toasters

toasters@lists.teaparty.net

13531 discussions

Re: DLT library controls
by Jay Sekora 08 Jun '99

08 Jun '99

> That brings up a related question though -- since ndmp allows SCSI > commands to be sent directly to the device, that would theoretically allow > one to control the robotics over the network via NDMP. > > Do any of the NDMP-based packages support this? (Legato, Budtool, > whatever) BudTool (running, obviously, on a Unix box) does indeed tell our Breece Hill tape library (attached to the NetApp) to load and unload specific tapes, and it talks to the library through the NetApp via NDMP. So I guess this must be how it's doing it. Cheers, Jay Sekora <jay(a)ccs.neu.edu> Unix Systems Administrator Northeastern University College of Computer Science

1 0

DLT library controls
by cng1＠cecil.muscat.com 08 Jun '99

08 Jun '99

I've had a DLT7000 tape library for some time now backing up our ageing 540 but I've never been terribly happy with the controls for loading/unloading the library. In order to backup start a backup on a given tape I have to either go to the loaders console and tell it to load the tape or I need to know what tape I am on and give the correct number of "mt -f urst0a status" commands to cycle through to the correct tape. I believe that I could use something other than dump to do the backups but dump is free and does exactly what I want. The problem is compounded that since upgrading the firmware on the tape drive (to allow autocleaning) the mt -f urst0a status trick hasn't worked. Is there a better way? I would've thought that there should be some better drive robotics control functions - have they crept in between 4.3 and 5.x? FYI I'm running 4.3 connected to a overland dlt7100 drive. Chris -- Chris Good - Muscat Ltd. The Westbrook Centre, Milton Rd, Cambridge UK Phone: 01223 715006 Mobile: 07801 788997 http://www.muscat.com

4 4

RE: DLT library controls
by Paul English 08 Jun '99

08 Jun '99

> I believe that you can set the Overland Data library to run in sequential > "stacker" mode. > This mode will automatically change tapes when they are full. > There are no robotics controls in DataONTAP. > That brings up a related question though -- since ndmp allows SCSI commands to be sent directly to the device, that would theoretically allow one to control the robotics over the network via NDMP. Do any of the NDMP-based packages support this? (Legato, Budtool, whatever) Has anyone gotten this working by hacking around with NDMP? -- Paul English (Tallpaul) (508) 647-7715 tallpaul(a)mathworks.com (508) 647-7015 FAX Walkie Channel 2 ----- End Included Message -----

1 0

directory optimisation.
by yann.golanski＠ThePLAnet.net 08 Jun '99

08 Jun '99

Suppose I have a filer (760) with about 50 million files -- between 1k and 500M. What would be the optimum directory structure to keep them all? So far I have the following: /vol/vol1/data/Z/XX/XXXX/<full_usr_name>/files where XX and XXXX are the first 2 and first 4 characters of <full_usr_name> and Z is a hash spliting the <full_usr_name> between 2 filers -- yes, we have a rather large system ;) This seems to be working fairly well, but I am wondering if there isn't a better way of doing it. Does anyone knows how Netcaches keep their URLs in memory? Could you use that methode for the above? Any ideas? -- Yann Golanski Internet Systems Developer yann.golanski(a)theplanet.net The Planet Online

1 0

RE: Metadata preservation during network file backup
by Benn, Paul 08 Jun '99

08 Jun '99

NT metadata is lost when backing up via NFS. If you perform a backup via CIFS of files with UNIX-style permissions, the permissions are saved and restored. Additionally, WAFL keeps a DOS-like archive bit on UNIX files (as well as NT files). NT based backup apps can leverage this to perform incremental backups of UNIX files. You can check out my document on NT backup at: http://www.netapp.com/technology/level3/3052.html Regards, Paul -----Original Message----- From: Itzik (Itzhak) Meirson DSc. [mailto:imeirson@xpert.com] Sent: Tuesday, June 08, 1999 12:20 AM To: toasters(a)mathworks.com Subject: Metadata preservation during network file backup I would appreciate if someone could clarify the issue of metadata preservation during network backup of filers data. Lets assume that I have a share with NFS/CIFS access. If backing up this share from NFS will the CIFS metadata preserved upon restore? If backing up this share from CIFS will the NFS ACLs be preserved upon restore? Thnaks, Itzik

1 0

Re: Q: lose shelf power supply
by Jim McCoy 07 Jun '99

07 Jun '99

Michael Alvarado writes: >One other point to emphasize is that power supplies are fairly reliable devices >and a redundant supply can be purchased for even greater protection. If fact, in my experience the power supplies are far more reliable than the shelves themselves. Having gone through such events before (shelf failures, PS failures, etc) I can assure you that the system does "the right thing" and once you have replaced the failed hardware everything starts running again just fine. jim mccoy Yahoo! Inc.

