toasters

toasters@lists.teaparty.net

13515 discussions

RE: Legato Networker backups
by Whitman, Matthew 06 Mar '99

06 Mar '99

Greg, I will take a crack at answering this for you as a "guy in the know..". First things first; you are not the first to bring this up. As you may or may not know, NetApp wrote a protocol several years ago called NDMP which stands for Network Data Management Protocol, which allows for a "standard" that controls remote tape devices, storage pools, etc. Most every backup vendor signed on to support the protocol (Veritas, Intelliguard, BudTool, Seagate, CommVault, etc.) except Legato, who maintained the "superiority" of their proprietary system. There have been a large number of VERY big NetApp installs that have been pushing Legato to provide native NetApp or they would switch to another product. This led to the co-development of a Java-based Legato Networker client that will run directly on the Filer. The expected shipping date of this product is Q2/99. This product will be distributed, supported (and presumably sold) directly by Legato. But wait!! Things get EVEN better! On 1/28/99, Legato announced that they were acquiring Intelliguard Software: http://www.legato.com/press/PR200.html One of the main reasons cited for buying Intelliguard was the NDMP technology. EVEN BETTER!!!!!!!!! On 2/2/99, Legato announced that all Networker products will be NDMP compliant in Q3/99: http://www.legato.com/press/PR209.html With a big sigh of relief and a smile on their faces, NetApp customers and employees could give a hearty YAHOO!!! Now, the question was asked about keeping the CIFS attributes during backup; both of the methods above will allow this to happen. In current environments, backups need to be done by an NT machine running Networker, OR having a UNIX Networker server that backs up an NT machine with the Filer mounted on it. I hope that this helps. Regards, Matt Matt Whitman - Consulting Systems Engineer Network Appliance, Inc. www.netapp.com 2350 Mission College Blvd. Suite 900 Santa Clara, CA 95054 (408)367-3000 Corporate mattw(a)netapp.com - E-mail (408)987-5365 - Direct Dial (408)987-5364 - Fax -----Original Message----- From: Gregory M. Paris [mailto:paris@bose.com] Sent: Friday, March 05, 1999 12:26 PM To: toasters(a)mathworks.com Cc: paris(a)bose.com Subject: Legato Networker backups Dear Toasters, This is along the lines of the "Future Newbie" thread, though I'm not new to NetApp boxes. I am looking to get our first here at this company. We use Legato Networker to backup our Engineering systems, which I support. (We use HP's Omniback and a StorageTek tape library for our business systems, but that's another post....) The problem is, I'm not clear on how I'll backup an F740 (~180 GB) using Networker. I've read the "How to Integrate..." white paper on the NetApp site. I've read the ancient "Backing Up NetApp..." on the Legato site. Neither of those seem to address our situation: Networker server running on Solaris; NetApp server with NFS and CIFS. How do I? I can connect a Quantum DLT stacker to the NetApp, but can I make Legato use it? If not, how do I backup over the network, given that I want to preserve NT ACLs? The "How to Integrate..." document shows how to do this when Networker runs on an NT machine, but we have it on UNIX. I'm looking for a definitive answer, on the order of, "We do it here and it works great!" (along with the how-to, of course). I'm bucking the prevailing winds in trying to bring in a NetApp. Tiny issues like, "No proven way to back it up," could result in me supporting a new HP or Sun server. (Not that I don't use their equipment already, but the combination of RAID and NFS+CIFS is too much complexity on UNIX servers, IMHO.) All help is appreciated. Greg -- Gregory M. Paris CIS Engineering Systems Bose Corporation Email: paris(a)bose.com The Mountain Phone: +1 508 766-6080 Framingham, MA 01701-9168 FAX: +1 508 820-0173

2 1

Legato Networker backups
by Gregory M. Paris 05 Mar '99

05 Mar '99

Dear Toasters, This is along the lines of the "Future Newbie" thread, though I'm not new to NetApp boxes. I am looking to get our first here at this company. We use Legato Networker to backup our Engineering systems, which I support. (We use HP's Omniback and a StorageTek tape library for our business systems, but that's another post....) The problem is, I'm not clear on how I'll backup an F740 (~180 GB) using Networker. I've read the "How to Integrate..." white paper on the NetApp site. I've read the ancient "Backing Up NetApp..." on the Legato site. Neither of those seem to address our situation: Networker server running on Solaris; NetApp server with NFS and CIFS. How do I? I can connect a Quantum DLT stacker to the NetApp, but can I make Legato use it? If not, how do I backup over the network, given that I want to preserve NT ACLs? The "How to Integrate..." document shows how to do this when Networker runs on an NT machine, but we have it on UNIX. I'm looking for a definitive answer, on the order of, "We do it here and it works great!" (along with the how-to, of course). I'm bucking the prevailing winds in trying to bring in a NetApp. Tiny issues like, "No proven way to back it up," could result in me supporting a new HP or Sun server. (Not that I don't use their equipment already, but the combination of RAID and NFS+CIFS is too much complexity on UNIX servers, IMHO.) All help is appreciated. Greg -- Gregory M. Paris CIS Engineering Systems Bose Corporation Email: paris(a)bose.com The Mountain Phone: +1 508 766-6080 Framingham, MA 01701-9168 FAX: +1 508 820-0173

