toasters

toasters@lists.teaparty.net

13531 discussions

Re: Autosupport, 5.2.3 upgrade, diskscrub and wackz
by alexei＠mindspring.net 10 Oct '99

10 Oct '99

Jay Soffian <jay(a)cimedia.com> writes: > Do parity errors during a disk scrub necessarily indicate something is > wrong with the filesystem? Not neccessarily. > this rather distressing. The filer really needs a way to perform a > filesystem health check w/o downtime. Like running fsck on a mounted filesystem? Some things are better done in a quiesced state... >NA also needs to publish > accurate timing data on wack via NOW. The only document I can find has > ancient data. There are way too many variables to that equation. It depends on the version of the OS, the version of wack, etc. I have seen times when running the incorrect version of wack yielded 3 hour wack's (before someone mentioned this should not be the case; we restarted with the proper version). A similar table that would be nice is raid reconstruct speeds based on volume size, filer load and disk size. Now that would be interesting.. :) Alex

3 2

Re: nfs.tcp.enable option
by alexei＠mindspring.net 10 Oct '99

10 Oct '99

"Eyal Traitel" <r55789(a)email.sps.mot.com> writes: > It created a complete havoc for our site when we were with tcp (apps hangups > etc.) There were also some pretty substantial bugs with NFS over TCP. For a while NetApp shipped the filers with the option set to on, but after a while they set it to off by default. The problems I had experienced (a while ago; I have not needed to look into the tcp option again) was that after a while the client would not be able to talk to the filer. Something about the sequence numbers not being quite right. At any rate, thorough testing with your client sets would be a good thing to do before going live with it. Alex

1 0

Re: downgrading from 5.3.1 to 5.2.3
by Mike Smith 10 Oct '99

10 Oct '99

> > "Puneet" == Puneet Anand <puneet(a)netapp.com> writes: > > > > Puneet> Jay, This might help > > > > Puneet> http://now.netapp.com/NOW/knowledge/contents/TIP/TIP_502.shtml > > > > Excellent. FYI - A search on "Downgrading" from NOW with all options > > checked didn't return that document. > > > > j. > > Hi Jay, > downgrading would not return the document but "revert" > would. Hope that helps. > > No, not really. The issue is that I wasn't able to find this document > using the search engine. The process I was looking for is called > downgrading, not reverting. The title of the document is "Downgrading > the Filer from Data ONTAP 5.3 through 3.1.6". I would therefor expect > a search on "downgrading" to return this document. While the filer > command is "revert_to", I didn't know this (if I did, I probably > wouldn't have needed this document in the first place). Ok. The point of sending the info was simply to give you the term to search on if you should ever need the document/procedure again. Sorry for any mis-communication. Just trying to be helpful. Indeed you are correct the process is downgrading. I guess the term revert is a Network Appliance term. I will cc the now-admin(a)netapp.com and have them include the meta-tag downgrade and downgrading to the document so that a search on those terms returns the document you had hoped to find. -- ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Mike Smith mikesmit(a)netapp.com http://now.netapp.com 408-822-4755 Technical Support Engineer ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ > > Thanks. > > j. > -- > Jay Soffian <jay(a)cimedia.com> UNIX Systems Engineer > 404.572.1941 Cox Interactive Media

2 1

nfs.tcp.enable option
by Graham Knight 09 Oct '99

09 Oct '99

All our filers do NFS using UDP. If i turn the nfs.tcp.enable option to on, does it *add* that capability, or does it do it one way or the other? Thanks, Graham

3 2

Re: open bugs / closed bugs
by sirbruce＠ix.netcom.com 09 Oct '99

09 Oct '99

On 10/08/99 10:59:26 you wrote: >In searching for a bug on NOW, I've noticed that a majority of bugs >are still in the open state. Does this mean these bugs have not been >fixed? I always assumed open bugs were the ones that have not been fixed in a current release, yes. Note that NOW doesn't list all bugs, either, so there are probably a lot of bugs that are fixed that never make it on there. Customers probably want to know more about known bugs with workarounds than those without workarounds or have been fixed. >What does the 'release fix' column refer to? Does this mean the bug >applies only to that specific release, or that the bug was fixed in >that release, or that the bug was first noticed in that release? I always thought it meant the bug is (believed to be) fixed in that release (and all future ones based from it). >Are bugs numbered in a strictly sequential order? They used to be. >If so, how is it >that bug #289 applies to release 5.3? I'm not sure I understand the question. Are you surprised than a bug discovered years ago may have not yet been fixed? That's not unusual if the bug is rare or difficult to replicate, or requires some new features to resolve the problem. >It would be nice to see the bug tracking system be setup more clearly, >perhaps with the following fields: > >Date bug opened. >Date bug closed. >First release bug noticed. >Releases which contain bug. >First release which fixed bug. >State: (opened, analyzed, solved, fix incorporated into release). I thought NOW did contain that information (other than the dates), or was at least supposed to in the ideal world. Note it is a non-trivial problem to list all releases wich contain a bug, especially before the relevant code has been analyzed (which is generally very close to the time it would be fixed). So for an open bug, it is often going to be hard to trust that the bug isn't in your release as well, be it younger or older than the one in which the problem was first spotted. >I'd have to guess that the NOW bug system is not the same system used >internally by NA engineers. It used to be based of/integrated with it. Perhaps that has changed. Bruce