1 0

Filer Impressions, please.
by Nathan O. Siemers 07 Jun '99

07 Jun '99

Hello, I have joined this list because I am considering a purchase of either (~ 1/2 tB) : 1. A Netapp 760 Filer. 2. An Auspex file server. 3. Beefed up local RAID. to serve as common, high performance, *shared* file space for two Origin2000 servers. I imagine a dedicated high speed network between the toaster and the two origins will be put in place if we go with the netapp type solution. I would appreciate your frank comments on the Filer's performance and reliability. Thanks, nathan -- N a t h a n O . S i e m e r s Bioinformatics Division of Applied Genomics Bristol-Myers Squibb Pharmaceutical Research Institute Hopewell Building 3B, P.O. Box 5400, Princeton, NJ 08543-5400 609 818-6568 siemersn(a)bms.com

4 3

RE: Q: lose shelf power supply
by Alvarado, Michael 07 Jun '99

07 Jun '99

One other point to emphasize is that power supplies are fairly reliable devices and a redundant supply can be purchased for even greater protection. -----Original Message----- From: hitz(a)netapp.com [mailto:hitz@netapp.com] Sent: Monday, June 07, 1999 10:51 AM To: george(a)YorkU.CA Cc: toasters(a)mathworks.com Subject: Re: Q: lose shelf power supply > Could someone please explain what happens when you loose a single > power supply in a shelf? > > Is the filer smart (dumb) enough to halt? > Do I get 'double disk error' and loose the filesystem? The filer does the "right thing:" If there's a double disk failure in a single RAID group, you have definitely lost the file system, at least for now, and the filer tells you so. However, it immediately stops writing to the filed file system, so that it doesn't screw things up in case you do find those failed disks. So in the case you are talking about, the filesystem will appear to fail, but if you replace the failed power supply, everything should be okay again. (I don't know whether or not this sequence causes/requires a reboot. My guess would be that it does.) Dave

1 0

Re: Q: lose shelf power supply
by sirbruce＠ix.netcom.com 07 Jun '99

07 Jun '99

On 06/07/99 09:34:03 you wrote: > >Could someone please explain what happens when you loose a single >power supply in a shelf? That depends on whether or not you have another pwoer supply. If you do, there's no problem. >Is the filer smart (dumb) enough to halt? >Do I get 'double disk error' and loose the filesystem? Both? Actually, I can't say for sure what recent version of the OS does, but in past versions it did think that a bunch of disks had stopped responding, leading to a 'double disk error' scenario. However, this does not mean you have lost the filesystem, because you didn't actually *lose* any disk in this scenario, and the disks aren't marked bad because they aren't "there" to be marked. There was a bug/enhancement request filed which suggested that the filer recognize when a whole shelf fails and provide a more sensible error message. There may have been a similar change made when multivolume and multiraidgroup support was added, since the filer will want to keep running even when it loses a particular volume and not halt. However, I am assuming from your question that you want to know what happens when there's only one filesystem and no failover filer. >There is a discussion going on here as to what happens in a hardware RAID >configuration vs a NetApp filer when a power supply fails. > >The thought is that if I have only one power supply in a shelf and it >fails (failing 7 disks) it is like having multiple disks fail and >therefore you loose the filesystem. Like I said, in the past it certainly did "think" it had multiple disks fail, but this didn't make you lose the filesystem. If you tried to bring the filer back up sans 6 or 7 disks (and only one filesystem), it will fail to boot. Once you replace the power supply and turn it back on with all the disks attached, it will detect they are all there and pick up just fine. (You also have the option of just moving the disks to another shelf if you have empty slots, but I'm not sure if this works with fiber channel and/or when you have multiple raid groups.) There are a few possible problems that can still result. Data will not be lost, since it's all still in NVRAM, but this type of failure could result in your parity disk for the raid group being reconstructed, degrading performance for a while. This also sounds like a case where it's possible the disk labels can get confused and you'll wind up with disks on the failed shelf not matching the other disks, and thus the filer refusing to recognize them even after you replace the power supply. I am not saying this will happen (it shouldn't), but the exact circumstances when the labels can get out of sync is unclear to me. Anyway, this is also easily solved via a floppy command and won't result in any data loss. Finally, the loss of a power supply could potentially damage a disk and/or its contents, giving you a failed disk when you finally get back up or even data corruption that eventually necessitates doing a wack on the filesystem. However, these would be rare, extreme cases, generally the result of an external event killing the power supply (like a lightning strike or power surge) rather than the power supply failing on its own. But this type of problem isn't unique to Netapp; it could happen to any RAID system. The bottom line is that the vast majority of the time, once you replace the power supply the system will come back up just fine, and those times when there is a problem, the vast majority of them will be easily corrected without data loss. Bruce

