toasters

toasters@lists.teaparty.net

1 participants
13515 discussions

New Bundled DS4243 Shelves
by Brian Beaulieu 15 Jan '13

15 Jan '13

I received our order of a new FAS3250 along with a 7 shelves. I want to use the shelves on our FAS3240 for now. We'll be doing a head swap in the future. I got 5 of the shelves attached today and then realized they were all owned by the FAS3250 that we got. On top of that, it looks like all disks are in an aggregate. I suspect this because I forced disk ownership of drive 0 on one of the shelves and it imported aggr0 but then renamed it to aggr0(1) and put it offline. I tried the same thing with drive 0 of another shelf and that imported aggr0(2) and put it offline. So, what's the best way to handle this? disk reassign ? My fear is if I import 144 drives using 'disk assign <disk> -s <sysid>-f', I will end up with 144 aggr0(X) offline aggregates and then have to clean all of that up. Once the headswap is done, the FAS3240 along with the other 2 remaining shelves will be going to our DR site and I imagine I'll be doing a fresh install of OnTAP on there since there will be no root vol Thanks! Brian

2 2

When is 1Tb == 1000Gb == 1000^2Mb == 1000^3Kb == 1000^4bytes ?
by Fletcher Cocquyt 13 Jan '13

13 Jan '13

This came up when I was doing some work with our new backup vendor's API, pulling out their backup numbers all reported in bytes and converting to Gb or Tb for our cacti graphs. set bytes=7696581394432 echo $bytes bytes = `echo $bytes"/1024/1024/1024/1024" | bc` Tb 7696581394432 bytes = 7 Tb But the numbers on the vendors dashboard were different. I asked vendor support and the next day they confirmed (as I suspected) they were converting using powers of 10 But what I did not know, was this was on purpose due to the disk manufacturer's convention: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hard_disk_drive#Units For someone with a computer science background this was surprising to not have uniform definitions of units across media Ram manufacturers don't do this according to the article they use (do Flash or SSD makers?) So if I have full 1Tb RAM drive and try to copy it to a 1Tb HDD, it won't fit - I'll need 9.95% more space due to the different definitions of Tb Made me wonder what the Netapp reporting tools, OpsMgr, System Manager, DFM etc do when reporting the #bytes available on a HDD as Tb do they do binary or decimal conversions? What are some other implications of the unit definition difference? thanks

4 3

CIFS Proxy
by Steven Kreuzer 11 Jan '13

11 Jan '13

Greetings- I have a remote office that is a mix of Windows and Unix clients that have to access a filer far away in our main office. For the unix folks, we have deployed a flexcache and their quality of life has greatly improved. It looks like NetApp doesn't offer any type of flexcache type solution for CIFS so I am look at other options. Are there any flexcache like solutions from a 3rd party that people have deployed and is anyone using a tcp accelerator appliance such as Riverbed to speed to access to a volume via CIFS? At this point, I am open to just about any solution :) Thanks

6 5

Where does the "125L" come fromin diskname 0c.125L72 (when using ATTO FC-to-SAS bridges)
by Filip Sneppe 10 Jan '13

10 Jan '13

Hi, This is perhaps a bit of a silly question, but a customer of ours asked this , and I am not able to provide him with a full answer. On a FAS system with ATTO FC-to-SAS bridges, a disk is identified by a name like this 0c.125L72. On a V-series system, you may encounter disks names such as "fcswitchname:17.126L31". This link: https://library.netapp.com/ecmdocs/ECMP1147535/html/GUID-6F23FBA1-07DC-4CF1… explains the 125L and 126L are device IDs, but can anyone give me a little more information on what they represent, how they are set etc. Thanks in advance, Filip

1 0

Latency reporting
by Peta Thames 04 Jan '13

04 Jan '13

Hi and happy new year to you all! My first conundrum of 2013... Anyone got any ideas on how I get the amount of time in any given time period that overall FCP read/write latency has been above a certain threshold? The threshold is already set in perf advisor and has been for some time. I have the usual free opsmanager tools to hand, plus Balance. I know there are other performance metrics I can and do look at, however for this report I have very explicitly been asked to find something that can be expressed as a percentage, and so far this is the best I can come up with (% of time in a month spent over the threshold). Any other ideas would be welcome though. Thanks, Peta

3 2

BURT 519766 panic on production 3270
by Fletcher Cocquyt 02 Jan '13

02 Jan '13

Happy 2013! One of our production 3270 heads panic'ed and rebooted 3:30 am Dec 25 - lump of coal ? The good news is, when our system panic'ed and rebooted, the failover performed as expected so we had only a 2 second timeout logged on our ESXi hosts, Oracle - no downtime. There is scarce public info on this issue and Netapp is recommending options from "do nothing - (its rare and may never happen again)" to "replace motherboards and all cards" Our 3270 clusters (we have 2 in Active:Standby mode) have been stable since we installed them in Feb 2011. We are on 8.1GA - Netapp support says the issue is independent of OnTAP version. Anyone else encountered this issue? What was your action and outcome? thanks, Fletcher Cocquyt Stanford University School of Medicine

