toasters

toasters@lists.teaparty.net

1 participants
13515 discussions

Re: NetApp/Auspex killer?
by Darrell Fuhriman 16 Mar '99

16 Mar '99

discussing hardware completely ignores the core of what makes the Netapp so good -- the file system. WAFL simply beats all the others -- even ext2 or veritas. Darrell

1 0

Re: 5.2.1D5: praise and a caveat
by Aimee Schmidt 15 Mar '99

15 Mar '99

> That's strange. My F760 doesn't have a "floppy-boot?" parameter. What it > does have is a "boot" (or is it "system-boot"?) parameter set to > "floppy scsi-disk". That way my box boots from floppy, if installed, otherwise > from disk. Is this different in 5.2.1D5? The boot order should be controlled > by the firmware (2.1_a2) not ONTAP. (after all ONTAP isn't running yet) > > I cannot check my 630's (firmware 1.12_a1) but I suspect they are the same. This variable is not set by default. One must execute a setenv floppy-boot? true at the firmware level (ok prompt). Conversly one can remove the prompt with the following syntax at firmware: unsetenv floppy-boot? Aimee _____________________________________________________ Aimee Schmidt aimee(a)netapp.com Software Test Engineer Voice: 408.367.3238 Network Appliance Fax: 408.367.3451 / |\ / | \ "We cannot direct the wind / | \ but we can adjust our sails" ---------- \________/ |_|

1 0

Re: 5.2.1D5: praise and a caveat
by grdodson＠lexmark.com 15 Mar '99

15 Mar '99

That's strange. My F760 doesn't have a "floppy-boot?" parameter. What it does have is a "boot" (or is it "system-boot"?) parameter set to "floppy scsi-disk". That way my box boots from floppy, if installed, otherwise from disk. Is this different in 5.2.1D5? The boot order should be controlled by the firmware (2.1_a2) not ONTAP. (after all ONTAP isn't running yet) I cannot check my 630's (firmware 1.12_a1) but I suspect they are the same. Thanks. Graydon Dodson grdodson(a)lexmark.com Lexmark International Inc.

1 0

RE: filer-mrtg
by Thompson, Tim 15 Mar '99

15 Mar '99

> > > In a fit of needing a diversion i installed > > > filer-mrtg yesterday and boy is it cool! > > Glad you found it. > > Ok, I looked on ftp.netapp.com, But I can't find it. > > Where can you get filer_mrtg? On the NOW site (now.netapp.com) in the Tools&Utilities section, in the Toolshed area. (You could also use the "Search" capability on the NOW site.) >From the README: This package uses the MRTG (Multi Router Traffic Grapher) to provide web-based monitoring for Filers. It provide a current and historical view (the last day, week, month, and year) of statistics for network traffic (per interface), CPU load, disk usage, and NFS and CIFS operations. There is also a similar netcache-mrtg package in the Toolshed. ...Tim Thompson...Network Appliance, Inc...tjt(a)netapp.com...

1 0

Filers and Lotus Notes...
by Paul Taylor 15 Mar '99

15 Mar '99

Hi. I would like to know if anyone has had any experience with NetApp filers and Lotus Notes. Here is our situation: We have an F630 that has 2 LN server attached to it (among other things), running across Fast Etherchannel. One of the LN servers is on WinNT and the other is on AIX. The AIX box is a RS/6000 H50 with a single CPU, and 512MB RAM. The NT box is a single CPU netfinity with 512MB RAM, running at 400mhz. The Filer has 512MB onboard, running DoT 5.1D12. LN is v. 4.6.2. We have 2 networks on each server, a public network that goes to the internet, and a private network (a 10. ) that goes to the filer. The problem we had at first was with LN itself not liking UNC names. For this problem I installed PCNFSD, and ran it that way for a while. Now we are experiencing corruption at random times. I figure it is probably the connectionless nature of NFS. Bah. Anyone have any better ideas? BTW: client doesn't want to do directory links, it has to run as a service, and it has to run as system. Next problem: We installed Domino on an RS6K adn it ran horribly. I moved it over to local disk, and it ran great. Hmmmmm.... Here is the mount info for the rs6k from /etc/filesystems (commented out for now since we went to local disk: * /lnmobem01: * dev = "/vol/vol0/lnmobem01" * vfs = nfs * nodename = efiler01 * mount = true * options =bg,hard,intr,rsize=4096,wsize=4096,vers=2,proto=udp account = true Anyone have any ideas as to why this would act slow when opening a DB? it takes about 1.5 min to open log.nsf, when it should take about .5 sec. Thanks, Paul