1 0

Re: Whats better: several narrow or one wide
by sirbruce＠ix.netcom.com 06 Jun '99

06 Jun '99

On 06/03/99 13:44:32 you wrote: > >Hi Ya'll, > >This is probably one of those questions for which there's no >true correct answer, but I'm interested in peoples opinion. Okay. Just for the record, my opinion is based on a balance of administrative ease and flexibility with the need for high performance. >1) In setting up a NetApp, is it better to use one big/wide >connection (say gigabit ethernet) as opposed to a bunch of >narrow connections (say, 4 100mbps ethernet in a etherchannel). >(Note that for this discussion I'm ignoring the redundancy in >a etherchannel.) One big connection, say Gigabit, is ideal for your primary data backbone. You can still use other, smaller connections for other smaller networks. >2) On a Unix system that will be doing heavy NFS work to a NetApp, >is it better to use separate mounts on separate but smaller ethernet >connections (100mbps ethernet), or, run all mounts through one wide >ethernet connection (gigabit ethernet)? Again I would recommend running all the mounts from a particular machine to one filer through one particular large network connection. This is going to be administratively advantageous in the long run. Even on a network with lots of networks for data access with lots of different purposes (and I have no objection with such a configuration), I'd still recommend keeping all of the mounts from a given dataless client over the same network to the filer(s), unless there is some very specific reason not to (like dedicated remote backup networks). Bruce

3 2

Whats better: several narrow or one wide
by Richard L. Rhodes 05 Jun '99

05 Jun '99

Hi Ya'll, This is probably one of those questions for which there's no true correct answer, but I'm interested in peoples opinion. 1) In setting up a NetApp, is it better to use one big/wide connection (say gigabit ethernet) as opposed to a bunch of narrow connections (say, 4 100mbps ethernet in a etherchannel). (Note that for this discussion I'm ignoring the redundancy in a etherchannel.) 2) On a Unix system that will be doing heavy NFS work to a NetApp, is it better to use separate mounts on separate but smaller ethernet connections (100mbps ethernet), or, run all mounts through one wide ethernet connection (gigabit ethernet)? Specifically, I'm going to be setting up an Oracle DB on a NetApp. I'm looking at whether I would be better off using multiple 100mbps ethernets or one gigabit ethernet connection. Thanks in advance for all opinions!!!!!!!!! rick ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Richard L. Rhodes e: rhodesr(a)firstenergycorp.com Ohio Edison Co. p: 330-384-4904 f: 330-384-2514

2 2

Re: Whats better: several narrow or one wide
by Michael Salmon 04 Jun '99

04 Jun '99

+----- On Thu, 03 Jun 1999 13:44:32, "Richard L. Rhodes" writes: | Hi Ya'll, | | This is probably one of those questions for which there's no | true correct answer, but I'm interested in peoples opinion. | | 1) In setting up a NetApp, is it better to use one big/wide | connection (say gigabit ethernet) as opposed to a bunch of | narrow connections (say, 4 100mbps ethernet in a etherchannel). | (Note that for this discussion I'm ignoring the redundancy in | a etherchannel.) | | 2) On a Unix system that will be doing heavy NFS work to a NetApp, | is it better to use separate mounts on separate but smaller ethernet | connections (100mbps ethernet), or, run all mounts through one wide | ethernet connection (gigabit ethernet)? | | Specifically, I'm going to be setting up an Oracle DB on a NetApp. | I'm looking at whether I would be better off using multiple 100mbps | ethernets or one gigabit ethernet connection. In my experience using a single big whatever is best unless you know precisely what your are going to be doing with it. A single big whatever is much more flexible. Having said that though I am not sure that a single gigabit connection is going to give you more throughput that an ether-channel, your really comparing 2 sorts of big. The same thing applies on the Unix side, I would probably be more inclined towards ether-channel on both. One thing that I have found is that having large differences in the speed of your server and client nearly always causes problems. /Michael

