch jobs that compile our S/W. During these batch jobs we get "file not found" or "make: no rule to create target" type errors where we can prove the files existed on the filler when the Suns reported them missing. We don't have a "hang" just a failure to stat(). The problem has manifested itself on both our Solaris 2.5.1 and Solaris 8 systems. The filler is a F760 (5.3.5R2P2). The load on the filler when this happens is typically 10,000 ops/sec or greater. Netapp has asked for packett traces but we are talking gigabit interfaces here, the trace files are huge and "pktt" is dropping about 80% of the packets anyway. We have already cut "nfs.udp.xfersize" to 8K and are running out of ideas. I am getting hauled in front of management on a regular basis to explain how I am going to make the problem go away. Now all I need is a solution..... What type of filler do you have and what version of code is it running? I know it's obvious, but have you checked for duplex problems? If you find a solution I would really like to hear about it. Graydon Dodson (606) 232-6483 grdodson(a)lexmark.com Lexmark International Inc.

2 1

RE: fastboot
by Rowe, Alan 29 Sep '00

29 Sep '00

6.0 does indeed have a fast reboot option, which skips the memcheck and the load of the OS from the disk. This kicks in for panics and reboots where the OS version is still the same. Other parts of boot are faster too: WAFL replay, disk scan, ... {and, we're have more in mind..) alr -----Original Message----- From: Timothy A. McCarthy [mailto:tmac@netapp.com] Sent: Thursday, September 28, 2000 7:21 PM To: Todd C. Merrill Cc: toasters(a)mathworks.com Subject: Re: fastboot If it is any consequence, when 6.0.1 or later is loaded on your machine, it appears to have a "fastboot" type mechanism. It appears to skip POST & memory, just boots ontap from memory. --tmac "Todd C. Merrill" wrote: > SunOS used to have a `fastboot` command that skipped filesystem checks > (?) on bootup. HP-UX machines have a PROM setting FASTBOOT to skip > memory checks on bootup. > > Anything equivalent on a filer (skipping memory tests, not filesystem > checks, that is!)? > > With 3 GB of memory to check on boot, it takes (min:sec) 1:11 of a > total boot time of 2:15. Downtime can be reduced by 50% by just > skipping the memory test! > > It may not be a good thing in production, but during installation and > configuration, it gets to be tiring. > > Until next time... > > The Mathworks, Inc. 508-647-7000 x7792 > 3 Apple Hill Drive, Natick, MA 01760-2098 508-647-7001 FAX > tmerrill(a)mathworks.com http://www.mathworks.com > --- -- ******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

fastboot
by Todd C. Merrill 29 Sep '00

29 Sep '00

SunOS used to have a `fastboot` command that skipped filesystem checks (?) on bootup. HP-UX machines have a PROM setting FASTBOOT to skip memory checks on bootup. Anything equivalent on a filer (skipping memory tests, not filesystem checks, that is!)? With 3 GB of memory to check on boot, it takes (min:sec) 1:11 of a total boot time of 2:15. Downtime can be reduced by 50% by just skipping the memory test! It may not be a good thing in production, but during installation and configuration, it gets to be tiring. Until next time... The Mathworks, Inc. 508-647-7000 x7792 3 Apple Hill Drive, Natick, MA 01760-2098 508-647-7001 FAX tmerrill(a)mathworks.com http://www.mathworks.com ---

2 1

Ultra 1 and NFS
by Tuc 29 Sep '00

29 Sep '00

Hi, Would like to hear, OFF LIST, of anyone who's used NFS off a Sun Ultra 1 (170E especially) for a high volume web site. (4-5 Mb/s continuous out the front end). Thanks, Tuc/TTSG

