toasters

toasters@lists.teaparty.net

13520 discussions

na_syslogd question
by Jay Soffian 10 Aug '99

10 Aug '99

syslogd automagically rotates the /etc/messages file weekly. If I setup the syslog.conf to log to other files, will those also be automagically rotated? If not, can I just rotate those files out from under syslogd and it will take notice and re-open the logs? I found lots of info about log rotation up on NOW. I didn't find the answer to this question in either the man pages or on NOW, but maybe I missed something. j. -- Jay Soffian <jay(a)cimedia.com> UNIX Systems Engineer 404.572.1941 Cox Interactive Media

3 2

RE: na_syslogd question
by Hackworth, Brian 09 Aug '99

09 Aug '99

: syslogd automagically rotates the /etc/messages file weekly. If I : setup the syslog.conf to log to other files, will those also be : automagically rotated? No. The magic works only for /etc/messages. : If not, can I just rotate those files out from : under syslogd and it will take notice and re-open the logs? Yes. The ONTAP syslog actually closes the messages files after writing each message, so moving the files around shouldn't mess things up. Hope this helps. - Brian

1 0

Re: SUMMARY: Off Subject: Net App Mailing List
by sirbruce＠ix.netcom.com 07 Aug '99

07 Aug '99

>The list is: toasters(a)mathworks.com. To subscribe: Sending email to >lists(a)mathworks.com with 'subscribe toasters' as the body of the email. > >Marc Summers has different suggestion: > >As long as you are considering file servers >I would seriously consider MDL corp. >They are the Mother of Network Appliance and have a similar >file server for about half the price, and it is rich with >features, and is more flexable than the Network Appliance filer. MDL Corp is not the mother of Network Appliance in this universe or any other alternate universe. Bruce

1 0

.
by Daniel Serna 07 Aug '99

07 Aug '99

subscribe toasters

1 0

Ebay..
by Mohler, Jeff 06 Aug '99

06 Aug '99

Ya know, I bet you could sell a LOT of Filers down road with Ebay tomorrow... Six hours and the 'warm backup' isnt online yet. With my filers..and by hand, thats been a 10 minute procedure (including getting out of bed).

3 2

ok, I'm curious
by fubar＠mathworks.com 06 Aug '99

06 Aug '99

I go out to a last-day lunch for ~90 minutes. I get back and seemingly half the world has subscribed (or tried) to the toasters list. So I'm curious... where was it just announced ? :-) K.

4 3

SUMMARY: Off Subject: Net App Mailing List
by grdodson＠lexmark.com 06 Aug '99

06 Aug '99

The following went out on sun-managers today...... Graydon Dodson ----- Begin Included Message ----- From sun-managers-relay(a)sunmanagers.ececs.uc.edu Fri Aug 6 14:55:38 1999 Date: Thu, 5 Aug 1999 21:49:49 -0700 (PDT) From: Ping Wei <wei(a)sfo.erg.sri.com> Subject: SUMMARY: Off Subject: Net App Mailing List To: sun-managers(a)sunmanagers.ececs.uc.edu Hi, Thanks to Bernhard Weinelt mgx(a)spruce.lsd.ornl.gov Darren Dunham The list is: toasters(a)mathworks.com. To subscribe: Sending email to lists(a)mathworks.com with 'subscribe toasters' as the body of the email. Marc Summers has different suggestion: As long as you are considering file servers I would seriously consider MDL corp. They are the Mother of Network Appliance and have a similar file server for about half the price, and it is rich with features, and is more flexable than the Network Appliance filer. Check out www.mdlcorp.com I think you will be very pleased. ------------- Original Question ------------- Hi, Sorry this is off subject. I have seen couple of discussion about Network Appliance File Server. Does anybody know any mailing list regarding Net App Servers? Thanks. -- Ping Wei wei(a)erg.sri.com ------------- End ------------- ----- End Included Message -----

1 0

Re: Disk death rate by usage pattern
by sirbruce＠ix.netcom.com 06 Aug '99

06 Aug '99

On 08/06/99 14:44:03 you wrote: > >"Soren S. Jorvang" <soren(a)t.dk> writes: > >> For instance, I wouldn't be surprised if parity disks had different >> failure patterns than data disks. > > >Interesting, the disks I have seen the *least* ammount of failures >has been on the parity drive. Usually, any new generation of drives >has some issues that need to be shaken out, so the first few months >proove to have higher infant-mortality-rates for (new) drives. In my experience, parity drives were the most likely to fail, although the ratio of failures of parity:data may have been as slim as 3:2. Most failures were *not* correlated with load, mainly because Netapp load tests all the drives before selling them, and any such failures are usually seen within the first few days. So you're left with fairly normal disks that just decide to fail whenever in the middle of the night just to annoy you. :) The exception would be a greater chance of a failure during the intense load caused during disk reconstruction, but mainly that was due, I think, to a priori problems with the disk that went undetected. RAID scrubbing took care of that issue for the most part. This is just my experience. I'm sure Netapp has data on all of their parts and their relative failure rates; this would also address the earlier question about NIC failures. (BTW, I agree with the general consensus that the onboard NIC seems to be the most likely to fail among various models.) They might be willing to share it if you ask them (probably under NDA). Bruce

1 0

Re: Disk death rate by usage pattern
by alexei＠mindspring.net 06 Aug '99

06 Aug '99

"Soren S. Jorvang" <soren(a)t.dk> writes: > For instance, I wouldn't be surprised if parity disks had different > failure patterns than data disks. Interesting, the disks I have seen the *least* ammount of failures has been on the parity drive. Usually, any new generation of drives has some issues that need to be shaken out, so the first few months proove to have higher infant-mortality-rates for (new) drives. YMMV. Alex

1 0

Disk death rate by usage pattern
by Soren S. Jorvang 06 Aug '99

06 Aug '99

Hi, I was idly wondering if you (the NetApp guys) have statistics on which disk usage patterns in filers are most likely to cause disks to die or fail otherwise. For instance, I wouldn't be surprised if parity disks had different failure patterns than data disks. -- Soren

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