1 0

downgrading from 5.3.1 to 5.2.3
by Jay Soffian 08 Oct '99

08 Oct '99

How would one go about downgrading an F540 from 5.3.1 to 5.2.3? This is not a production filer. Couldn't find anything on NOW. j.

2 2

Autosupport, 5.2.3 upgrade, diskscrub and wackz
by Jay Soffian 08 Oct '99

08 Oct '99

We recently upgraded our clustered F740 pair to 5.2.3 from 5.2.2. This necessitated an upgrade of the firmware from 2.1_a2 to 2.2_a2, as well as a disk firmware upgrade from FB37 to FB59. On one of our filers, the first disk scrub that ran after the upgrade (6 days after the upgrade) found a bunch on parity inconsistencies: Sun Oct 3 02:50:39 EDT [viking: consumer]: Scrub found 212 parity inconsistencies Sun Oct 3 02:50:39 EDT [viking: consumer]: Scrub found 0 media errors Sun Oct 3 02:50:39 EDT [viking: consumer]: Disk scrubbing finished... Apparently, with 5.2.3 the filer now generates autosupport mail on disk scrubs, so a couple days after this scrub, I received email from NetApp that they had noticed the error. (This is two anomalous autosupport emails in a row that NetApp has opened cases on, so I'd like to acknowledge NA on that.) NA's recommendation was to re-run a disk scrub (which I did, and it completed w/o finding any errors) and then to run wackz (which I haven't done). Unforunately, I cannot find _any_ documentation on wackz on NOW. I've also searched the toasters archive for wackz and didn't find much. In particular, I'd like to know how much downtime I'm going to be saddled with. NA claims that wackz can process 25 million inodes/hour. Given: viking> df -i Filesystem iused ifree %iused Mounted on /vol/cim0a/ 1057771 2593665 29% /vol/cim0a/ that means the wackz should complete in < 10 minutes. From what I've heard about wack, I find this hard to believe (I've heard stories of wack running for 8+ hours). Or I'm missing something? I'm interested in hearing from anyone who has run wackz on a similar configuration and how long it took to complete. This filer has 21 9GB disks. The cim0a volume is composed of 3 raid groups (5+1, 5+1, 4+1). The vol0 volume is composed of a single raid group (1+1). BTW - I'm still not clear on the difference between wack and wackz. The previous explanation to toasters (wackz runs faster, does things in an optimized fashion) wasn't very enlightening. wack must do something above and beyond wackz (or the other way around), otherwise why would both still be included in DOT? RFE: It would be nice if the filer could run a wack (read-only) and report inconsistencies so that I could check the file system w/o downtime. If the filer requires an immutable filesystem to run wack, then DOT should allow you to tag a whole volume as read-only. I'd like to thank Ron Thibault of NA for his assistance so far. j. -- Jay Soffian <jay(a)cimedia.com> UNIX Systems Engineer 404.572.1941 Cox Interactive Media

3 3

RE: Max number of drives.
by Alvarado, Michael 08 Oct '99

08 Oct '99

This also applies to the F630. It is 1.39 TB to be exact. -----Original Message----- From: tkaczma(a)gryf.net [mailto:tkaczma@gryf.net] Sent: Thursday, October 07, 1999 5:13 PM To: toasters(a)mathworks.com Subject: RE: Max number of drives. On Thu, 7 Oct 1999, Alvarado, Michael wrote: > Yes you look at the maximum storage capacity the OS supports. In the case of > the F760, it is 1.4TB. What about an F630 running the same OS? Tom

