toasters

toasters@lists.teaparty.net

13520 discussions

Backing up a filer
by Greg Wong 06 Jan '00

06 Jan '00

Hi all, I'm kind of new to the this filer business and I have a question about backing it up. We have an F720 on site that isn't doing much since we aren't backing it up. I need some options on how to do this. We currently back up our other systems vith Veritas Netbackup and a tape library. Now, my question(s) is if I want to use Veritas to back up the filer using NDMP, do I have to dedicate a drive on the remote tape library to the filer? Will the filer support a locally attached library, and if it does, does Veritas control the library or does the filer? Thanks for your help Greg

1 0

Re: Sun Client Maximum Throughputs (again)
by sthaug＠nethelp.no 06 Jan '00

06 Jan '00

> Ah, interesting... I never considered whether DOT's stack > supported the RFC1323 TCP extensions, but that might be part of the > reason why my FreeBSD desktop (which turns on 1323 and 1644 by > default) always seems to outrun much more expensive Sparc servers for > network throughput, and with a lower CPU hit. FreeBSD *did* turn on these by default. It no longer does. You want to check the following sysctl variables: net.inet.tcp.rfc1323 net.inet.tcp.rfc1644 Steinar Haug, Nethelp consulting, sthaug(a)nethelp.no

2 1

RE: CIFS and NTFS
by Bond, Andrew 06 Jan '00

06 Jan '00

You should liase with NetApp tech support on this, but briefly: > 1) Do I need to put our CIFS server in an NT domain to use NTFS ACLS ? > Our CIFS server is currently in a workgroup and is not seen > by NT client as an > NTFS server, but as a FAT server. Yes - you need the filer to be in an NT domain. > 2) I tried to move the CIFS in our NT domain, and it failed. > I get this message > : > Could not register CIFS group name DOMAIN: Another machine > already has that > name. Chances are there was a problem with the syntax you were using. "cifs testdc" is a useful tool, but you'll need to shut down cifs before you test a different domain using it. Support will be able to help with this. Thanks and best regards, Andrew Bond Network Appliance UK Systems Engineer Waterview House, 1 Roundwood Avenue, tel +44 (0)20-8756-6722 Stockley Park, mobile +44 (0)7801-383566 Middlesex, UB11 1EJ fax +44 (0)20-8756-6701 http//www.netapp.com Get answers NOW! - NetApp On the Web - http//now.netapp.com Privileged/Confidential Information may be contained in this message. If you are not the addressee indicated in this message (or responsible for delivery of the message to such person), you may not copy or deliver this message to anyone. In such case, you should destroy this message and kindly notify the sender by reply email. Please advise immediately if you or your employer does not consent to Internet email for messages of this kind. Opinions, conclusions and other information in this message that do not relate to the official business of my company shall be understood as neither given nor endorsed by it.

1 0

CIFS and NTFS
by Laurent Blain 06 Jan '00

06 Jan '00

Hello, I try to reconfigure our CIFS server to get NTFS features (ACLs). I've moved qtree security attribute from unix to mixed. But I still have two problems : 1) Do I need to put our CIFS server in an NT domain to use NTFS ACLS ? Our CIFS server is currently in a workgroup and is not seen by NT client as an NTFS server, but as a FAT server. 2) I tried to move the CIFS in our NT domain, and it failed. I get this message : Could not register CIFS group name DOMAIN: Another machine already has that name. There is no other machine with the same name in this DOMAIN, PDC and BDC are running and other servers (NT stations and SAMBA servers) register fine in the DOMAIN. Finally, I tried to move the server in another NT domain with less servers and it works... Any idea. Thanks. Laurent ----------------------------------------------------------- Laurent Blain Tel. (+33) 5 61 33 69 39 LAAS-CNRS Fax. (+33) 5 61 33 64 47 7, Av du Colonel Roche E-mail: blain(a)laas.fr 31077 Toulouse Cedex 4 - FRANCE -----------------------------------------------------------

1 0

Re: Sun Client Maximum Throughputs (again)
by Darrell Fuhriman 06 Jan '00

06 Jan '00

mds(a)gbnet.net (mark) writes: > Heh. Have you been extra careful balancing your sbus/pci cards? > What tape units do you use? What host adaptors too? Not *extra* careful. We put 2 DLT7000's per bus, and we're using the Dual Port differential controller sold by sun, I think it's the 6514A. > Did you try IBM's, SGI's or HP's, out of sheer curiosity..? The HP V-class was able to feed us about 55MB/s. I think the CPU load was higher on the HP than the Sun, though of course it had a lot more CPUs to burn. :) Darrell

1 0

Re: Sun Client Maximum Throughputs (again)
by mds＠gbnet.net 06 Jan '00

06 Jan '00

On Wed 7 Jan, 1930, Darrell Fuhriman <darrell(a)grumblesmurf.net> wrote: > Brian Tao <taob(a)risc.org> writes: > > > Do you find that with 2 x 400-MHz CPU's that you have enough > > cycles to stream 600 Mbps off the gigabit ethernet and sustain high > > throughput to your tape drives? > > Yep, plenty. :) Of course, in our testing we've found that Sun > does much better at this than other platforms, say DEC, which > just crapped itself entirely. :) <nosey> Heh. Have you been extra careful balancing your sbus/pci cards? What tape units do you use? What host adaptors too? Did you try IBM's, SGI's or HP's, out of sheer curiosity..? </nosey> > Darrell >-- End of excerpt from Darrell Fuhriman -- -Mark ... an Englishman in London ...