1 0

Re: Future Newbie Needs Advice
by rbutler＠pdc.com 05 Mar '99

05 Mar '99

> From kelleher(a)susq.com Fri Mar 5 10:24:36 1999 > To: Jonah Yokubaitis <barron(a)staff.texas.net> > cc: Tom Limoncelli <tal(a)research.bell-labs.com>, toasters(a)mathworks.com > Subject: Re: Future Newbie Needs Advice > Date: Fri, 05 Mar 1999 11:00:17 -0500 > From: "Jason D. Kelleher" <kelleher(a)susq.com> > Sender: owner-toasters(a)mathworks.com > Content-Length: 4312 > > > >Mmmm....if only a native legato client :-) > > Yuch. Native dump format is so much friendlier to work with than > proprietary dump formats. That plus NDMP is why we went with > BudTool. I won't be an issue for the filers once there's a native > client, but wouldn't backup all my other hosts with it. Anyone > know what's going to happen with this issue once BudTool is > absorbed by Legato? I heard a rumor that BudTool v5.0 has already > been scrapped. (Is there an Intelliguard mailing list?) If Legato > and their tape format is our only upgrade path, we'll start looking > at other products. > > jason > > --- > Jason D. Kelleher kelleher(a)susq.com > Susquehanna Partners, G.P. 610.617.2721 (voice) > 401 City Line Ave, Suite 220 610.617.2916 (fax) > Bala Cynwyd, PA 19004-1122 > > Intelliguard now has OSA agents available for all supported BudTool media server platforms (SunOS, Solaris, HP-UX, AIX, IRIX) that are clients making the platform NDMP compliant. This means that you can backup these architectures to NetApp direct attached tape drives, for example. The OSA agents are a new product and have been available since the middle of January 1999. I have installed and used them. When everything is NDMP compliant, you can backup up any NDMP compliant platform to any NDMP attached tape drive. They come in 10 packs and are pretty cheap to purchase. Randy Butler System Engineering Supervisor - Western Region PDC Solutions, Inc. E-mail: rbutler(a)pdc.com

2 1

Future Newbie Needs Advice
by Russ Amidon 05 Mar '99

05 Mar '99

Hello Everyone, I am about to purchase two F760's w/ Cluster Failover Software and Hardware because we need a system that is 100% available and rock solid. I was convinced after talking to other Net App users that this was the way to go. After a week of reading this mailing list, I am no longer convinced. Does anyone out there have the system I described? Are you happy with it? I am particularly concerned about the fiber channel problems and all of the OS upgrades and patches. We are also considering the new Auspex NS2000. Does anyone know of an Auspex mailing list like this one? Thank you in advance for any advise you can offer to the "future newbie". Russ Amidon UNIX Sys Admin