1 0

Re: File locking, sendmail and toasters
by alexei＠mindspring.net 08 Oct '99

08 Oct '99

Nick Hilliard <nick(a)iol.ie> writes: > If you need to have text-based NFS-mounted client mailboxes, the only > reliable option is to use a mailbox format which doesn't require locking, > such as Maildir. Depending on what access is provided to the mail spool, yes, maildir is a safer, viable format. Check procmail for to use as an LDA for this or look a qmail for some other thoughts on how this is done. But not all instances can work with this. If you have shell users that do funky stuff based on the mbox format, this can be a problem. There are plenty of other cases where maildir is not a viable alternative to mbox. I hope you find what you need. Alex

3 2

What Radius servers are recommended to work with the Netcache Appliance?
by Mike Ball 08 Oct '99

08 Oct '99

What Radius servers are recommended or have been tested with the Netcache appliance? Mike Ball Open System Solutions, Inc. 3124 Spring Forest Rd Raleigh, NC 27616 Fax: 919-871-6308 Vmail: 919-871-6301 ext. 311 Email: mball(a)opensystems.com Http: www.opensystems.com

1 0

open bugs / closed bugs
by Jay Soffian 08 Oct '99

08 Oct '99

In searching for a bug on NOW, I've noticed that a majority of bugs are still in the open state. Does this mean these bugs have not been fixed? What does the 'release fix' column refer to? Does this mean the bug applies only to that specific release, or that the bug was fixed in that release, or that the bug was first noticed in that release? Are bugs numbered in a strictly sequential order? If so, how is it that bug #289 applies to release 5.3? It would be nice to see the bug tracking system be setup more clearly, perhaps with the following fields: Date bug opened. Date bug closed. First release bug noticed. Releases which contain bug. First release which fixed bug. State: (opened, analyzed, solved, fix incorporated into release). I'd have to guess that the NOW bug system is not the same system used internally by NA engineers. j. -- Jay Soffian <jay(a)cimedia.com> UNIX Systems Engineer 404.572.1941 Cox Interactive Media

1 0

RE: Max number of drives.
by Alvarado, Michael 08 Oct '99

08 Oct '99

Yes you look at the maximum storage capacity the OS supports. In the case of the F760, it is 1.4TB. -----Original Message----- From: Jason Middlebrooks [mailto:Jason_Middlebrooks@datalink.com] Sent: Thursday, October 07, 1999 1:37 PM To: Thompson, Arnold Cc: Mohler, Jeff; toasters(a)mathworks.com Subject: RE: Max number of drives. I am not concerned about mixing the drives in the volume because like drive will be in there own raidgroup. I am just wondering about the max number of drives. All the docs say 28 18Gig drives and 56 9Gig drives in a loop. But what if you have 21 18Gig drives and 14 9Gig drives? Do you look at the maximum Storage Capacity to determine how many total drive you can have when you mix them? Thanks Jason "Thompson, Arnold" <arnold.thompson(a)netapp.com> on 10/07/99 03:46:34 PM To: "Mohler, Jeff" <jeff.mohler(a)netapp.com>, Jason Middlebrooks/Datalink, toasters(a)mathworks.com cc: Subject: RE: Max number of drives. I recall from mixing 9s and 18s at a customer site that you *can* add the 18s to an existing volume of 9s and still get 18G worth (minus filesystem overhead, snaps, etc.) from each 18G drive. The first 18G drive becomes parity and the 9G parity becomes a data drive (so you get 9G additional capacity from the first 18G drive), but after that you should get 18 and not 9. Historically, you've been able to mix and match with the filer doing the right thing. It is true that if a 9G drive fails and there is no 9G spare, it will rebuild on an 18G drive but you will only get 9G on that rebuilt drive. So be sure to have a spare of each size available. If anybody has tested this with different results I could be completely nuts, so please educate us! It is important to make the 9G shelves the lowest order shelves for FCAL loop initialization purposes, so make the 9G shelves numbers 0 and 1. Regards, Arnie > -----Original Message----- > From: Mohler, Jeff [mailto:jeff.mohler@netapp.com] > Sent: Thursday, October 07, 1999 11:38 AM > To: 'Jason Middlebrooks'; toasters(a)mathworks.com > Subject: RE: Max number of drives. > > > Sure, no problem. > > But when you add them to a volume (if you are not creating a > new one) make sure > you add them to the volume made up of 18G drives. (That is, > if the 18G drives > are a separate volume from the 9G ones). > > If you mix/max drive sizes in a volume, the larger drives > will appear only to be > the size of the smallest drive in the array. > > -----Original Message----- > From: Jason Middlebrooks [mailto:Jason_Middlebrooks@datalink.com] > Sent: Thursday, October 07, 1999 12:01 PM > To: toasters(a)mathworks.com > Subject: Max number of drives. > > > Question. > > I have 14 9Gig drives and 14 18Gig drives. So a total of 28 > drives. Can I > add 7 more 18Gig drives on the same loop? > > The filer is a F760 > > Thanks in advance > Jason Middlebrooks >

