toasters

toasters@lists.teaparty.net

3 participants
13514 discussions

Need new backup solution
by Brian Hostetter 14 Apr '00

14 Apr '00

Hi, We have been facing some explosive growth during the past 6 months and have grown past our current backup solution. We are currently backing up via a linux box that has our 740 nfs mounted. Backups are taking sometimes 24-30 hours for incrementals and all weekend for fulls. What I am looking for is info on how others are backing up 200G volumes on 740's or 760's. I just purchased a pair of 760's and am going to need a nice stable reliable backup system for them. Ideas? --Brian

8 10

Oracle Parallel Server on Filer?
by Dave Mills 14 Apr '00

14 Apr '00

Filer users, Has anyone implemented OPS on multiple NFS clients? Isn't this the product that would be required if multiple simultaneous updates to the same Oracle instance is needed? Is this a certified solution? How does file and record locking work in an OPS/Filer environment? Dave Mills Cypress Systems, LTD.

3 2

RE: Need new backup solution
by Ernst.Bokkelkamp＠mchh.siemens.de 14 Apr '00

14 Apr '00

Unfortunately this is all just theory. The reality is a bit different. You forgot that every packet on the network has to be processes and transported over multiple busses before it reaches the tape drive. These times add up to quite a bit. I have Gigabit ethernet, I have powerfull backup machines that perform at 20 Mbyte/sec on backup of ordinary Windows NT servers over LAN. These machines backup about 1.5 TB spread over 100+ servers in about 20 hours. But afte many tests the same machine with Gigabit Ethernet has only been able to backup a single filer with 4 volumes @ 139GB at a rate of about 48 GB/Hour.The Gigabit idles at that throughput. The equation that Gigabit is 10x Fast Ethernet does not work on a point-to-point situation. Bye Ernie > -----Original Message----- > From: Jay Orr [SMTP:orrjl@stl.nexen.com] > Sent: Thursday, April 13, 2000 11:22 PM > To: toasters(a)mathworks.com > Subject: RE: Need new backup solution > > On Thu, 13 Apr 2000, Schepers, Jan wrote: > > > Looking at the responses sofar, most of you agree on: > > o directly attached tape devices and > > o the use of NDMP software > > If I may put my 2 cents worth in... > > First of all as I understand NDMP (which isn't that well - feel free to > enlighten me if I'm mistaken) it's just a different standard of dump of > sorts, so other then being able to dump a netapp directly connected tape > drive there is no advantage to using it (i.e. if you're backing up over a > network, same performance of dump vs. NDMP backups). This would put the > two points above together as one. > > Second, direct connect isn't necessarly the fastest - for instance, many > tape drives have throughput of less then 10M Bytes/sec. If you have 100Mb > ethernet, thats ~11M Bytes/sec, so you're getting the same throughput and > the bottleneck is still the tape drive. If you have a seperate "backup" > network of 100Mb ethernet and backup through the network, time is saved if > you use a backup package that interleaves backups (i.e. combines backup > streams) - then the tape drive isn't waiting for one machie to feed it > data. Kick this up to Gigabit and you would outperform the tape drive. > Also, with this method you have less unused backup media and better media > inventory management. > > However, there are things that can affect throughput of networked backups > - NFS latencies, traffic on the ethernet, etc. > > SO, as I see it, there isn't really a quick-and-dirty rule of thumb on > this. The factors that would have to be considered are : > > 1) Tape throughput > 2) Network throughput > 3) Backup software methodology. > > all of these weigh close to equal in the equasion of "what's the best > way to do it", so unfortunately I don't see an easy rule of thumb.. > > Of course, I'm never one to trust an easy answer either - so maybe it's > just me ;p > > ----------- > Jay Orr > Systems Administrator > Fujitsu Nexion Inc. > St. Louis, MO

1 0

Re: Disk-to-disk backups? (was Re: Need new backup solution)
by Bruce Sterling Woodcock 14 Apr '00

14 Apr '00

Not only that, but if a hacker breaks in and all your backups are online, they can just as easily destroy them too. Or they can become corrupted due to a failure. Tapes are much more stable (unless you pass a magnet over them) and you can store them, as you said, offsite. Snapshots are great for near-term recovery, and mirrors are even good for single-point disasters, but you always want tapes available in the event of a catastrophe. Bruce

3 2

Re: Disk-to-disk backups? (was Re: Need new backup solution)
by Fred Ab 13 Apr '00

13 Apr '00

If your place burns down you are not just down but out of business. Tapes are tangible and can be stored offsite. ===}From: Bennett Todd <bet(a)rahul.net> ===}To: toasters(a)mathworks.com ===}Subject: Disk-to-disk backups? (was Re: Need new backup solution) ===}Date: Thu, 13 Apr 2000 13:13:15 -0700 ===}Mime-Version: 1.0 ===} ===}I'm curious about something here. ===} ===}First, some background. I recently set up a backup system I really, ===}really like. It's on a Linux fileserver, no netapps in this ===}picture. It's backing up c. 60GB of disk, a single root drive and a ===}50GB RAID-5 with a hot spare, to another RAID-5 set, about 130GB, ===}with no hot spare. I have a cronjob set to email me if a drive drops ===}out of the set. I backup with a script that replicates all the ===}data to be saved onto the backup raid set, using rsync, with the ===}--backup-dir option to save anything that's been changed or deleted; ===}then it takes all those changed-or-deleted files and bzip2s them ===}into timestamped archives. When the backup partition gets over ===}90% full it commences deleting those bzip2-ed archives, starting ===}with the oldest, until it's back down under 80% full. This gives me ===}months of coverage and I never have to change a tape, and the cost ===}of the drives is less than the cost of a suitable capacity tape ===}drive to back up 60GB of data. ===} ===}So anyway, enough with background, the question is, how come I don't ===}hear anyone advocating using Netapp's snapshots as a backup ===}strategy? Netapps don't lose data; it's not like WAFL or Netapp's ===}RAID or any other bits are so bug-ridden that they don't do their ===}job. ===} ===}And you can buy a _Load_ of drives for what a heavy-duty ===}industrial-strength DLT jukebox costs. Especially when you factor ===}in the setup time, and the re-setup time every time it breaks. The ===}Exabyte 8200 was the only tape drive I ever set up that didn't die ===}before I switched jobs; seems like MTBF for a drive writing a tape ===}a day is well under a year, at least in my experience in the last 6 ===}years or so. Bleech. ===} ===}-Bennett