1 0

RE: fastboot
by Knight, Graham 28 Sep '00

28 Sep '00

There's no automatic way to do it, but you can hit ESC on the console and it will skip the test. 6.0 has a warm reboot feature that skips the memory test completely. Graham -----Original Message----- From: Todd C. Merrill [mailto:tmerrill@mathworks.com] Sent: Thursday, September 28, 2000 2:47 PM To: toasters(a)mathworks.com Subject: fastboot SunOS used to have a `fastboot` command that skipped filesystem checks (?) on bootup. HP-UX machines have a PROM setting FASTBOOT to skip memory checks on bootup. Anything equivalent on a filer (skipping memory tests, not filesystem checks, that is!)? With 3 GB of memory to check on boot, it takes (min:sec) 1:11 of a total boot time of 2:15. Downtime can be reduced by 50% by just skipping the memory test! It may not be a good thing in production, but during installation and configuration, it gets to be tiring. Until next time... The Mathworks, Inc. 508-647-7000 x7792 3 Apple Hill Drive, Natick, MA 01760-2098 508-647-7001 FAX tmerrill(a)mathworks.com http://www.mathworks.com ---

1 0

CIFS style tape backups
by Clarke, John L. (CIS) 28 Sep '00

28 Sep '00

Hello, We have an F740 in a mixed NFS/SMB environment and have been trying to do CIFS style tape backups to preserver the ACL's. Unfortunately, HP Omniback II has been giving us fits and we need to look for other options. Are any of you doing CIFS style backups? What software are you using? How happy are you with that software, and the service provided by the vendor? Thanks John

2 1

RE: Low SMB throughput
by Mike Sphar 28 Sep '00

28 Sep '00

Have you run any network analyzers on the network? This is the kind of thing where a good sniffer (or a fluke, damn I love those) can be invaluable. "If it works, it must be a Fluke." -- Mike Sphar - Sr Systems Administrator - Engineering Support Services, BOFH, GWP, MCP, MCP+I, MCSE, BFD -----Original Message----- From: chris_good(a)webtop.com [mailto:chris_good@webtop.com] Sent: Thursday, September 28, 2000 6:56 AM To: toasters(a)mathworks.com Subject: Re: Low SMB throughput andrew-m.webster(a)db.com wrote: > Where is the delay? Is it that the inital connection to the Filer takes a long time? This would indicate that the Filer is having problems authenticating users via the domain controller. People log on OK, intermittently files just will not save, transfers take forever while nfs is still screaming. Netapp engineers have had a look at it and are as baffled as we are. >BTW: We never rely on autonegotiate (AUTO), but set each Filer interface to 100meg/Full Duplex. We force everything as a matter of course. -- Chris Good WebTop.com http://www.webtop.com Tel: +44 (0) 1223 715000 Fax: +44 (0) 1223 715001

1 0

RE: Low SMB throughput
by Hawley, Rob 28 Sep '00

28 Sep '00

What version of the filer are you running? This is the checklist I give in the cifs performance class I teach for the netapp SE's. This is based on the experience of actual customers in order of decreasing probability. 1. Network Problems. In one of your earlier emails you stated you were sure this did not apply. Since NFS performance is OK, you are probably correct, but I would run netdiag anyway. 2. Virus Scanner. Some of the previous years implementations of virus scanners were not very friendly with file servers. If you are running a virus scanner on the affected clients, then you might want to temporarily disable it to diagnose the problem. 3. Oplock problems. There is a known timing bug in Win95 redirector that the filer triggers. The short version is that the client is not able to immediately receive a response from a file server. The filer has a provision to insert delays in its responses to avoid this problem. Take a look at the cifs stat OpLkBkNoBreakAck to see if this is happening. If you are getting counts on this stat, please contact CS. We can tune the filer for your environment so this will stop happening. 4.Max_mpx too small. Normally I include this in any list. Since this is happening with Win95 clients, this can be eliminated as a source. If you cannot identify the problem based on this list, then please work with NetApp CS. They can perform some more detailed tests to identify the source of your problem. mailto: hawleyr(a)netapp.com US Mail: Network Appliance Inc. Windows Networking Engineering 495 E Java Dr Phone/pager: 408-822-6661 Sunnyvale, CA 94089 http://www.netapp.com -----Original Message----- From: Alfred Lerch [mailto:alfred_lerch@mentorg.com] Sent: Thursday, September 28, 2000 12:07 AM To: Toasters Subject: Low SMB throughput Friends, we are running a F740 in a heterogenous NFS/SMB environment. While we are completely happy on NFS performance SMB performance is not what we would like it to be. But it is only on some Win95 and NT 4.0 where then throughput is low, other Win95 and NT 4.0 systems with the same configuration are fine (as far as you are able to state that two Windows installations are the same). Looking to our 3Com switches shows us that it is not an issue on the ethernet level. I personally guess that it is a protocol issue between the NetApp and Microsoft implementation of CIFS/SMB/NetBIOS over TCP/IP but I'm unable to verify this. Any ideas where we might start looking ? Has anyone experienced a similar issue ? regards alfred -- -- \\\\\/// / ^ _ \ ( (o) (o) ) --- That's all folks --- +=oOOO=====(_)=====OOOo==========================================+ |Alfred Lerch Mentor Graphics Deutschland GmbH| |Network & System Administrator Elsenheimer Str. 41 - 43| |IT - Business Support Team Munich D-80687 Muenchen, Germany| |email: alfred_lerch(a)mentor.com Fax : +49 89 57096-400| |Tel. : +49 89 57096-241 Mobile: +49 172 8915200| | | |Helpdesk IT Central Europe in Munich | |Tel. : +49 89 57096-110 internal: 777| |email: helpdesk_dem(a)mentor.com | +=============Oooo.==============================================+ .oooO ( ) ( ) ) / \ ( (_/ \_)