2 1

RE: Max number of drives.
by Palinckx, Gregory 08 Oct '99

08 Oct '99

Hi Jason, There is a 56 drive hardware limit per FC-AL loop. There is also a total capacity software restriction. I believe this is a F760, so the software restriction will be about 1.4TB. Greg > -----Original Message----- > From: Jason Middlebrooks [mailto:Jason_Middlebrooks@datalink.com] > Sent: Thursday, October 07, 1999 2:37 PM > To: Thompson, Arnold > Cc: Mohler, Jeff; toasters(a)mathworks.com > Subject: RE: Max number of drives. > > > I am not concerned about mixing the drives in the volume > because like drive > will be in there own raidgroup. I am just wondering about > the max number > of drives. All the docs say 28 18Gig drives and 56 9Gig > drives in a loop. > But what if you have 21 18Gig drives and 14 9Gig drives? Do > you look at > the maximum Storage Capacity to determine how many total > drive you can have > when you mix them? > > Thanks > Jason > > > > > > "Thompson, Arnold" <arnold.thompson(a)netapp.com> on 10/07/99 > 03:46:34 PM > > To: "Mohler, Jeff" <jeff.mohler(a)netapp.com>, Jason > Middlebrooks/Datalink, > toasters(a)mathworks.com > cc: > Subject: RE: Max number of drives. > > > > > I recall from mixing 9s and 18s at a customer site that you > *can* add the > 18s to > an existing volume of 9s and still get 18G worth (minus filesystem > overhead, > snaps, etc.) from each 18G drive. The first 18G drive > becomes parity and > the 9G > parity becomes a data drive (so you get 9G additional > capacity from the > first > 18G drive), but after that you should get 18 and not 9. Historically, > you've > been able to mix and match with the filer doing the right > thing. It is > true > that if a 9G drive fails and there is no 9G spare, it will > rebuild on an > 18G > drive but you will only get 9G on that rebuilt drive. So be > sure to have a > spare of each size available. If anybody has tested this > with different > results > I could be completely nuts, so please educate us! > > It is important to make the 9G shelves the lowest order > shelves for FCAL > loop > initialization purposes, so make the 9G shelves numbers 0 and 1. > > Regards, > Arnie > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Mohler, Jeff [mailto:jeff.mohler@netapp.com] > > Sent: Thursday, October 07, 1999 11:38 AM > > To: 'Jason Middlebrooks'; toasters(a)mathworks.com > > Subject: RE: Max number of drives. > > > > > > Sure, no problem. > > > > But when you add them to a volume (if you are not creating a > > new one) make sure > > you add them to the volume made up of 18G drives. (That is, > > if the 18G drives > > are a separate volume from the 9G ones). > > > > If you mix/max drive sizes in a volume, the larger drives > > will appear only to be > > the size of the smallest drive in the array. > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Jason Middlebrooks [mailto:Jason_Middlebrooks@datalink.com] > > Sent: Thursday, October 07, 1999 12:01 PM > > To: toasters(a)mathworks.com > > Subject: Max number of drives. > > > > > > Question. > > > > I have 14 9Gig drives and 14 18Gig drives. So a total of 28 > > drives. Can I > > add 7 more 18Gig drives on the same loop? > > > > The filer is a F760 > > > > Thanks in advance > > Jason Middlebrooks > > > > >