1 0

Re: Sun Client Maximum Throughputs (again)
by Darrell Fuhriman 06 Jan '00

06 Jan '00

mds(a)gbnet.net (mark) writes: > These two do what? > > ndd -set /dev/ge adv_pauseTX 0 > > ndd -set /dev/ge adv_pauseRX 0 Disable Link Level Flow Control. According to the docs, you shouldn't need to muck with them (TX defaults to 0, RX to 1) unless you're silly and aren't using your Gb card in the 66Mhz slot. I think the concept is of LLFC is silly when you're using only TCP like we are, hence the forcibly disabling. > Much bigger buffers than I got for 100Mb/s networks, makes sense. Have you > found these value by experiment or otherwise? > > ndd -set /dev/tcp tcp_recv_hiwat 262144 > > ndd -set /dev/tcp tcp_xmit_hiwat 262144 Honest truth is, I can't remember. I think it was a combination of chats with sun, and our own experimenting. > How come this is set so low? > > ndd -set /dev/tcp tcp_xmit_lowat 2048 That's actually the default on 2.6, maybe it's a hold over from earlier OS revs? > How do each of these three things affect things? > > ndd -set /dev/tcp tcp_wscale_always 1 This enables the wscale option. ;) Essentially it allows the window size to exceed the original TCP default of 64k. I suspect it also puts a minimum size of 64k on the window size as a side effect. > > ndd -set /dev/tcp tcp_tstamp_always 1 This places a (sender determined) timestamp in each packet, which is simply returned to it by the receiver in the ACK. The result of this is that you get more accurate RTT calculations. This means fewer unnecessary retransmits, and better congestion control in fat pipes. > > ndd -set /dev/tcp tcp_rexmit_interval_max 60000 I'm not sure why this is set to what it is (it's 1/4 of the default), we put it in at Sun's recommendation. Docs say: If you are running your Solaris 2.6 system with a large TCP window and you experience slowdowns during high network traffic, you should decrease the TCP default maximum retransmission timeout interval variable Which doesn't help much. :) Darrell

1 0

Re: Sun Client Maximum Throughputs (again)
by Darrell Fuhriman 06 Jan '00

06 Jan '00

Brian Tao <taob(a)risc.org> writes: > Do you find that with 2 x 400-MHz CPU's that you have enough > cycles to stream 600 Mbps off the gigabit ethernet and sustain high > throughput to your tape drives? Yep, plenty. :) Of course, in our testing we've found that Sun does much better at this than other platforms, say DEC, which just crapped itself entirely. :) Darrell

1 0

Can a C720 take a 4GB controller and shelf?
by Jaye Mathisen 06 Jan '00

06 Jan '00

I'm eyeballing swapping the FCAL drives on my new 720 with the 4GB shelves on my 630's and 540's, to get the higher cap drives on the 630. I don't think I can put FCAl on the 540, so it's a moot point. Just thinking about it. Have a spare 720, so I can always try it I guess.

1 0

Re: Sun Client Maximum Throughputs (again)
by Darrell Fuhriman 06 Jan '00

06 Jan '00

mds(a)gbnet.net (mark) writes: > What I'm thinking of is that AFAICR tcp_xmit_hiwat and tcp_recv_hiwat > are set to 8192 (bytes) and the equivalent *lowat's to 2048. This is We're using this on our 2x400 MHz E450's and we see ~60MB/s using switched gigabit. ndd -set /dev/ge adv_1000fdx_cap 1 ndd -set /dev/ge adv_1000hdx_cap 0 ndd -set /dev/ge adv_1000autoneg_cap 0 ndd -set /dev/ge adv_pauseTX 0 ndd -set /dev/ge adv_pauseRX 0 ndd -set /dev/tcp tcp_recv_hiwat 262144 ndd -set /dev/tcp tcp_xmit_hiwat 262144 ndd -set /dev/tcp tcp_xmit_lowat 2048 ndd -set /dev/tcp tcp_wscale_always 1 ndd -set /dev/tcp tcp_tstamp_always 1 ndd -set /dev/tcp tcp_rexmit_interval_max 60000 Note these are dedicated backup servers, so the very high tcp_X_hiwait may not be appropriate if you're not doing lots of bulk data transfer. The tcp_tstamp_always is a big win. Darrell

3 2

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