4 3

Re: Future Newbie Needs Advice
by Jason D. Kelleher 05 Mar '99

05 Mar '99

In message <Pine.BSF.4.00.9903042345180.26075-100000(a)staff2.texas.net>, Jona h Yokubaitis writes: > >On Thu, 4 Mar 1999, Tom Limoncelli wrote: > >|If you monitor this mailing list you will get the impression that the >|NetApp products have nothing but problems. That's because people >|without problems don't need to post. It's sort of like going to an AA >|meeting and complaining, "Gosh, you're all alcoholics! Doesn't anyone >|here NOT have a drinking problem?" > >I agree with this as well. We have run into many bugs with our >netapps, but never have had an outage longer than 5minutes, and NEVER >have lost any data. That IMO is a strong statement for network >attached storage. We've had an F330 running since 10/95. In all cases except one, downtime was limited to a ~5 minute outage. In 8/98 we had a major problem that brought us down for ~1.5 hours and left us crippled for the remainder of the day. During an outage we have always been able to get ahold of very helpful and knowledgable support via the 800 number. After the major outage, alot of questions we asked by management about the server. (It also provided us with the final argument to get our cluster.) I came up with these numbers: System in use: ~1034 days == 24816 hours Total Downtime: ~10 hours (being harsh and counting "crippled" as down) Percent Downtime: 10 / 24816 == 0.000352 Percent Uptime: 99.999648 I know it's not very scientific, but being able to work out an approximate uptime that matches the numbers NetApp's marketing guys hand out gives me a warm fuzzy feeling. >We also are running NetApp Release 4.3.5D2 and refuse to upgrade. >"If it aint broke, don't break it" That was my feeling until 8/98. Then we experienced bugs 4157... Bug ID 4157 Title Removes of very large files can cause the filer to deadlock Problem Description Simultaneous removes of files that together take up more than 1GB of space (i.e. a few large files or thousands of smaller ones) may cause a filer to deadlock and not provide file service. Multiple reboots may be required to clear the deadlock condition. Release Fixed 5.0 Unpleasant doesn't begin do describe this beast. Not only did we need to reboot the filer, but the also the system which issued the delete. Our filer has ~200 clients any one of which could have done so... not a pretty picture. It was a known bug at the time, my only saving grace was telling management that the release it was fixed in was still in "Early Access". I'd seriously consider moving up to a 5.x release. >|I used to be a big Auspex fan. Now I'm a big NetApp fan. (actually, I'm >|a fan of big NetApps :-) ). The CIFS/NFS integration is so tight its a >|thing of beauty. The RAID, wafl, and other features make it difficult >|to even evaluate any other box. Now re-evaluating BudTool on the other >|hand... Bug 4157 was my worst experience with our filer. It occurred while we were still fighting to get an HA file server (F630 cluster) approved for purchase. And I still like 'em. We got an F740 cluster last month and going to be retiring our F330 in several months. And the support is great (well, some issues with bad/wrong parts being sent recently -- but never couldn't get a hold of knowledgable personel in an emergency). >Mmmm....if only a native legato client :-) Yuch. Native dump format is so much friendlier to work with than proprietary dump formats. That plus NDMP is why we went with BudTool. I won't be an issue for the filers once there's a native client, but wouldn't backup all my other hosts with it. Anyone know what's going to happen with this issue once BudTool is absorbed by Legato? I heard a rumor that BudTool v5.0 has already been scrapped. (Is there an Intelliguard mailing list?) If Legato and their tape format is our only upgrade path, we'll start looking at other products. jason --- Jason D. Kelleher kelleher(a)susq.com Susquehanna Partners, G.P. 610.617.2721 (voice) 401 City Line Ave, Suite 220 610.617.2916 (fax) Bala Cynwyd, PA 19004-1122

1 0

RE: Gb-ether and Extreme: closure! :-)
by Garrett Burke 05 Mar '99

05 Mar '99

Hi, Both the filer and switch are set to 100-FD. I'm not seeing any collisions, only CRC errors. Cabling has been replaced to see if they went away, but to no avail. GB > ---------- > From: Devi Nagaraj[SMTP:devi@netapp.com] > Sent: 05 March 1999 08:47 > To: Dane Jasper > Cc: Garrett Burke; 'bmw(a)visgen.com'; toasters(a)mathworks.com > Subject: Re: Gb-ether and Extreme: closure! :-) > > At 10:38 AM 3/4/99 -0800, Dane Jasper wrote: > >On Thu, Mar 04, 1999 at 09:19:36AM -0000, Garrett Burke wrote: > >> As an aside, have you run a filer into a 100Mb/s port on a S48? I'm > seeing > >> CRC errors on the port that my F230 is on. Netapp are investigating, > just > >> wondering if anyone else is seeing/has seen this. > > > >We've got a F230 running 100-FD with a Summit 48. We found that we had > >better results if we hard set both devices to 100-FD and turned off > >negotiation. > > > The F200/F300 series on-board ethernet doesnot autonegotiate. So if you > had > the filer's > ethernet interface set to operate in 100BaseTx-FD, the corresponding > switch port > should also be set to operate in 100BaseTX-FD. > > When speed/duplex mismatches occur, depending on the switch to which > the filer's interface is connected, you will see CRC errors and > collisions. > You will definitely see poor network throughput. > >

1 0

RE: Future Newbie Needs Advice
by Mohler, Jeff 05 Mar '99

05 Mar '99

I have two F760 Cluster systems (Four total heads). It's been extremely stable, and I did have to perform one OS upgrade, and replace one MB due to a FC 'oddness'. Ive always had hardware when I needed it, and tech support has been so solid for me too. Your BEST tech support is with your SE if avialable, it seems that sometimes I can get better OS advice from my SE than from the 800#, but thats common with the guy in the field having the up-to-the-minute advice ahead of a database somewhere else. You'll enjoy your system! > -----Original Message----- > From: Russ Amidon [SMTP:amidon@pico.sps.mot.com] > Sent: Thursday, March 04, 1999 3:56 PM > To: toasters(a)mathworks.com > Subject: Future Newbie Needs Advice > > Hello Everyone, > > I am about to purchase two F760's w/ Cluster Failover Software and > Hardware > because we need a system that is 100% available and rock solid. I was > convinced > after talking to other Net App users that this was the way to go. After a > week > of reading this mailing list, I am no longer convinced. Does anyone out > there > have the system I described? Are you happy with it? I am particularly > concerned > about the fiber channel problems and all of the OS upgrades and patches. > > We are also considering the new Auspex NS2000. Does anyone know of an > Auspex > mailing list like this one? > > Thank you in advance for any advise you can offer to the "future newbie". > > Russ Amidon > UNIX Sys Admin