1 0

Do F740 cards work in an F760
by Matt Phelps 28 Sep '00

28 Sep '00

Folks, I know I can get this answer from NetApp, et. al., but this list is easier ;-) Can we use the cards we have in our 740 (gigabit and fiber channel controllers) for an anticipated 760 upgrade? Thanks, -- Matt Phelps System Administrator, Computation Facility Harvard - Smithsonian Center for Astrophysics mphelps(a)cfa.harvard.edu, http://cfa-www.harvard.edu/~mphelps

2 1

Re: Low SMB throughput
by andrew-m.webster＠db.com 28 Sep '00

28 Sep '00

Hi Chris, Where is the delay? Is it that the inital connection to the Filer takes a long time? This would indicate that the Filer is having problems authenticating users via the domain controller. If not have a look at the output from the following commands:- rc_toggle_basic netdiag It might provide some clues. BTW: We never rely on autonegotiate (AUTO), but set each Filer interface to 100meg/Full Duplex. Regards -- Andrew Webster PC, NetApp Filer, TSM Sanno Move Project Deutsche Real Estate Consulting Ltd. - Tokyo Internal (but outside Tokyo): 88 408-7542 Tel. +81-3-5156-7542 Fax. +81-3--5156-4811 Mobile: 0907 184 8958 Andrew-M.Webster(a)db.com ---------------------------------------- Message History ---------------------------------------- From: alfred_lerch(a)mentorg.com on 28/09/2000 08:23 AM GMT To: chris_good(a)webtop.com; toasters(a)mathworks.com cc: Subject: Re: Low SMB throughput Hi Chris, thanks for your quick answer. - autonegotiation and duplex are fine, no errors reported on the switches - pure TCP/IP is fast (like http, ftp etc.) - the Win95 and NT 4.0 which are slow to NetApps are fast to NT fileservers alfred chris(a)webtop.com wrote: > > In toasters(a)mathworks.com, you wrote: > >Any ideas where we might start looking ? Has anyone experienced a > >similar issue ? > > We currently have similar problems. Check network settings, in > particular autonegotiation and duplex. Also check your WINS servers > and PDC/BDC are functioning ok. > > CHris > -- > Chris Good WebTop.com http://www.webtop.com > Tel: +44 (0) 1223 715000 Fax: +44 (0) 1223 715001 -- -- \\\\\/// / ^ _ \ ( (o) (o) ) --- That's all folks --- +=oOOO=====(_)=====OOOo==========================================+ |Alfred Lerch Mentor Graphics Deutschland GmbH| |Network & System Administrator Elsenheimer Str. 41 - 43| |IT - Business Support Team Munich D-80687 Muenchen, Germany| |email: alfred_lerch(a)mentor.com Fax : +49 89 57096-400| |Tel. : +49 89 57096-241 Mobile: +49 172 8915200| | | |Helpdesk IT Central Europe in Munich | |Tel. : +49 89 57096-110 internal: 777| |email: helpdesk_dem(a)mentor.com | +=============Oooo.==============================================+ .oooO ( ) ( ) ) / \ ( (_/ \_)