2 1

RE: Max number of drives.
by Jason Middlebrooks 07 Oct '99

07 Oct '99

I am not concerned about mixing the drives in the volume because like drive will be in there own raidgroup. I am just wondering about the max number of drives. All the docs say 28 18Gig drives and 56 9Gig drives in a loop. But what if you have 21 18Gig drives and 14 9Gig drives? Do you look at the maximum Storage Capacity to determine how many total drive you can have when you mix them? Thanks Jason "Thompson, Arnold" <arnold.thompson(a)netapp.com> on 10/07/99 03:46:34 PM To: "Mohler, Jeff" <jeff.mohler(a)netapp.com>, Jason Middlebrooks/Datalink, toasters(a)mathworks.com cc: Subject: RE: Max number of drives. I recall from mixing 9s and 18s at a customer site that you *can* add the 18s to an existing volume of 9s and still get 18G worth (minus filesystem overhead, snaps, etc.) from each 18G drive. The first 18G drive becomes parity and the 9G parity becomes a data drive (so you get 9G additional capacity from the first 18G drive), but after that you should get 18 and not 9. Historically, you've been able to mix and match with the filer doing the right thing. It is true that if a 9G drive fails and there is no 9G spare, it will rebuild on an 18G drive but you will only get 9G on that rebuilt drive. So be sure to have a spare of each size available. If anybody has tested this with different results I could be completely nuts, so please educate us! It is important to make the 9G shelves the lowest order shelves for FCAL loop initialization purposes, so make the 9G shelves numbers 0 and 1. Regards, Arnie > -----Original Message----- > From: Mohler, Jeff [mailto:jeff.mohler@netapp.com] > Sent: Thursday, October 07, 1999 11:38 AM > To: 'Jason Middlebrooks'; toasters(a)mathworks.com > Subject: RE: Max number of drives. > > > Sure, no problem. > > But when you add them to a volume (if you are not creating a > new one) make sure > you add them to the volume made up of 18G drives. (That is, > if the 18G drives > are a separate volume from the 9G ones). > > If you mix/max drive sizes in a volume, the larger drives > will appear only to be > the size of the smallest drive in the array. > > -----Original Message----- > From: Jason Middlebrooks [mailto:Jason_Middlebrooks@datalink.com] > Sent: Thursday, October 07, 1999 12:01 PM > To: toasters(a)mathworks.com > Subject: Max number of drives. > > > Question. > > I have 14 9Gig drives and 14 18Gig drives. So a total of 28 > drives. Can I > add 7 more 18Gig drives on the same loop? > > The filer is a F760 > > Thanks in advance > Jason Middlebrooks >

1 0

RE: Max number of drives.
by Palinckx, Gregory 07 Oct '99

07 Oct '99

Hi All - Unless something has changed in the 5.3 days, Arnie is correct - you can add 18s to a 9GB group and get 18(17)GB. Here is a sysconfig from a customer out here - RAID group 0 RAID Disk HA.ID HA SHELF BAY CHAN Used (MB/blks) Phys (MB/blks) --------- ----- ------------ ---- -------------- -------------- parity 0a.11 0a 1 3 FC:A 17000/34816000 17366/35566480 data 0a.5 0a 0 5 FC:A 8600/17612800 8683/17783112 data 0a.1 0a 0 1 FC:A 8600/17612800 8683/17783112 data 0a.2 0a 0 2 FC:A 8600/17612800 8683/17783112 data 0a.3 0a 0 3 FC:A 8600/17612800 8683/17783112 data 0a.6 0a 0 6 FC:A 8600/17612800 8683/17783112 data 0a.4 0a 0 4 FC:A 8600/17612800 8683/17783112 data 0a.13 0a 1 5 FC:A 17000/34816000 17366/35566480 data 0a.12 0a 1 4 FC:A 17000/34816000 17366/35566480 data 0a.9 0a 1 1 FC:A 17000/34816000 17366/35566480 I would just be sure that you have enough 18s to get a decent stripe.... Greg SE - Rockies > -----Original Message----- > From: Mohler, Jeff [mailto:jeff.mohler@netapp.com] > Sent: Thursday, October 07, 1999 1:50 PM > To: Thompson, Arnold; 'Jason Middlebrooks'; 'toasters(a)mathworks.com' > Subject: RE: Max number of drives. > > > Im scratching some documents here.. > > I could have swore the last time I asked that I was told the > larger drives would > be counted as the smaller capacity drives after the parity drive. > > > > -----Original Message----- > From: Thompson, Arnold > Sent: Thursday, October 07, 1999 12:47 PM > To: Mohler, Jeff; 'Jason Middlebrooks'; toasters(a)mathworks.com > Subject: RE: Max number of drives. > > > I recall from mixing 9s and 18s at a customer site that you > *can* add the 18s to > an existing volume of 9s and still get 18G worth (minus > filesystem overhead, > snaps, etc.) from each 18G drive. The first 18G drive > becomes parity and the 9G > parity becomes a data drive (so you get 9G additional > capacity from the first > 18G drive), but after that you should get 18 and not 9. > Historically, you've > been able to mix and match with the filer doing the right > thing. It is true > that if a 9G drive fails and there is no 9G spare, it will > rebuild on an 18G > drive but you will only get 9G on that rebuilt drive. So be > sure to have a > spare of each size available. If anybody has tested this > with different results > I could be completely nuts, so please educate us! > > It is important to make the 9G shelves the lowest order > shelves for FCAL loop > initialization purposes, so make the 9G shelves numbers 0 and 1. > > Regards, > Arnie > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Mohler, Jeff [mailto:jeff.mohler@netapp.com] > > Sent: Thursday, October 07, 1999 11:38 AM > > To: 'Jason Middlebrooks'; toasters(a)mathworks.com > > Subject: RE: Max number of drives. > > > > > > Sure, no problem. > > > > But when you add them to a volume (if you are not creating a > > new one) make sure > > you add them to the volume made up of 18G drives. (That is, > > if the 18G drives > > are a separate volume from the 9G ones). > > > > If you mix/max drive sizes in a volume, the larger drives > > will appear only to be > > the size of the smallest drive in the array. > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Jason Middlebrooks [mailto:Jason_Middlebrooks@datalink.com] > > Sent: Thursday, October 07, 1999 12:01 PM > > To: toasters(a)mathworks.com > > Subject: Max number of drives. > > > > > > Question. > > > > I have 14 9Gig drives and 14 18Gig drives. So a total of 28 > > drives. Can I > > add 7 more 18Gig drives on the same loop? > > > > The filer is a F760 > > > > Thanks in advance > > Jason Middlebrooks > > >