4 3

RE: Future Newbie Needs Advice
by Clarke, Bruce 05 Mar '99

05 Mar '99

One clarification: NFS and CIFS behave quite differently. We commonly demo Oracle/Unix (NFS) running against a cluster and routinely do "unexpected" things to the target filer making it fail (pulling both plugs is my favorite). It seamlessly fails over to the second node and Oracle, after a hesitation for a minute or so, takes off where it left off. The giveback is equally transparent. Thank Sun (circa 1983) for the statelessness of NFS. You are right; NT connections are not quite so robust. Bruce Clarke - Database Marketing Director Network Appliance, Inc. 2770 San Tomas Expressway Santa Clara, CA 95051 Phone: 1-408-367-3156 Fax: 1-408-367-3670 Email: bruce.clarke(a)netapp.com

1 0

RE: Future Newbie Needs Advice
by Sam Schorr 04 Mar '99

04 Mar '99

Russ, We have just installed clustering using 2 F740s. We had one F740, bought a second with clustering, and it was installed Monday night. A couple of things have happened: 1. We had to replace the disk array shelves onthe existing filer last night because the cluster partner (the new F740) could not see all of the disks on the "older" F740. Also, we had to upgrade the disk firmware on the "older" F740. 2. The existing filer has now started to crash. We had one crash Tuesday before correcting the disk problem above, so the cluster partner did not take over. We had a second one today on the "older" filer, and this time clustering worked fine. 3. However, it is not seemless. The failover breaks file shares (we are a CIFS-only environment, but I understand it would do the same to NFS mounts). So, users/application may get file errors if they are in the middle of performing a file operation. When you do a "giveback", you either have to manually break file shares again, or do a "cf giveback -f" which forces the share break. Only then, after the shares have been broken, does the filer you are do the "giveback" to reboot. This means, once again, file errors to clients. 4. Netapp believes the crashes may be the result of a bad ServerNet card (the card that connects the two filers together for clustering). If true, that means that we will have suffered 3 bad/faulty parts in one install/purchase. If you want, I'll let you know the end of this soap opera. Sam Schorr -----Original Message----- From: Russ Amidon [mailto:amidon@pico.sps.mot.com] Sent: Thursday, March 04, 1999 1:56 PM To: toasters(a)mathworks.com Subject: Future Newbie Needs Advice Hello Everyone, I am about to purchase two F760's w/ Cluster Failover Software and Hardware because we need a system that is 100% available and rock solid. I was convinced after talking to other Net App users that this was the way to go. After a week of reading this mailing list, I am no longer convinced. Does anyone out there have the system I described? Are you happy with it? I am particularly concerned about the fiber channel problems and all of the OS upgrades and patches. We are also considering the new Auspex NS2000. Does anyone know of an Auspex mailing list like this one? Thank you in advance for any advise you can offer to the "future newbie". Russ Amidon UNIX Sys Admin

1 0

Re: Future Newbie Needs Advice
by sirbruce＠ix.netcom.com 04 Mar '99

04 Mar '99

On 03/04/99 13:56:29 you wrote: > >Hello Everyone, > >I am about to purchase two F760's w/ Cluster Failover Software and Hardware >because we need a system that is 100% available and rock solid. I was convinced >after talking to other Net App users that this was the way to go. After a week >of reading this mailing list, I am no longer convinced. Does anyone out there >have the system I described? Are you happy with it? I am particularly concerned >about the fiber channel problems and all of the OS upgrades and patches. > >We are also considering the new Auspex NS2000. Does anyone know of an Auspex >mailing list like this one? Data seems to suggest that despite the problems described, your Netapp is going to be far more reliable than an Auspex or virtually any other system. *Nothing* is going to be 100% available. Clustered filers are close; for more reliability you're going to have to pay a LOT more for really big iron which may not have the software capabilities you want. The other important thing is that the filer, when it does crash, generally results in a minimal outage. Other serves may take a half-hour or more to recover. Bruce