2 1

Re: Low SMB throughput
by Alfred Lerch 28 Sep '00

28 Sep '00

Hi Chris, thanks for your quick answer. - autonegotiation and duplex are fine, no errors reported on the switches - pure TCP/IP is fast (like http, ftp etc.) - the Win95 and NT 4.0 which are slow to NetApps are fast to NT fileservers alfred chris(a)webtop.com wrote: > > In toasters(a)mathworks.com, you wrote: > >Any ideas where we might start looking ? Has anyone experienced a > >similar issue ? > > We currently have similar problems. Check network settings, in > particular autonegotiation and duplex. Also check your WINS servers > and PDC/BDC are functioning ok. > > CHris > -- > Chris Good WebTop.com http://www.webtop.com > Tel: +44 (0) 1223 715000 Fax: +44 (0) 1223 715001 -- -- \\\\\/// / ^ _ \ ( (o) (o) ) --- That's all folks --- +=oOOO=====(_)=====OOOo==========================================+ |Alfred Lerch Mentor Graphics Deutschland GmbH| |Network & System Administrator Elsenheimer Str. 41 - 43| |IT - Business Support Team Munich D-80687 Muenchen, Germany| |email: alfred_lerch(a)mentor.com Fax : +49 89 57096-400| |Tel. : +49 89 57096-241 Mobile: +49 172 8915200| | | |Helpdesk IT Central Europe in Munich | |Tel. : +49 89 57096-110 internal: 777| |email: helpdesk_dem(a)mentor.com | +=============Oooo.==============================================+ .oooO ( ) ( ) ) / \ ( (_/ \_)

2 1

(no subject)
by Uros Lampret 28 Sep '00

28 Sep '00

Are there any special considerations on using F740 with VMS? I tried once to mount NFS mount on VMS, there vas no problems, but VMS seems to create some other files. Any experience? _____________________________ Uros Lampret _____________________________

1 0

Re: NFS client performance
by David Lockwood 27 Sep '00

27 Sep '00

We had a very similar situation when we first connected an F760 to HP-UX 10.20. Performance was very poor initially, after some investigation we found that having no (0) biods running we got much better performance. This can be changed on HP-UX (10.20 or 11.00) by changing NUM_NFSIOD in the /etc/rc.config.d/nfsconf file. Nobody could tell me exactly how the system was working with no biod processes but it does. >>> "Rick Hulsey" <RHULSEY(a)wnco.com> 09/27/00 02:01pm >>> We have a couple of HP-UX 11.0 systems running Oracle 8i (8.1.6). Each of these systems has about 10-15 small to medium sized Oracle databases on the system. In order to separate tables, logs, and archives for availability and recovery in the event of a filer volume failure, we are using 3 volumes per database. We are using qtrees allow for the mounting the database tables, logs, and archives separately which allows us to use failover between the HP servers for each database. This all boils down to needing 45+ NFS mounts per client. HP still uses separate biod processes (the default is 4 biod processes) , and I think each running biod can handle 2 concurrent I/O requests (this may or may not be configurable by through some kernel parameter - not sure what the parameter is though). Does anyone know how to tune the HP-UX client for the best performance for this many mounts? I currently think we should bump up the number of biod processes to about 32. We will probably bump up to 16 for a while just as an intermediate test before we go to 32. Does anyone know of other changes that will increase NFS client performance? Rick Hulsey Southwest Airlines 2425 Wyman Mail Stop 4DC Dallas, Tx., 75235 rick.hulsey(a)wnco.com (214) 792-7188 Office (972) 880-6882 Cell (800) 915-3747 Pager ---------------------------------------------------------------------- For further information on Benetton Formula 1 visit our web site at www.benettonf1.com. This email and any files transmitted with it are confidential and intended solely for the use of the individual or entity to whom they are addressed. If you have received this email in error please destroy and notify Benetton Formula on +44 1608678000. ----------------------------------------------------------------------