1 0

Sybase & Netapps
by Derek Kelly 13 Apr '00

13 Apr '00

Not too long ago I remember seeing someone out there who was planning to store Sybase data on Netapps. I wonder if that person (or others) could share the outcome of this project with the list. We are beginning to jump into this arena and are looking for feasibility and potential pitfall info before we begin. The setup will be data from Compaq Alpha ES40's and/or DS20's with DEC Unix 4.0 running Sybase 11.9.2 through a Cisco Catalyst 6509 to a Netapp F760 with gigabit nic's installed at each end of the pipe. I have seen documentation related to using Oracle in such a fashion, but not much on Sybase. We will be doing the same setup with Oracle so any info in that area will be much appreciated as well. Cheers, Derek Kelly www.genomecorp.com

1 0

Quotas: Hard, Soft, and Time limits?
by Timothy Demarest 13 Apr '00

13 Apr '00

Does DOT support soft and hard quotas? How about time limits? From everything I've searched, it looks like it only supports hard limits. Regards, Tim -- Timothy Demarest ArrayComm, Inc. demarest(a)arraycomm.com 2480 N. 1st Street, Suite 200 http://www.arraycomm.com San Jose, CA 95131

4 4

F740 Quad card performance
by Laurent Aymeric 13 Apr '00

13 Apr '00

I've a F740 running 5.3.4R3 with a Matrox Quad card connected on a CISCO 5509 (trunking mode) I've create a vif in multi mode. I've selected on my network 4 clients (HP running 10.20) using each a separated port on the quad card thanks to their MAC address (best case). Everybody is 100 Meg Full Duplex configured (no autoneg). The test I run is copying a 100 Mb file from each client to the filer, and the perf I've got are: Hostname: eauze Bytes: 104857600 Elapsed time: 43.281 (043281 msec), KBytes/s = 2365.93 Hostname: mimizan Bytes: 104857600 Elapsed time: 44.328 (044328 msec), KBytes/s = 2310.05 Hostname: orlu Bytes: 104857600 Elapsed time: 40.493 (040493 msec), KBytes/s = 2528.83 Hostname: tarascon Bytes: 104857600 Elapsed time: 41.819 (041819 msec), KBytes/s = 2448.65 The NFS calls/s varies from 200 to 1800 only during the copies. It seems that all the ports "share" a 10 Mb bandwith (peak I reach with a single client test). Can I expect more from such a configuration? PS: We got many "Bus overruns" errors on each interfaces.

1 0

RE: Need new backup solution
by Mikkel Kjær Andersen 13 Apr '00

13 Apr '00

Hi John We're looking for a way to implement backup of our NetApp (F740) Files in our current NetWorker backup solution (Legato). Are you using ClientPak for NetApp? Or are you just backing up the files via an NFS share? And are you utilizing the snapshot function? And if yes - how? Regards, Mikkel Kjær Andersen System Administrator Tele Danmark Internet -----Original Message----- From: John Stoffel [mailto:john@casc.com] Sent: 13. april 2000 00:20 To: Brian Hostetter Cc: toasters(a)mathworks.com Subject: Re: Need new backup solution We're currently using Legato Networker (Solstice Backup actually) 5.1 to backup NetApps that have been NFS mounted to the backup servers, which have ATL jukeboxes with dual DLT7000 in them. It works well on the server that's an Ultra 2 with dual 300Mhz CPUs. The other one is slow because it's just a Sparc 20 with Dual CPUs. Haven't had the chance to replace it yet.

1 0

RE: Need new backup solution
by Melvin, Grant 12 Apr '00

12 Apr '00

Hi Brian, You may also want to take a quick look at a white paper on the external NetApp web page. "Data Protection Strategies for Network Appliance Filers" at: http://www.netapp.com/tech_library/3066.html Cheers, Grant -----Original Message----- From: Mohler, Jeff [mailto:jeff.mohler@netapp.com] Sent: Wednesday, April 12, 2000 12:49 PM To: 'Brian Hostetter'; toasters(a)mathworks.com Subject: RE: Need new backup solution Brian: You might want to consider quota-trees within your large volumes, then you can do backups of different quota-trees within a single volume separately..that is if your application leaves you stuck to a single-large-volume approach. -----Original Message----- From: Brian Hostetter [mailto:BrianH@dice.com] Sent: Wednesday, April 12, 2000 12:24 PM To: toasters(a)mathworks.com Subject: Need new backup solution Hi, We have been facing some explosive growth during the past 6 months and have grown past our current backup solution. We are currently backing up via a linux box that has our 740 nfs mounted. Backups are taking sometimes 24-30 hours for incrementals and all weekend for fulls. What I am looking for is info on how others are backing up 200G volumes on 740's or 760's. I just purchased a pair of 760's and am going to need a nice stable reliable backup system for them. Ideas? --Brian

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