1 0

Re: Gb-ether and Extreme: closure! :-)
by Devi Nagaraj 04 Mar '99

04 Mar '99

At 10:38 AM 3/4/99 -0800, Dane Jasper wrote: >On Thu, Mar 04, 1999 at 09:19:36AM -0000, Garrett Burke wrote: >> As an aside, have you run a filer into a 100Mb/s port on a S48? I'm seeing >> CRC errors on the port that my F230 is on. Netapp are investigating, just >> wondering if anyone else is seeing/has seen this. > >We've got a F230 running 100-FD with a Summit 48. We found that we had >better results if we hard set both devices to 100-FD and turned off >negotiation. The F200/F300 series on-board ethernet doesnot autonegotiate. So if you had the filer's ethernet interface set to operate in 100BaseTx-FD, the corresponding switch port should also be set to operate in 100BaseTX-FD. When speed/duplex mismatches occur, depending on the switch to which the filer's interface is connected, you will see CRC errors and collisions. You will definitely see poor network throughput. Here is a table that gives info on the board types and the supported speed and duplex (mediatype) Interface Sysconfig name Mkt P/N Mediatype --------- -------------- ------- --------- Single 10/100 - ZX342 - X1001 - 10BaseT(half/full), 100BaseTx(half/full) Quad 10 BaseT - ZX314 - X1002 - 10BaseT(half/full) Quad 10 BaseT - ZX314 - X1003 - 10BaseT(half/full) Quad 10/100 - ZX346 - X1012 - 10BaseT(half/full), 100BaseTx(half/full), auto Single 10/100 - ZX345Q - X1001B - 10BaseT(half/full), 100BaseTx(half/full), auto Quad 10/100 - ZX346Q - X1012B - 10BaseT(half/full), 100BaseTx(half/full), auto F200/300 series onboard - 10BaseT(half/full), 100BaseTx(half/full) F700 series onboard - 10BaseT(half/full), 100BaseTx(half/full), auto Here is a small note on autonegotiation in the ethernet world: Q. What is Auto-negotiation? A. Auto-negotiation is an optional function of the IEEE 802.3u Fast Ethernet standard that enables devices to automatically exchange information over a link about their speed and duplex abilities. This allows devices to perform automatic configuration to achieve the maximum common level of operation over a link. Q. How does Auto-Negotiation work at Both Ends? A. When two auto-negotiation devices with multiple capabilities are linked together, they find their maximum common mode of operation based on a priority table. The following table lists priorities from the highest (1) to the lowest (5). The full-duplex mode of operation is given higher priority over half-duplex because, at the same speed, more data can traverse the full-duplex link. ------------------------------------------------------- Priority Capabilities ------------------------------------------------------- 1 100BaseT4 (not supported on NetApp filers) 2 100BaseTX Full Duplex 3 100BaseTX 4 10BaseT Full Duplex 5 10BaseT -------------------------------------------------------- Q. How does Auto-Negotiation work at One End? A. If one link partner is set to auto-negotiate and the other link partner is manually set, the manually set partner must always be half-duplex.The IEEE spec does not allow the auto-negotiating partner to detect full-duplex on a manually set link partner. auto ----X--> 100BaseT-FD auto -------> 100BaseT-HD If one end is configured to operate in 100BaseTx fullduplex make sure that the other end is also manually configured to operate in the same mode. If there is a speed/duplex mismatch, you might see CRC errors and poor network throughput. Hope this helps. -Devi Network Appliance

4 3

RE: UNCORR PROC MCHK 98
by Bulfer, David 04 Mar '99

04 Mar '99

This is not a memory error on and F630. For an F630, an MCHK 98 means "Processor Hard Error". It is a SW problem associated with SNMP. Access NOW and check out bug 11610. David Bulfer -----Original Message----- From: G D Geen [mailto:geen@msp.sc.ti.com] Sent: Wednesday, March 03, 1999 1:46 PM To: 'toasters(a)mathworks.com' Cc: Peter Pross; Mike Ball Subject: Re: UNCORR PROC MCHK 98 We were told that this was a memory issue as well. This was not so in our case. Ours occurred when a network device discovery was run from the Spectrum server. This did not affect the system running version below 5.1.1. If you are running some sort of network monitoring tools such as Cabletron's Spectrum server, the SNMP call made by the discovery may be causing your problem as it did ours. NetApp took ownership of this issue and created a patch to fix our problem. Though this problem had been reported by other vendors, Cabletron does not consider it a bug in *their* code. -gdg Peter Pross wrote: > > Hi, > > I believe this may be memory errors. I think you aloud 1 in a blue moon, if > more replace mem. Check with netapps. > > Cheers, > > Peter > > __^__ > ( ___ > )--------------------------------------------------------------------------- > ------ > | / | Peter Pross Title: Unix Systems > Administrator > | / | Nortel Networks Montreal Email: pross(a)nortel.ca > | / | 16 Place du Commerce Voice: 514-765-7973 > | / | Nun's Island, Quebec, Fax : 514-761-8710 > > | / | Canada H3E 1H6 ESN : 852-7973 > > |___| > > (_____)--------------------------------------------------------------------- > ----------- > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Mike Ball [SMTP:mball@rtp.opensystems.com] > > Sent: March 3, 1999 2:06 PM > > To: 'toasters(a)mathworks.com' > > Subject: UNCORR PROC MCHK 98 > > > > Does anyone have an idea of what the below error is pointing to on my F630 > > running 5.21? > > > > "Wed Mar 3 09:26:49 EST [rc]: relog syslog UNCORR PROC MCHK 98 > > pc:fffffc0000482260 cia:0 mm:4090 eia:1820f550 fs:ff00 eis:945000000 isr: > > 0 pci0:3010106 pci1:4000" > > > > I discovered my system was locked up this morning when I came in. After > > rebooting i discovered the following error in my messages file. > > > > -- --------------------------------------------------------------- G D Geen mailto:geen@ti.com Texas Instruments Phone : (972)480.7896 System Administrator FAX : (972)480.7676 --------------------------------------------------------------- Life is what happens while you're busy making other plans. -J. Lennon