1 0

Re: NFS client performance
by Herbert Kornfeld 27 Sep '00

27 Sep '00

Well according to Netapp solution id 3.0.2639783.2627617, you should actually _reduce_ the number of biods. There's no reference to a particular version of HP-UX, so I presume it applies to everything. Maybe ;-) --h _________________________________________________________________________ Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com. Share information about yourself, create your own public profile at http://profiles.msn.com.

1 0

NFS client performance
by Rick Hulsey 27 Sep '00

27 Sep '00

We have a couple of HP-UX 11.0 systems running Oracle 8i (8.1.6). Each of these systems has about 10-15 small to medium sized Oracle databases on the system. In order to separate tables, logs, and archives for availability and recovery in the event of a filer volume failure, we are using 3 volumes per database. We are using qtrees allow for the mounting the database tables, logs, and archives separately which allows us to use failover between the HP servers for each database. This all boils down to needing 45+ NFS mounts per client. HP still uses separate biod processes (the default is 4 biod processes) , and I think each running biod can handle 2 concurrent I/O requests (this may or may not be configurable by through some kernel parameter - not sure what the parameter is though). Does anyone know how to tune the HP-UX client for the best performance for this many mounts? I currently think we should bump up the number of biod processes to about 32. We will probably bump up to 16 for a while just as an intermediate test before we go to 32. Does anyone know of other changes that will increase NFS client performance? Rick Hulsey Southwest Airlines 2425 Wyman Mail Stop 4DC Dallas, Tx., 75235 rick.hulsey(a)wnco.com (214) 792-7188 Office (972) 880-6882 Cell (800) 915-3747 Pager

1 0

FS: Netapp 9gb Fiber Drives and FC7 Storage Shelves
by ScottUCE＠aol.com 27 Sep '00

27 Sep '00

The following Netapp gear has become available: Qty 28 9.0 GB FC-AL Disk Drives (model no. X219F) Asking price: 450.00@ Qty 4 Storage Shelves FC7 (model no. X650A) Asking price: 1,500.00@ We also have several F330's and F520's available and will entertain any reasonable (or possibly even unreasonable!) offers. Scott Fischmann Union Computer Exchange, Inc. 6233 Idylwood Lane Minneapolis, MN 55436 (952) 935-7282 (952) 935-5056 - FAX www.unioncomputer.com