2 1

Aggregate Best Practices
by Ray Van Dolson 28 Dec '12

28 Dec '12

We're revisiting how we set up our aggregates and I want to see how others out there do it. Specifically, what strategies do you use for ensuring certain key applications or environments get the performance they need in a shared environment. Typcially we'll create large aggregates based on a homogeneous disk type. 15K SAS disks in one aggregate, SATA in another. In some cases when it's only a single type of disk, we'd have 60 15K disks in one aggregate and 60 in other (assigned to each controller respectively). The idea here is that more spindles gives us the most performance. However, some applications/workloads are more important than others, and some can be "bullies" impacting the important stuff. Ideally we'd try and keep our OLTP random workloads on one filer and heavy sequential workloads on another (maybe dedicated). We've also been discussing creating multiple, smaller aggregates that we then assign to specific workloads guaranteting those spindles for those workloads. Lower possible maximum performance, but better protection against "bullies"[1]. I also know ONTAP has some I/O QoS options. I'm less inclined to go that direction however. Our workloads tend to be ESX VM's using the filers as NFS datastores. We have the usual budgetary / purchasing cycle constraints, so trying to minimize pain for as long as possible until we can add resources. How do folks out there handle this? Thanks, Ray [1] Controller obviously still is shared.

6 8

question about NDMP dumps
by Scott Eno 21 Dec '12

21 Dec '12

In investigating why an NDMP dump over 10GbE isn't going as fast as it seems it should, a question arose. Does the data being dumped via netbackup to a data domain device, 1.58TB deduped down to 813GB, have to get re-hydrated as the dump proceeds? And, if so, would that impact the speed of the dump?

3 4

Moving to 64bit aggrs
by Steven Kreuzer 21 Dec '12

21 Dec '12

Greetings- On our primary filer we are running 8.0.3p2 and I have a 11TB 32bit aggregate that is close to running out of space. I would like to move this volume, along with all its snapshots to a new 64bit aggregate. >From my research, it looks like if I was running 8.1 I could either upgrade the aggr in place, or do a vol move from a 32bit 64bit aggr. In 8.0.3, do I have any options like this? I would really like to avoid using rsync to copy over a snapshot and take a snapshot on the destination, wash rinse repeat. Many Thanks

4 3

8.1.1 RLW Performance Trouble, 8.1.2 issues?
by Randy Rue 12 Dec '12

12 Dec '12

Hello All, After a few months of planning and preparation we were just about to pull the trigger on an 8.1.1 upgrade to our v3170 currently running 7.3.5.1P5 with a 3Par T800 spinning 528 SATA spindles. We've crawled through release notes and upgrade notes, used the online "upgrade advisor" tools, checked this list and engaged our NetApp SE. Tested against a simulator , killed a chicken at midnight of the full moon, etc. Then last week one of our admins found this link and asked in passing if this issue was relevant to our situation: Data Ontap 8.1 upgrade - RLW_Upgrading process and other issues https://communities.netapp.com/thread/22676 Looks like upgrading to 8.1x implements a new layer of protection called RLW (RAID protection from Lost Writes). This requires the addition of some metadata to the disk system and after upgrade a background process "rlw_update" runs for some period of time. The trouble is, this process does not "nice" itself as it's meant to when other processes are running. Worse, if it runs at the same time as other "not so nice" processes like de-dupe there can be disastrous performance issues. This problem is exacerbated if disk utilization is high, or if slower disks are used, or if a lot of misaligned traffic is running. Users in the wild have reported the rlw_update process taking several weeks and horrible performance issues during its tenure. Yike, I'm just glad we found out about this now and not Monday morning. Our filer consistently runs ~90% disk utilization, is usually running two or three de-dupe processes, is running on SATA disks, and one node does nothing but serve up NFS datastores to our VMware farm which we suspect is running mostly misaligned VMDK files. So now we've postponed the upgrade. We'll need to retest against 8.1.2 (or later). We're averse to get too eager to upgrade to 8.1.2 until it's been out a while, especially as NetApp seems to be on a roll lately, releasing new versions to address performance issues that then seem have performance issues. We're also concerned about upgrading to any new version while the system is heavily loaded (we're also in the process of deploying a new block-level storage system that will offload more than half of the current performance load on the v3170). So. This post is intended first as a heads-up to anyone in a similar situation who's about upgrade to 8.1.1. Another takeaway might be to acknowledge the value of the official NetApp Communities pages: I've usually relied on this toasters list and/or our NetApp/VAR technical staff, but will also be following the "official" user community resources from now on. And I also welcome any feedback from anyone with experience or information to offer. Anyone been in this situation? Anyone running 8.1.2 yet? Anyone have advice on upgrading a significantly busy system? Hope to hear from you, Randy Rue Seattle

4 3

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