3 2

RE: Gb-ether and Extreme: closure! :-)
by Garrett Burke 04 Mar '99

04 Mar '99

Hi Bruce, You'll find the same thing happens if you setup port mirroring. When you turn mirroring off the port isn't in any VLAN and hence doesn't pass any packets. Couldn't find it mentioned in any of the Extreme docs...must doc it for my colleagues..now where's my clone and a 48hr day As an aside, have you run a filer into a 100Mb/s port on a S48? I'm seeing CRC errors on the port that my F230 is on. Netapp are investigating, just wondering if anyone else is seeing/has seen this. Regards, GB > ---------- > From: Bruce Walker[SMTP:bmw@visgen.com] > Sent: 04 March 1999 09:02 > To: toasters(a)mathworks.com > Subject: Re: Gb-ether and Extreme: closure! :-) > > > But what happens when you unconfigure a trunked port on a Summit, > apparently, is that the port ends up not being on *any* VLAN. The > port is "alive" but nothing is routed to or from it. > >

3 2

Re: newbie asking about autoloaders
by rbutler＠pdc.com 04 Mar '99

04 Mar '99

> From bmw(a)visgen.com Wed Mar 3 19:26:09 1999 > From: Bruce Walker <bmw(a)visgen.com> > Subject: Re: newbie asking about autoloaders > To: kfischer(a)rsinc.com (Kathy Fischer) > Date: Wed, 3 Mar 1999 20:20:43 -0500 (EST) > Cc: toasters(a)mathworks.com > X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4 PL24 ME5a] > Content-Type: text > Sender: owner-toasters(a)mathworks.com > Content-Length: 1536 > > Kathy Fischer writes: > > > > Can anyone out there recommend an autoloader (DLT type), or warn against any > > for use with the toaster? > > If it doesn't have to be DLT, the Exabyte Mammoth tapes get excellent > performance and are cheaper. I am getting better than 5 Mbytes/sec > continuous xfer, which lets me backup 65 Gigs in about 4 hours > using dump on the filer. This is to an Exabyte F220 autoloader > (10 tapes) running in dumb mode, attached directly to an F720. > > Well almost directly; I have a Rancho differential SCSI to single-ended > converter mashed in between the Exabyte and the F720. I ordered > both the F720 and the Exabyte at the same time and failed to notice > that the 720's come with differential SCSI! I sure croaked that > filer bad when I connected a plain 68pin to 50pin HD SCSI kluge > adapter to it. Kernel fault and core dump. > > Supposedly, BudTool works with the Exabyte too, but I may never be > able to find that out :-) > > On the performance thing: it's important that the filer be able to > get the data rate up high enough to prevent the DLT tapes from > shoe-shining which brings down their effective xfer rate a lot. > I had a DLT4000 drive for a while before I bought the F220 and it > shoe-shined a lot when driven from an F330 filer. It only managed > to do about as well as the 4mm DAT drive it was temporarily replacing. > > I kinda like helical scan technology for that start/stop ability. > > Cheers! > -- > -bmw | Double helix in the sky tonight > | Throw out the hardware > | Let's do it right -- Steely Dan; Aja > Hi, BudTool supports most all libraries that are manufactured. This includes the Exabyte 220. There are a number of DLT libraries with DLT7000 and DLT4000 tape drives in them. In my opinion, DLT is the defacto standard in the industry. Mammoth may be a little cheaper, but was never really accepted widely by the market. The top three Tape Library manufacturers are StorageTek, ATL, and Breece Hill. Any tape library from these manufacturers will give you very good service for the long term. If you go with 8mm technology such as the Mammoth or Sony AIT, then Exabyte or Spectrologics makes excellent tape libraries to fill this nitch. As an aside, the top three Tape Library manufacturers I mentioned above (STK, ATK and BH) decided to only support DLT tape technology for OpenSystems (UNIX) and passed on Mammoth and AIT. Randy Butler System Engineering Supervisor - Western Region PDC Solutions, Inc. phone: 972-446-2644 x15 Systems Engineering Solutions FAX: 972-245-9320 1445 MacArthur Drive, Bldg. 1, Suite 116 Carrollton, TX 75007 E-mail: rbutler(a)pdc.com //////////// //////////// ////////// // /// // // /// // // //// // /// // // /// // /// // /////////// // /// // // // /// // // // /// /// /// //// ///////////// /////////////

1 0

Sun Trunking
by Mohler, Jeff 04 Mar '99

04 Mar '99

Im looking for a reference to the Sun Trunking software..and Im unable to locate so far. Sorry for the off topic, but if anyone has a reference...thanks.