1 0

Difference in resources?
by TTSG 26 Sep '00

26 Sep '00

Hi, We've had great luck with BSDI and our F720's, so we decided to spec it for a Sun customer. There are 2 machines.. Thor and Sif. Thor is an Ultra 1, 170E running 5.5.1, pretty patched up. Sif is an Ultra 1, 170E running 5.7, pretty patched up. Both systems currently have 2 Multi-pack 12's with 10 disks in each. The systems serve a single web site, DNS load balanced which is usually decent (LB sales people need not apply, customer doesn't want it). We loaded the content onto the F720, and unmounted ALL the disks of Thor, and told it to use the Filer. Immediately the load rose on the box, and infact has gotten as bad as : last pid: 1040; load averages: 48.67, 35.91, 22.98 18:04:24 315 processes: 251 sleeping, 63 running, 1 on cpu CPU states: 0.0% idle, 28.8% user, 71.2% kernel, 0.0% iowait, 0.0% swap Memory: 497M real, 142M free, 175M swap, 1235M free swap PID USERNAME PRI NICE SIZE RES STATE TIME WCPU CPU COMMAND 777 www 34 0 2544K 1896K run 0:01 0.22% 1.65% httpd 1030 karupspc 24 0 3232K 2880K run 0:00 0.22% 1.65% ttsgvalidate.c 556 www 34 0 2568K 1936K sleep 0:02 0.20% 1.53% httpd 494 www 34 0 2544K 1896K run 0:01 0.20% 1.53% httpd 618 www 34 0 2544K 1896K sleep 0:02 0.18% 1.40% httpd 800 www 34 0 2544K 1896K sleep 0:01 0.18% 1.40% httpd 762 www 34 0 2552K 1904K sleep 0:00 0.18% 1.40% httpd 926 www 34 0 2544K 1904K run 0:00 0.17% 1.27% httpd While at the same time : last pid: 8293; load averages: 1.02, 1.51, 1.59 18:04:57 312 processes: 310 sleeping, 1 zombie, 1 on cpu CPU states: 55.5% idle, 11.4% user, 22.7% kernel, 10.4% iowait, 0.0% swap Memory: 512M real, 7888K free, 139M swap in use, 1268M swap free PID USERNAME THR PRI NICE SIZE RES STATE TIME CPU COMMAND 8292 root 1 50 0 2384K 1648K cpu 0:00 1.51% top 7903 www 1 58 0 2712K 1856K sleep 0:01 0.79% httpd 8176 www 1 58 0 2696K 1840K sleep 0:00 0.77% httpd 8005 www 1 58 0 2688K 1824K sleep 0:00 0.44% httpd 7838 www 1 58 0 2688K 1816K sleep 0:01 0.43% httpd 8002 www 1 58 0 2712K 1856K sleep 0:00 0.42% httpd 8071 www 1 48 0 2688K 1824K sleep 0:00 0.34% httpd 8066 www 1 49 0 2688K 1824K sleep 0:00 0.34% httpd 8092 www 1 58 0 2712K 1856K sleep 0:00 0.33% httpd Sif was doing that..... Is this expected? ALOT more kernel usage, a LOT higher load average. It ebbs and flow, but it hasn't gotten below 5 since we started. 5 didn't bother me. Almost 50 does. On BSDI, I know I have a daemon called NFSIOD : Nfsiod runs on an NFS client machine to service asynchronous I/O requests to its server. It improves performance but is not required for correct operation. I did notice quite an improvement. Is there anything I need to do on the Sun or Filer to get better performance? Any ideas why I might have degraded the performance so bad? Thanks, Tuc/TTSG

5 6

RE: F840
by Byte, David 26 Sep '00

26 Sep '00

I'm sure that for a price you could have the new faceplate chrome plated or dipped though.. *********************************************************************** *********************************************************************** David Byte Phone: (918) 459-4601 Systems Engineer Fax: (918) 459-4542 Network Appliance, Inc. Email: byte(a)netapp.com One Memorial Place Pager: (877) 5-NETAPP 7633 East 63rd Place Suite 300 Tulsa, OK 74133 *********************************************************************** *********************************************************************** NETWORK APPLIANCE RELIABLE - FAST - SIMPLE - MULTIPROTOCOL URL: http://www.netapp.com -----Original Message----- From: Fox, Adam [mailto:Adam.Fox@netapp.com] Sent: Tuesday, September 26, 2000 3:21 PM To: 'Todd C. Merrill'; andrew-m.webster(a)db.com Cc: toasters(a)mathworks.com Subject: RE: F840 > > On Tue, 26 Sep 2000 andrew-m.webster(a)db.com wrote: > > > I'll have to keep the F760es around so I can swap over the > front panel. :-) > > Anybody got any F630 front panels they want to sell? > Those were cool. > > Until next time... Yeah the F630s were cool. But they won't fit a 700 or 800 box cleanly since the LCD/floppy/etc has moved on those boxes. -- Adam Fox NetApp Professional Services, NC adamfox(a)netapp.com

2 1

RE: F840
by Fox, Adam 26 Sep '00

26 Sep '00

> > On Tue, 26 Sep 2000 andrew-m.webster(a)db.com wrote: > > > I'll have to keep the F760es around so I can swap over the > front panel. :-) > > Anybody got any F630 front panels they want to sell? > Those were cool. > > Until next time... Yeah the F630s were cool. But they won't fit a 700 or 800 box cleanly since the LCD/floppy/etc has moved on those boxes. -- Adam Fox NetApp Professional Services, NC adamfox(a)netapp.com

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