1 0

RE: filer-mrtg
by Thompson, Tim 15 Mar '99

15 Mar '99

> In a fit of needing a diversion i installed > filer-mrtg yesterday and boy is it cool! Glad you found it. >I'm having a hard time >correlating the "Network Kbytes sent >and recieved" with the "Network Interface >Sent And Received" The first one is uses the Filer's MIB entry for "miscNetRcvdKB", and the second one uses the MIB entry for the individual interface. If only one interface is used, they should match - I just checked a filer here that has a single interface, and the two graphs match well. I'll ask for more details in separate email. ...Tim Thompson...Network Appliance, Inc...tjt(a)netapp.com...

2 1

Etherchannel/trunking
by Paul English 15 Mar '99

15 Mar '99

We currently have a quad etherchannel/trunking set up working with a Cisco switch, and from Todd's post, you all know that it worked very well. Does anyone have any experience using etherchannel/trunking with any other vendors/products? Any info would be useful.. Paul -- Paul English (Tallpaul) (508) 647-7715 tallpaul(a)mathworks.com (508) 647-7015 FAX Walkie Channel 2

4 3

NIS+
by Jason Middlebrooks 15 Mar '99

15 Mar '99

I know that the netapps support NIS but what about NIS+ ????? Thanks for all the answers. Jason

3 2

filer-mrtg
by Graham C. Knight 12 Mar '99

12 Mar '99

In a fit of needing a diversion i installed filer-mrtg yesterday and boy is it cool! I do have a question for those in the know though - i'm having a hard time correlating the "Network Kbytes sent and recieved" with the "Network Interface Sent And Received" I would figure that on a system with 1 interface that these graphs should be pretty much identical - but on some systems the path of the graph is very similar but the numbers are really different - sometimes as much as 2-1 in favor of the "Network Kbytes Sent and Recieved" category. Is this a bug - or am i missing something here.... Thanks for any info you all can provide. GRaham

2 1

RE: FW: Shelves, disks, et al
by Chen, Ray 12 Mar '99

12 Mar '99

Probably because we qualified both. Dual-sourcing critical components like disk drives is standard procedure when multiple sources are available. (I can't say for sure because the qual for those happened before I got here.) Doing so has saved the posterior anatomy of more than one system vendor when it turns out that the product delivered by one source suddenly develops problems due to manufacturing process changes that occurred after qualification and/or problems that take a long time to appear (anyone remember the IBM stiction problems :-), or availability simply becomes a problem. I would imagine that most vendors don't want to qualify more than 2 both due to the cost of each qual and also because of the fact that qualifying N drives turns into an N^2 problem. If you qualify 3 drives, you have to ensure that all combinations work (e.g. a SCSI bus with drive A, B, and C works well, ditto for just drive A, B, and drive A, C, etc.). You wouldn't think that this should be an issue but it has been in the past. I think you can get away with skimping on some testing for situations where the N Gbytes and M Gbyte drives from the same manufacturer are the same family running the same firmware. But even then, I suspect you have to check for vibration issues in your supported enclosures. Ray > -----Original Message----- > From: Jonah Yokubaitis [mailto:barron@staff.texas.net] > Sent: Thursday, March 11, 1999 7:18 PM > To: Chen, Ray > Cc: 'Jim Davis'; toasters(a)mathworks.com > Subject: RE: FW: Shelves, disks, et al > > > > On Thu, 11 Mar 1999, Chen, Ray wrote: > > |The truly sad thing is that you are correct in that > |most people won't buy Michael's argument but that > |Michael is correct when he tries to communicate > |how much work goes into disk drive qualification > |and how painful the problems can be if you try > |and put in joe-random-disk drive, even the same > |model from the same vendor, and get unlucky. > | > |Heck, *I* didn't buy the argument until I spent > |a few years at another company where I exposed to > |some of what happens in drive qualification and > |saw what could go wrong in the lab and in the field. > | > |To be safe, you really need the same vendor, same > |drive, and exact same firmware and that's typically > |very hard to get unless you buy from the system vendor > |instead of the drive vendor. Even then, that's not > |a guarantee that you won't get bit, your odds are > |just better. > > Ray, > > If that's the case, then why does one of our F630s (9gig SCSI drives > in it) having 2 *different* model numbers of drives in it? All drives > came directly from Netapp. > > Jonah > > Jonah Barron Yokubaitis > http://www.texas.net <--- The ISP > http://www.giganews.com <--- News Outsourcing >

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