1 0

RE: Restoring DOT 4.x tapes on 5.X?
by Melvin, Grant 04 Jun '99

04 Jun '99

Hi Benjy, We work very hard in the File System Recovery group to maintain both backwards & forwards compatibility with our dump format. We also strive to be compatible with Solaris ufsrestore. If you have any restore issues then we'd like to hear about them. The best mechanism for this is to open a call record with NetApp support. Cheers, Grant -----Original Message----- From: Benjy Feen [mailto:benjy@feen.com] Sent: Thursday, June 03, 1999 10:11 AM To: toasters(a)mathworks.com Subject: Re: Restoring DOT 4.x tapes on 5.X? On Thu, 3 Jun 1999, Jason D. Kelleher wrote: > Haven't yet had the need. I have however restored files from > both DOT 4.X & 5.X with ufsrestore on a Solaris 2.6 system. Is there a recipe to do this, or did it "just work" for you? We've been unsuccessful thus far in doing restores to Solaris 2.6... -=- Benjy Feen benjy(a)feen.com http://www.feen.com Specialization is for insects. =-=

1 0

Re: Restoring DOT 4.x tapes on 5.X?
by Jason D. Kelleher 03 Jun '99

03 Jun '99

In message <Pine.LNX.4.10.9906030409500.22731-100000(a)lucien.blight.com>, Ben jy Feen writes: >Anyone ever successfully restored a tape created with DOT 4.X on a 5.X >toaster? Haven't yet had the need. I have however restored files from both DOT 4.X & 5.X with ufsrestore on a Solaris 2.6 system. jason

2 1

None
by Jim Sanford 03 Jun '99

03 Jun '99

I've just downloaded amanda in an effort to help me with a problem on an HP. First off, I'm impressed with the product. However, my particular problem is that HPUX wont recognize the norewind tape device for fbackup (it's local backup utility) altho tar likes it just fine. My question then is, how does amanda use the HP norewind device? Am I correct in presuming it just dumps tars/gtar to the device? How does it handle incrementals? If I did a find . -mtime -1 | tar ..... I'd pick up all the files created/modified within the last day but some of these files would have the same names (eg .dt/... files) altho they'd reside in different directories. Unless the path was hardcoded to each, they'd overwrite each other on the tape, right? And if they path is hardcoded, how could tey be restored to different directories? So is amanda just a client/server package layered onto gtar? Thanks ********************************* Jim Sanford IS Department Research Systems, Inc. *********************************

3 2

Restoring DOT 4.x tapes on 5.X?
by Benjy Feen 03 Jun '99

03 Jun '99

Anyone ever successfully restored a tape created with DOT 4.X on a 5.X toaster? -=- Benjy Feen benjy(a)feen.com http://www.feen.com Specialization is for insects. =-=

1 0

Re: CIFS
by Matt Day 03 Jun '99

03 Jun '99

>Is or has anyone experienced any problems getting cifs to run on the netapps ? > We have an F720 and >are having performance problems with our win95 users. Just transfering files > from a server drive to the >F720 is very slow. The other problem is that several programs wont run if the > files have multiple access, >such as access. We changed the cifs.oplocks.enable to off .... Can anyone > shed some light ? Hi Mark, Sounds to me like you're probably running into a known CIFS bug. What version of Data ONTAP are you running? I strongly recommend contacting Netapp support about getting a software upgrade. Matt

1 0

CIFS
by Mark D Fowle 03 Jun '99

03 Jun '99

Is or has anyone experienced any problems getting cifs to run on the netapps ? We have an F720 and are having performance problems with our win95 users. Just transfering files from a server drive to the F720 is very slow. The other problem is that several programs wont run if the files have multiple access, such as access. We changed the cifs.oplocks.enable to off .... Can anyone shed some light ? Mark Fowle