1 0

RE: VIF command
by Mohler, Jeff 04 Mar '99

04 Mar '99

> What switch are you using (mfg/model)? There are many differences in how > load > balancing is implemented. I have even found differences in different > model > switches from the same manufacturer. All that I have seen are based on > MAC > addresses - Either source, destination or a combination. Some mfg's let > you > choose which to use. If your client base is reasonably large with random > MAC > address and equal loads, then the traffic will be balanced. Small client > pools > or most traffic being generated/requested by a few clients can skew the > load. > Some implementations have standby ports in the trunk, which seems like > what you > are seeing. I believe Extreme allocates one port out of the trunk as a > standby. > Perhaps this is configurable. --- Its a FEC blade in a Cisco 5505.

1 0

RE: VIF command
by Naden, Barbara 04 Mar '99

04 Mar '99

What switch are you using (mfg/model)? There are many differences in how load balancing is implemented. I have even found differences in different model switches from the same manufacturer. All that I have seen are based on MAC addresses - Either source, destination or a combination. Some mfg's let you choose which to use. If your client base is reasonably large with random MAC address and equal loads, then the traffic will be balanced. Small client pools or most traffic being generated/requested by a few clients can skew the load. Some implementations have standby ports in the trunk, which seems like what you are seeing. I believe Extreme allocates one port out of the trunk as a standby. Perhaps this is configurable. Barbara -----Original Message----- From: Mohler, Jeff [mailto:jeff.mohler@wilcom.com] Sent: Thursday, March 04, 1999 7:01 AM To: 'Sam Cramer'; Mohler, Jeff Cc: 'toasters(a)mathworks.com' Subject: RE: VIF command > If you unplug one of the busy links, does one of the idle links pick up > the > slack? > > Sam --- Yes, a spare link picks up the dead one, and holds onto it when you restore the dead link.

1 0

Re: 5.2.1 blues
by sirbruce＠ix.netcom.com 04 Mar '99

04 Mar '99

On 03/03/99 08:42:57 you wrote: > >I mean, instead of running 5.1.2P1, P2, D1, D2, D3, D4, D5, D6, or D7 >(deep breath) >I'd like to run 5.1.2 with the patches i feel i'd like to have. I think that's an even worse idea. If you think that Netapp's QA is bad now (and I'm not saying it is), you've just increased their workload exponentially because they have to test each combination of patches to make sure they all work together in whatever combination a user might pick. My experience is that Netapp's patches for specific problems are generally very good, but there always seem to be a couple of large bugs in new releases that many customers run into right away that should have been caught in testing. Bruce

3 2

RE: VIF command
by Mohler, Jeff 04 Mar '99

04 Mar '99

> If you unplug one of the busy links, does one of the idle links pick up > the > slack? > > Sam --- Yes, a spare link picks up the dead one, and holds onto it when you restore the dead link.

1 0

Re: VIF command
by Sam Cramer 04 Mar '99

04 Mar '99

Jeff writes: > I created me a vif interface made up of four 100Mb Ethernet interfaces. > > I see, that only the first two interfaces really do anything, the second two > show no errors, but dont DO anything. It's my understanding that etherchannel switches use a proprietary protocol to distribute load over the links. This protocol often involves a hash of the source and destination addresses. It may be that you have a pattern of access from specific clients that doesn't hash well, and so doesn't distribute the load over all the links. > Im thinking it hasnt reached a 'threshold' to fire up more links. I don't believe that total network load needs to hit a certain threshold in order to use all the links. If you unplug one of the busy links, does one of the idle links pick up the slack? Sam

2 1

RE: NFS 2 -vs-3
by Mohler, Jeff 04 Mar '99

04 Mar '99

Nothing makes me think 2 is -better-, just that I see more "V2 is better" type arguments. Im just ferreting out actual facts *grin* > -----Original Message----- > From: kls(a)netapp.com [SMTP:kls@netapp.com] > Sent: Tuesday, March 02, 1999 10:17 PM > To: jeff.mohler(a)wilcom.com > Cc: toasters(a)mathworks.com > Subject: Re: NFS 2 -vs-3 > > > In a really short list, other than the attribute cache, why is vers 2 > NFS > > better than vers 3? > > What makes you think V2 is better than V3? > > > I will be working with directories with fewer than a dozen LARGE files > on > > each mount. > > With few files per directory, I can't think of anything in favor of > V2, and with large files I can think of various advantages to V3, > larger packet sizes being the major one. > > -- Karl

