toasters

toasters@lists.teaparty.net

13520 discussions

Scaling
by chris＠cecil.muscat.com 20 Jul '99

20 Jul '99

I've been doing some benchmarking on our filer (f540, dot4.3r4 256+8, 26 4g discs) and I'm trying to work out how things will scale on more recent filers. For our workload the filer pegs out doing around 1k nfs ops. This is slightly under half the sfs1 results. Is it fair to assume that given that data point that we can just scale the current models sfs2 results down by 1.25 to get the right sort of numbers? I know that sfs1/2 results are different but they do seem to be in the same ballpark. Workload is lots of small random reads which to me says number of spindles is going to be the critical factor which probably won't scale. Chris -- Chris Good - Muscat Ltd. The Westbrook Centre, Milton Rd, Cambridge UK Phone: 01223 715006 Mobile: 07801 788997 http://www.muscat.com

1 0

RE: Backup alternatives (again)
by Mohler, Jeff 19 Jul '99

19 Jul '99

1 0

FW: Backup alternatives (again)
by Yu, David 19 Jul '99

19 Jul '99

Jeff: We are aware that this is a widespread customer need. We have had some preliminary contact with ADSM, but discussions are still in the exploratory stage. Customers are the most effective catalyst in accelerating a joint solution. Please let your ADSM sales reps know of your need. This will reinforce the message that NetApp and ADSM have heard from the field. David -----Original Message----- From: Mohler, Jeff [mailto:jeff.mohler@wilcom.com] Sent: Monday, July 19, 1999 5:39 AM To: toasters(a)mathworks.com Subject: RE: Backup alternatives (again) Ok..it's been a number of months..so it's time to ask my favorite question. ADSM support. Ive lost a truckload of potential Filer placements in our company (other than the four heads I have in clusters now) due to this missing backup ability, and Id like to know if theres an update on this.

1 0

RE: Netapp hang and Security on NT2000b3
by Mohler, Jeff 19 Jul '99

19 Jul '99

One of our customers is doing some evaluations of netapp. While evaluating the new server he was using Windows(NT)2000. He has defined some directories and files on the server from the NT. While/after playing around (setting) with the security features on the just defined files and directories the netapp server will hang. Only reboot of the sever will revive it. The customer claims he can recreate the problem at will. Has anyone encountered such problems. Do any of you have any words of wisdom? The customer dos not like to accept the fact that win2000 is not yet formally supported. he claims that win2000 talks CIFS, and even if MS is doing wrong things at most the filer should complain but for sure not hang... --- Geesh..talk about a loose-loose situation. I would not expect NetApp to spend more than a _few_ man hours on this problem, while they continue to hammer out solid released for solid software platforms. While I agree it should not hang, theres no way to tell what NT2000 feature is not working properly.

1 0

RE: Netapp hang and Security on NT2000b3
by Muhlestein, Mark 19 Jul '99

19 Jul '99

We have fixed a number of issues with Windows 2000 clients. Microsoft completely rewrote the client network redirector for Windows 2000, and it is quite different over the wire. Make sure the customer is running at least Windows 2000 beta 3 as a client, and you should make sure they are using the correct ONTAP version. Contact Netapp customer support to get information on what to use. Mark Muhlestein -- mmm(a)netapp.com -----Original Message----- From: Itzik (Itzhak) Meirson DSc [mailto:imeirson@xpert.com] Sent: Monday, July 19, 1999 10:43 AM To: $netapp Subject: Netapp hang and Security on NT2000b3 One of our customers is doing some evaluations of netapp. While evaluating the new server he was using Windows(NT)2000. He has defined some directories and files on the server from the NT. While/after playing around (setting) with the security features on the just defined files and directories the netapp server will hang. Only reboot of the sever will revive it. The customer claims he can recreate the problem at will. Has anyone encountered such problems. Do any of you have any words of wisdom? The customer dos not like to accept the fact that win2000 is not yet formally supported. he claims that win2000 talks CIFS, and even if MS is doing wrong things at most the filer should complain but for sure not hang... Thanks Itzik