1 0

Will cluster failover occur with either 5.21 or 5.3 if NIC card fails?
by Mike Ball 03 Jun '99

03 Jun '99

Will a cluster failover occur if a NIC card fails in one of the clustered filers? I have not been able to find a answer from level 1 tech support at Netapp or from the NOW site? Thank you, Mike Ball

6 8

Implementing Progress on NetApp
by itzik meirson 02 Jun '99

02 Jun '99

I would appreciate if anyoune could provide some relevant information regarding implementation of Progress database on NetApp filers. Searching the NetApp web did not provide any hints or pointers. TIA Itzik -- Itzik (Itzhak) Meirson DSc. e-mail: Imeirson(a)xpert.com Systems & Storage Integration Specialist ph. (972) 3 618 1118 Xpert Integrated Systems mob. (972) 5 322 4777

1 0

Implementing Informix on NetApp
by Itzik Meirson 31 May '99

31 May '99

I would apprecite if someone could provide information regarding implementation of Informix on NetApp filers. Searching NetApp's web did not provide any relevant information. TIA, Itzik

1 0

Re: erase disk label?
by Paul Albers 27 May '99

27 May '99

At 05:46 PM 5/26/99 -0400, mgx(a)spruce.lsd.ornl.gov wrote: >netapp support advised me to use the disk_remove_label >command to remove the disk labels of a couple of new >disks which decided to insert themselves into a new >and unused vol. however, my 5.3D2 ontap does not seem >to know the disk_remove_label command. is this correct? >or is there another command to remove the disk label? > >-- >-- michael > Michael, Use the disk_erase_label command, you will be able to find this command under rc_toggle_basic. You should be able to use the 'vol destroy' command to destroy these unwanted volumes though. Either one should accomplish what you are trying to do, turn these drives into spares. -paul

3 2

Evil Twins
by Jay Soffian 26 May '99

26 May '99

Okay, I've got to know. What does 'evil_twins' do? The help for the command isn't too enlightening: in-progress evil twin resize info j. -- Jay Soffian <jay(a)cimedia.com> UNIX Systems Administrator 404.572.1941 Cox Interactive Media

2 1

erase disk label?
by mgx＠spruce.lsd.ornl.gov 26 May '99

26 May '99

netapp support advised me to use the disk_remove_label command to remove the disk labels of a couple of new disks which decided to insert themselves into a new and unused vol. however, my 5.3D2 ontap does not seem to know the disk_remove_label command. is this correct? or is there another command to remove the disk label? -- -- michael

3 2

Re: Anybody running alternative NAS boxes alongside netapps?
by sirbruce＠ix.netcom.com 25 May '99

25 May '99

On 05/25/99 15:22:26 you wrote: > >In message <Pine.BSF.4.10.9905241404040.332-100000(a)schizo.cdsnet.net>, Jaye >Mathisen writes: >> >>I just got done catching my breath, and wiping the tears out of my eyes >>reviewing the latest storage quote from Netapp for my 540. Out of curiosity, was it simply a quote on more disks, which was too high for you, or is your current system already at capacity and you'd have to do a bunch of upgrades to newer hardware to get more storage? If it's the latter it's really unfair to use it for price comparison when other products; you will run into similar limitations on them eventually. If it's the former, remember that the disk is more expensive because it goes hand-in-had with the high performance and testing. If you want to use another product with cheaper disk, it's not going to be as reliable, particularly under heavy loads. >>Is anybody using some of the other boxes available as adjuncts to the >>netapp? I'm going to keep my netapps for some very specific users, but I >>believe I can move significant amounts of data (log files, etc). off to >>other products, and avoid paying absolutely ridiculous prices... Well, it's not clear what you want these adjunct products to do. If you care about reliability or performance, you'd get a netapp despite the price. If you don't care about these things, and simply want cheap bulk storage for "significant amounts of data" that you don't care how slow it is, or if it crashes and you lose all your data, nor how much administration time it will take adding new disks since you won't get RAID-4, then I see no reason to go with another "appliance-like" product. Just add some disks to your regular user/compute/development/cpu/whatever-you-call-them servers, be they Sun, Linux, Compaq/Digital, or whatever. Bruce

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