1 0

RE: Max number of drives.
by Mohler, Jeff 07 Oct '99

07 Oct '99

Im scratching some documents here.. I could have swore the last time I asked that I was told the larger drives would be counted as the smaller capacity drives after the parity drive. -----Original Message----- From: Thompson, Arnold Sent: Thursday, October 07, 1999 12:47 PM To: Mohler, Jeff; 'Jason Middlebrooks'; toasters(a)mathworks.com Subject: RE: Max number of drives. I recall from mixing 9s and 18s at a customer site that you *can* add the 18s to an existing volume of 9s and still get 18G worth (minus filesystem overhead, snaps, etc.) from each 18G drive. The first 18G drive becomes parity and the 9G parity becomes a data drive (so you get 9G additional capacity from the first 18G drive), but after that you should get 18 and not 9. Historically, you've been able to mix and match with the filer doing the right thing. It is true that if a 9G drive fails and there is no 9G spare, it will rebuild on an 18G drive but you will only get 9G on that rebuilt drive. So be sure to have a spare of each size available. If anybody has tested this with different results I could be completely nuts, so please educate us! It is important to make the 9G shelves the lowest order shelves for FCAL loop initialization purposes, so make the 9G shelves numbers 0 and 1. Regards, Arnie > -----Original Message----- > From: Mohler, Jeff [mailto:jeff.mohler@netapp.com] > Sent: Thursday, October 07, 1999 11:38 AM > To: 'Jason Middlebrooks'; toasters(a)mathworks.com > Subject: RE: Max number of drives. > > > Sure, no problem. > > But when you add them to a volume (if you are not creating a > new one) make sure > you add them to the volume made up of 18G drives. (That is, > if the 18G drives > are a separate volume from the 9G ones). > > If you mix/max drive sizes in a volume, the larger drives > will appear only to be > the size of the smallest drive in the array. > > -----Original Message----- > From: Jason Middlebrooks [mailto:Jason_Middlebrooks@datalink.com] > Sent: Thursday, October 07, 1999 12:01 PM > To: toasters(a)mathworks.com > Subject: Max number of drives. > > > Question. > > I have 14 9Gig drives and 14 18Gig drives. So a total of 28 > drives. Can I > add 7 more 18Gig drives on the same loop? > > The filer is a F760 > > Thanks in advance > Jason Middlebrooks >