1 0

RE: Backup alternatives (again)
by Mohler, Jeff 19 Jul '99

19 Jul '99

Jeff, do you have NT servers running ADSM? I think last time I looked at this it seemed like you should be able to use ADSM on NT to backup your filers using a CIFS connection to a filer share. See this IBM ADSM FAQ section: --- No, for better or for worse (each to their own..) we are an NT-Free environment. 100% UNIX. And although I can use ADSM via NFS, Id like to keep my application servers running apps, and the filer doing filer things (like backups).

1 0

RE: Backup alternatives (again)
by Muhlestein, Mark 19 Jul '99

19 Jul '99

Jeff, do you have NT servers running ADSM? I think last time I looked at this it seemed like you should be able to use ADSM on NT to backup your filers using a CIFS connection to a filer share. See this IBM ADSM FAQ section: http://www.storage.ibm.com/software/adsm/adfaq.htm#backupnt Note that backing up the UNIX metadata under NT fully captures all filer UNIX metadata, including symbolic links, hard links, block and char devices, etc. And of course it also captures any NT-specific metadata like ACLs. We haven't explicitly tested ADSM on NT from the filer, but all the NT backup programs we have tested have worked fine, so I don't expect any problems. Mark -----Original Message----- From: Mohler, Jeff [mailto:jeff.mohler@wilcom.com] Sent: Monday, July 19, 1999 5:39 AM To: toasters(a)mathworks.com Subject: RE: Backup alternatives (again) Ok..it's been a number of months..so it's time to ask my favorite question. ADSM support. Ive lost a truckload of potential Filer placements in our company (other than the four heads I have in clusters now) due to this missing backup ability, and Id like to know if theres an update on this.

1 0

Another Backup Question
by Jay Orr 19 Jul '99

19 Jul '99

I have another backup question -- we're using our toasters with budtool and currently have a 4700 DLT drive (i.e. dlt 4000 with 7 carts). The support cost on the hardware is ungodly ($2700/yr vs buy a new one for $4-5K) and the vendor (PDC solutions) states that it's because that particular jukebox is costly to repair. So my questions are: 1) Anyone know a good jukebox dealer that I can get a trade in on for something with more slots? 2)Anyone know a good model that's affordable? The only one I see is the ADT L500 (14 slot 1 drive), but I don't know how much more Budtool will charge for more slots... 3) Anyone have an idea which jukeboxes are more costy to have hardware support (and which aren't) ? It seemed like a simple idea, just upgrade the jukebox.... ;) ----------- Fujitsu - Nexion, St. Louis, MO Jay Orr (314) 579-6517

1 0

Allocation of PCI slots for ATM
by Michael Salmon 19 Jul '99

19 Jul '99

We have what will be a cluster that we want to connect to ATM but with a direct fast ethernet connection to a Sun using a QFE card. When the time came to install the ATM cards we noticed that there was a problem with the allocation of slots. If we follow netapp's recommendation then we don't have room for 2 ATM cards and a QFE card as the last FC-AL card is inserted in a 32 bit card slot. We would prefer to use the 3 32 bit slots for QFE and ATM and use one of the slots reserved for Giga bit ethernet for the last FC-AL card but I suspect that we have missed something. We also tried using slot 5 (a 64 bit slot) for an ATM card with no problems so I wonder why they are restricted to slots 1-3, all that I can think of is that slots 4-9 are 66 MHz slots but I can't find anything in the manual. Any comments? /Michael

1 0

RE: Backup alternatives (again)
by Mohler, Jeff 19 Jul '99

19 Jul '99

Ok..it's been a number of months..so it's time to ask my favorite question. ADSM support. Ive lost a truckload of potential Filer placements in our company (other than the four heads I have in clusters now) due to this missing backup ability, and Id like to know if theres an update on this.

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