3 2

Re: Gb-ether and Extreme: closure! :-)
by Bruce Walker 04 Mar '99

04 Mar '99

A very long time ago (mid-November 98), when I got my F720 filer with Gigabit ether, I tried to connect it to an Extreme Summit48, had trouble, contacted NetApp, despite excellent suggestions still had trouble and appealed to this list. Got a few "let us know what happens", but unfortunately no real leads. The story has a happy ending, and here's what did happen. First off: Gigabit on F720 to Summit48 works great. That's settled. Also, with the help I got from NetApp (Mark Smith, Tim McCarthy, David Zwick, Devi Nagaraj, possibly others!), if I had been actually able to concentrate on the problem for more than 30 minutes at a time (and more than 60 minutes per week :-), I might have noticed what was going on earlier. What the problem turned out to be is: on both of the Summit48's I had available to me to test the Gig ether link, the port I was using, always port 50, was missing from any VLAN list. What *that* means is that although the port appeared alive, no packets were ever delivered to that port from any other and it quietly acted as a packet sync for anything received from the filer. Now how did port 50 end up off of all VLANs, on both switches? Simple! Right after I first received my brand new switches, I had trunked the two fiber links on the two Summit48's together, just to see if it would work. I ran fiber from port 49 on one to port 49 on the other and 50 to 50. When the F720 arrived, I moved one fiber link (port 50) from the second Summit48 over to the 720 and unconfigured the trunking. But what happens when you unconfigure a trunked port on a Summit, apparently, is that the port ends up not being on *any* VLAN. The port is "alive" but nothing is routed to or from it. So, I reconfigured the affected ports (put all ports back on the Default VLAN) and the G/B link to the 720 now works just fine. There's still one small "cosmetic" glitch. When the filer comes up, it always reports that the G/B link is up, then right away that it's down. The last console message is always "e8: link down". But it is up (or I couldn't type this mail), so I'm not overly concerned. Do I really need Gigabit ether to an F720? Possibly not. I've only managed to drive the link to 1.5 times the speed of a 100Mbit link so far. But with the prices of Summit48's back when I bought them, I figure the Gig interfaces came for free. Plus, this way I don't have to trunk 100Mbit ether ports and waste good sockets on the switch. And anyway, I'm always adding more clients to load down the filer. That reminds me: has the Progress db been certified yet? -- -bmw | Double helix in the sky tonight | Throw out the hardware | Let's do it right -- Steely Dan; Aja

2 1

newbie asking about autoloaders
by Kathy Fischer 04 Mar '99

04 Mar '99

Hi everyone, I'm brand new to this mail group, and to toasters. We just recently setup our new toaster (720), and we are currently implementing into our environment. Part of this process is developing a backup policy for our toaster, and hooking up an autoloader! Can anyone out there recommend an autoloader (DLT type), or warn against any for use with the toaster? We need to buy one pretty quick, and I want to be sure we get one that won't cause us major headaches :-) !! FYI, we've been looking at the DLT4700, but are unsure which brand to go with. Thanks in advance for any help, Kathy Kathleen G. Fischer Research Systems, Inc. (303)413-3909 kfischer(a)rsinc.com

2 1

RE: Dell Deal
by Strange, Steve 04 Mar '99

04 Mar '99

> From: Dane Jasper [mailto:dane@sonic.net] > > If only the power switch wasn't on the front. We had to tape a half of a > plastic backup tape box on unit to keep someone from pushing the big black > button. You must have an F630 or earlier filer -- your wish came true on the 700-series! Steve

1 0

"5.1.2P2D7"? Whoa, Nelly.
by Brian Rice 03 Mar '99

03 Mar '99

I had no idea that x.y.z.Pm.Dn could exist. So thanks for the tip (sigh). I'm guessing that 5.1.2P2D7 is probably my best bet for a retrograde target, if it comes to that. Any horror stories with that one? I'm not running any cutting-edge hardware...just boring old SCSI shelves (well, one of the F630's is FC). I just want all my filers running the same release, and not panicking when I do a "quota on". It'd be lovely if said release didn't have a name suggestive of a Star Wars droid, but I'll take what I can get. Brian Rice (known to his friends as B2R2)

1 0

Jump to page:

2025

2024

2023

2022

2021

2020

2019

2018

2017

2016

2015

2014

2013

2012

2011

2010

2009

2008

2007

2006

2005

2004

2003

2002

2001

2000

1999

1998

1997

toasters