1 0

RE: Max number of drives.
by Thompson, Arnold 07 Oct '99

07 Oct '99

I recall from mixing 9s and 18s at a customer site that you *can* add the 18s to an existing volume of 9s and still get 18G worth (minus filesystem overhead, snaps, etc.) from each 18G drive. The first 18G drive becomes parity and the 9G parity becomes a data drive (so you get 9G additional capacity from the first 18G drive), but after that you should get 18 and not 9. Historically, you've been able to mix and match with the filer doing the right thing. It is true that if a 9G drive fails and there is no 9G spare, it will rebuild on an 18G drive but you will only get 9G on that rebuilt drive. So be sure to have a spare of each size available. If anybody has tested this with different results I could be completely nuts, so please educate us! It is important to make the 9G shelves the lowest order shelves for FCAL loop initialization purposes, so make the 9G shelves numbers 0 and 1. Regards, Arnie > -----Original Message----- > From: Mohler, Jeff [mailto:jeff.mohler@netapp.com] > Sent: Thursday, October 07, 1999 11:38 AM > To: 'Jason Middlebrooks'; toasters(a)mathworks.com > Subject: RE: Max number of drives. > > > Sure, no problem. > > But when you add them to a volume (if you are not creating a > new one) make sure > you add them to the volume made up of 18G drives. (That is, > if the 18G drives > are a separate volume from the 9G ones). > > If you mix/max drive sizes in a volume, the larger drives > will appear only to be > the size of the smallest drive in the array. > > -----Original Message----- > From: Jason Middlebrooks [mailto:Jason_Middlebrooks@datalink.com] > Sent: Thursday, October 07, 1999 12:01 PM > To: toasters(a)mathworks.com > Subject: Max number of drives. > > > Question. > > I have 14 9Gig drives and 14 18Gig drives. So a total of 28 > drives. Can I > add 7 more 18Gig drives on the same loop? > > The filer is a F760 > > Thanks in advance > Jason Middlebrooks >

1 0

RE: Max number of drives.
by Mohler, Jeff 07 Oct '99

07 Oct '99

Sure, no problem. But when you add them to a volume (if you are not creating a new one) make sure you add them to the volume made up of 18G drives. (That is, if the 18G drives are a separate volume from the 9G ones). If you mix/max drive sizes in a volume, the larger drives will appear only to be the size of the smallest drive in the array. -----Original Message----- From: Jason Middlebrooks [mailto:Jason_Middlebrooks@datalink.com] Sent: Thursday, October 07, 1999 12:01 PM To: toasters(a)mathworks.com Subject: Max number of drives. Question. I have 14 9Gig drives and 14 18Gig drives. So a total of 28 drives. Can I add 7 more 18Gig drives on the same loop? The filer is a F760 Thanks in advance Jason Middlebrooks

2 1

Max number of drives.
by Jason Middlebrooks 07 Oct '99

07 Oct '99

Question. I have 14 9Gig drives and 14 18Gig drives. So a total of 28 drives. Can I add 7 more 18Gig drives on the same loop? The filer is a F760 Thanks in advance Jason Middlebrooks

1 0

RE: Max number of drives.
by Alvarado, Michael 07 Oct '99

07 Oct '99

You can add the additional 7 disks since that will still be less than the maximum storage capacity currently supported on an F740. The maximum capacity of an F740 is 928 GB. -----Original Message----- From: Jason Middlebrooks [mailto:Jason_Middlebrooks@datalink.com] Sent: Thursday, October 07, 1999 12:01 PM To: toasters(a)mathworks.com Subject: Max number of drives. Question. I have 14 9Gig drives and 14 18Gig drives. So a total of 28 drives. Can I add 7 more 18Gig drives on the same loop? The filer is a F760 Thanks in advance Jason Middlebrooks

1 0

More Backup Questions
by Jay Orr 07 Oct '99

07 Oct '99

Hi. Still curious about this all. Thanks for all the info people have sent me. Here's some more questions. I'm working from a system where we have a jukebox hanging off a sun box backing up an F330 (well, there's more then this, but I'm keeping it simple). 1) Does the current (5.3.2r1) version support NDMP v3? a) If not is v3 support planned and for when? 2) What (if any) advantage is there using NDMP vs. Dump (dump.FAServer)? 3) Which is better/faster for individual file restores (i.e. one or two files only)? 4) Can you extract a file out of a NDMP dump onto a different file system (i.e. onto a sun box)? 5) Are both snapshot backups (NDMP & dump.FAServer)? Important for ClearCase users.... 6) Any problems spanning NDMP dumps over multiple tapes? Concerns that bring me to these questions : 1) Budtool (now Legato) not wanting to support dump.FAServer types. vs 2) End of Life on the F330's. ----------- Fujitsu - Nexion, St. Louis, MO Jay Orr (314) 579-6517

2 1

Re: More Backup Questions
by Darrell Fuhriman 07 Oct '99

07 Oct '99

Jay Orr <orrjl(a)stl.nexen.com> writes: all of my answers assume you're backing up to local tape. > 1) Does the current (5.3.2r1) version support NDMP v3? No. the standard has not been finalized and to my knowledge no one has implemented it. > a) If not is v3 support planned and for when? I'm trying to find the answer to this myself. > 2) What (if any) advantage is there using NDMP vs. Dump (dump.FAServer)? well, NDMP will work with your backup software better. Keep in mind, NDMP is nothing but a dump which spits back some meta information to the backup server. > 3) Which is better/faster for individual file restores > (i.e. one or two files only)? they're equally bad for the reason given above. > 4) Can you extract a file out of a NDMP dump onto a different file system > (i.e. onto a sun box)? you should be able to, though frankly I've never tried it. > 5) Are both snapshot backups (NDMP & dump.FAServer)? Important for > ClearCase users.... yes. > 6) Any problems spanning NDMP dumps over multiple tapes? no. Darrell

