toasters

toasters@lists.teaparty.net

13520 discussions

RE: name lookup debugging?
by Mohler, Jeff 23 Mar '99

23 Mar '99

Ive had this problem before too..and my only solution was a reboot. BIND on the box has done some really funky things for me..occasionally. ...maybe twice in a year. But the Filer will be the only device out of dozens/hundreds reporting any problems. > -----Original Message----- > From: Jim Davis [SMTP:jdavis@CS.Arizona.EDU] > Sent: Tuesday, March 23, 1999 2:06 PM > To: toasters(a)mathworks.com > Subject: name lookup debugging? > > I'm getting some odd messages from one of our filers > > [mountd]: DNS server for domain "CS.Arizona.EDU" not responding: > Connection timed out. > > The nameserver it's trying to contact as per /etc/resolv.conf seems to be > up and happy. No obvious network problems between here and there, though > our campus router people were playing permute-the-configuration earlier. > > Is there something that can be turned on on the netapp side to get more > details about what the filer is doing, name-lookup-wise?

1 0

One tape *drive* supported on 5.1.2???
by Kelly Wyatt 23 Mar '99

23 Mar '99

We have just been informed by Network Appliance that only *one* tape *drive* per adapter is supported on 5.1.2. (We have been running with 1 adapter/2 drives since August on 4.3 and then 5.0 and now on 5.1.2 since we upgraded.) Was anyone else aware of this? This came about due to a call we placed when removing a stuck tape rebooted the filer... ------- Kelly Wyatt, saskww(a)wnt.sas.com <mailto:saskww@wnt.sas.com> Integrated Solutions Consulting SAS Institute Inc. / SAS Campus Drive / Cary, NC 27513 (919) 677-8000 X4279 (Voice) / (919) 677-4444 (FAX) http://www.sas.com <http://www.sas.com>

1 0

NVRAM PCI cards
by Daniel Quinlan 23 Mar '99

23 Mar '99

Does anyone know who makes the NVRAM cards used by NetApp (for F630 and earlier)? No, I'm not looking to put this into one of my NetApps, but I am looking for a PCI card with some sort of non-volatile RAM that I can purchase. Ideally, some sort of battery-backed RAM -- not flash. - Dan

5 4

Re: NVRAM PCI cards
by mds＠gbnet.net 23 Mar '99

23 Mar '99

You could always give solid state disk a try - fibre channel or SCSI connection and capacities from jsut over a hundred MB to about 17GB are available. A 17GB battery backed solid state RAM drive would cost about 250,000 USD though.. 8)

1 0

RE: NVRAM PCI cards
by Packer, Gary 23 Mar '99

23 Mar '99

I believe the NVRAM card used in the EISA system was designed by a company called PEP, I don't know if they offer a PCI version. Since the F330 series, we have used our own proprietary design of NVRAM. -----Original Message----- From: guy(a)netapp.com [mailto:guy@netapp.com] Sent: Monday, March 22, 1999 7:02 PM To: quinlan(a)transmeta.com Cc: toasters(a)mathworks.com Subject: Re: NVRAM PCI cards > Does anyone know who makes the NVRAM cards used by NetApp (for F630 > and earlier)? Network Appliance, Inc.. (Well, they're probably actually *manufactured* by Solectron or some other contract manufacturer, but they're *not* an off-the-shelf part we buy from somebody else.) The NVRAM card used on the EISA filers came, as I was told, from a company that had an ISA NVRAM card - we had them design an EISA version. If they're still around, they may have a PCI card; I don't remember the name of the company, but I can ask around....

1 0

Re: NetApp/Auspex killer?
by Arvind K Aggarwal 23 Mar '99

23 Mar '99

> > > It all boils down to the words "disaster" and "recovery" being > > subjective.... > > > > And the "official" meanings change between the time you show > > management a price tag and when the data center catches on fire. :) > > > > > > jason > --- > > *laugh* > > Good one! > Until the data center catches fire and the same folks wanna know why *YOU* did not tell them the whole truth. I agree with jason, I just like to put in every caveat possible to cma. Arvind

1 0

RE: NetApp/Auspex killer?
by Mohler, Jeff 23 Mar '99

23 Mar '99

> It all boils down to the words "disaster" and "recovery" being > subjective.... > > And the "official" meanings change between the time you show > management a price tag and when the data center catches on fire. :) > > > jason --- *laugh* Good one!

1 0

RE: NetApp/Auspex killer?
by Mohler, Jeff 23 Mar '99

23 Mar '99

In our carrier atmosphere, we'll purchase our way around the performance hit. Instant, constant mirroring is our only option for the various network operations we perform. > -----Original Message----- > From: tkaczma(a)gryf.net [SMTP:tkaczma@gryf.net] > Sent: Monday, March 22, 1999 6:47 PM > To: toasters(a)mathworks.com > Subject: RE: NetApp/Auspex killer? > > > > On Mon, 22 Mar 1999, Mohler, Jeff wrote: > > > Your DR solution should PUSH data out constantly, not request it > > remotely every 60 seconds, then if a snapcopy fails for that period, it > gets > > thrown away on the remote side...two lost minutes of data. > > That's true for your application, but I don't want to mirror my disks > across the country even every 60 seconds. Once every couple of minutes > or hours is perfect for me. If you truly mirror your disks the latency > associated with data propagation will kill the performance. > > Tom

1 0

RE: NetApp/Auspex killer?
by Mohler, Jeff 23 Mar '99

23 Mar '99

> -----Original Message----- > From: Thompson, Arnold [SMTP:arnold.thompson@netapp.com] > Sent: Monday, March 22, 1999 1:04 PM > To: Mohler, Jeff; toasters(a)mathworks.com > Subject: RE: NetApp/Auspex killer? > > You're gonna *love* SnapMirror & SnapRestore! --- Already seen it, it does -not- match up to what EMC can do for us for remote DR service. A possible 2 minute outage in data-flow is a literal million dollar question for us. Your DR solution should PUSH data out constantly, not request it remotely every 60 seconds, then if a snapcopy fails for that period, it gets thrown away on the remote side...two lost minutes of data. Thats is at a minimum FOUR lost billing cycles on our ATM/IP/Voice network...and in our environment an incomplete billing cycle is non-billable. I belive the continuous real-time transfer of data from the main site to the remote site would be a solution that we could live with in the future.

3 2

RE: NetApp/Auspex killer?
by Thompson, Arnold 22 Mar '99

22 Mar '99

Management says I can't tell you right now or they'll have to kill us both! We will be making an official announcement shortly, when it's available. > -----Original Message----- > From: Jason D. Kelleher [mailto:kelleher@susq.com] > Sent: Monday, March 22, 1999 12:18 PM > To: Thompson, Arnold > Cc: toasters(a)mathworks.com > Subject: Re: NetApp/Auspex killer? > > > In message > <7F608EC0BDE6D111B53A00805FA7F7DAF0C14A(a)TAHOE.netapp.com>, "Thomp > son, Arnold" writes: > >You're gonna *love* SnapMirror & SnapRestore! > > Hmmm... SnapRestore...? > > If this does what it sounds like it does, tell me more! If it > means no more waiting while several GBs are tar'd out of > a snapshot > and re-written to a "real directory" after a developer said > "Oops..", tell me how much! Actually, free would be > prefered... :) > > The only reference I could find to "SnapRestore" on NOW was on the > "Copyright Information" page, so let's hear it! > > jason > > >

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