1 0

HTTP on a filer
by mitch＠netline.com 06 Oct '99

06 Oct '99

Greetings. I hope there are some folks out here that have experience using a filer as an HTTP server. First some specifics: Filer: F740, 512MB RAM, 32MB NVRAM, FC disks, 100Mbit switched Enet conn. Version: NetApp Release 5.3.2R1: Thu Aug 12 19:16:27 PDT 1999 We purchased the HTTP protocol license to offload images to the filer directly rather than have an intermediate host serve them up by grabbing them off that filer. After some basic testing we put this into the start of production and all was well, though first connections by a browser seemed to lag a bit, subsequent connections were fine. All was well for about 2 weeks when things came to a crawl and finally to a stop. Several observations 1. httpstat reported 512 peak and 512 open connections. 2. despite doing an "options httpd.enable off" and leaving it down for a while, open conn. never dropped and the http server was non-responsive. I even tweak the timeout down to 30, which is the lowest it can go. 3. NFS service was seemingly unaffected 4. netstat reported *many* (512?) connections in either ESTABLISHED or CLOSE_WAIT and those connections didn't seem to ever go away. 5. The log file was at it's maximum. I moved it to another filename and did an httpd.enable on then off, but another log file was never written to. How do you rotate the logs on a filer for HTTP? A possible kink in the matter is that I am using the VH interface and have two IP's aliased to it, the filer's address is aaa.bbb.ccc.xxx and then it has: ifconfig vh alias aaa.bbb.ccc.yyy ifconfig vh alias aaa.bbb.ccc.zzz I then use the httpd.hostprefixes to map each VH to the appropriate area: /path/YYY host-y.domain.com aaa.bbb.ccc.yyy /path/ZZZ host-z.domain.com aaa.bbb.ccc.zzz /path/TESTy test-y.domain.com /path/TESTz test-z.domain.com and this all works fine as far as things being pointed to the right places. All of this leaves me with some questions: 1. How do you turn off httpd on a filer? "options httpd.enable off" does not seem to do the trick. After doing that, if I telnet to port 80 I do not get a connection refused, it just sits there. At least when it was in this "hung" state. 2. How do you rotate log files. Actually, for the images, I don't want the log file at all, but the manual doesn't say how to make it go to the filer equivalent of /dev/null. 3. Can the number of connections be raised from 512? Can the timeout be made shorter than 30 seconds? Can the filer close idle/lost connections faster? 4. Is this a known problem with a fix? NOW didn't seem to have anything that I thought matched the problem. 5. Is it reasonable to even put a filer's HTTP into an environment that will generate roughly several million hits per day? -- do svidaniya, ~mitch

1 0

converting a disk to be a hot-spare
by Mitch Wright 06 Oct '99

06 Oct '99

Greetings, I've got an F220 running 4.3.3. It is doing fine and we've recently moved all of it's workload off to another filer. This filer had all of the disks in use for data (sans the one for parity of course), but what I'd like to do is take back a disk as a hot-spare. There is no longer any data on the filer that we care about with the exeception of the OS itself. Is there a way I can reclaim one of the disks as a hot-spare without reinstalling from scratch? -- do svidaniya, ~mitch

1 0

Re: Backup restore times
by Darrell Fuhriman 06 Oct '99

06 Oct '99

Dave Heiland <dheiland(a)lucent.com> writes: > entire filer. Thats just about ok, but the problem is that restores of user > files can also take up to 8 hours which is a bit long. The problem may get even It's much, much too long in fact. One has the option of making smaller volumes, but that's not always the best option. The problem is *greatly* aggravated if one has to use incrementals also. One thing that would really, really help is if the NDMP v3 spec were (finally) finalized and implemented. v3 includes the ability to send tape positioning information to the backup system, meaning restores can quickly find the correct tape file & record for a given disk file. I don't like the fact that the positioning information is defined on an implementation specific basis, though. After that, netapp needs to either modify dump, or create another backup utility that can actually make use of said information. Disk capacity is rapidly out-pacing tape capacity and speed -- an issue Netapp needs to address sooner rather than later. Doing dump on a 400 GB filesystem (6 dlt7000's!) is down right primitive. Darrell

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