toasters

toasters@lists.teaparty.net

13513 discussions

SUMMARY: "Calling all F630/FC-AL users"
by just me. 09 Sep '98

09 Sep '98

Well, its been a week, and as such I suppose time for a summary. Last week, I posted the following request for comments: If you are a NetApp F630/FC-AL user and have encountered any (especially recurring) glitches with interactions between the Fibre Channel host adapter and OnTAP, or recurring FC hardware failures I'd appreciate hearing from you. On the flip side, if you are a NetApp F630/FC-AL user and have seen perfect performance from your filer, I'd love to hear about it too. I was surprised to get only 5 responses, one from a fellow considering buying one. Out of the four owners that mailed me, two reported flawless performance, one mentioned problems caused by extreme environmental conditions, and one reported RAID bugs similar to the ones I had seen. Netapp replaced his shelf, as did they mine. I will post an update after we have the new shelf installed if there are any other notables. Their comment on the problem was "the low-level FC/SCSI system was unaware of a particular error sequence and was passing error codes to the RAID level where they caused a panic." They also recommended upgrading to 5.0.2D4. There were some other FC fixes rolled into 5.0.2, I'm not sure if there are additional ones in D4. Steve Clarke <Steven.Clarke(a)ThePLAnet.net> pointed out, "It has been my opinion for a while that there are people at NetApp who can make things happen and others who just make the right noises but do nothing." This has been my experience, too. However once I've been put in touch with the Clueful Folk, they have been dedicated above and beyond the call to resolving my issues. I've heard mumblings out-of-band about the usual low morale problems among their tech support staff and I sincerely hope that Netapp management recognise their amazing dedication. Thanks to Steven Clarke, Matt Stein, Fritz Feltner and Graham Knight for their time responding to my post. Alohas, matto --matt(a)snark.net----------------------------------------------------- Matt Ghali MG406/GM023JP - System Administrator, interQ, Inc AS7506 "Sub-optimal is a state of mind." -Dave Rand, <dlr(a)bungi.com>

1 0

Re: Bad HD
by Daniel Quinlan 08 Sep '98

08 Sep '98

leila.mutevelic(a)rss.rockwell.com writes: > Is it true that when one HD goes bad, it will be reconstructed on the > hotspare, but if you don't pull out bad HD and replace it within the 24 > hours system will shutdown? No, it's not true. > What happens in a case if you have 2 hotspare? If your system has run out of spares and a disk fails, it will be in degraded mode until you replace one or more spares. If an additional disk fails while in degraded mode, you are hosed. Having two spares helps protect you from a second disk failure, as long as that second failure happens after the first reconstruction has finished. However, even with two hot spares, I would recommend replacing replacing failed disks with new spares as soon as possible. - Dan

1 0

Re: Bad HD (fwd)
by beepy＠netapp.com 08 Sep '98

08 Sep '98

I think our system goes into 'degraded' mode when no spare is present. I'm the degenerate. (some mail misaddresses running around.) > Not quite. A failed disk will send the system into 'degenerated' mode if > there is no spare present. The system will shut down after 24 hours in > degenerated mode as a failsafe. However, if a spare disk *is* present, the > system goes into 'reconstruction' mode and rebuilds the failed disk. Once > reconstructed the system is back up and running as usual with no threat of > a failsafe shutdown. > If you have 2 hot spare disks, and one is used to rebuild a failed disk, > then you will have one spare disk remaining. > > leila.mutevelic(a)rss.rockwell.com wrote: > > > Is it true that when one HD goes bad, it will be reconstructed on the > > hotspare, but if you don't pull out bad HD and replace it within the 24 > > hours system will shutdown? > > What happens in a case if you have 2 hotspare? > > > > Thanks, > > --Leila. > > > > -- > Shannon Madison <shannon(a)netapp.com> > Technical Education Manager > > Network Appliance, Inc. > 2770 San Tomas Expressway > Santa Clara, CA 95051 > USA > > Work: (408) 367-3574 > Fax: (408) 367-2151 > > The usual disclaimers apply. > > ----- End of forwarded message from Brian Pawlowski -----

1 0

Bad HD
by leila.mutevelic＠rss.rockwell.com 08 Sep '98

08 Sep '98

Is it true that when one HD goes bad, it will be reconstructed on the hotspare, but if you don't pull out bad HD and replace it within the 24 hours system will shutdown? What happens in a case if you have 2 hotspare? Thanks, --Leila.

2 1

OnTap
by Wm Kevin Shaw 08 Sep '98

08 Sep '98

What is the latest and most stable version of OnTap for a F630 (Non F-CAL)? What configuration issues and bugs should I be aware of? Any Info on configuring CIFS for this version of OnTap would also be appreciated. Thanks in advance. Kevin

1 0

what is the safest way to shutdown the system?
by leila.mutevelic＠rss.rockwell.com 08 Sep '98

08 Sep '98

What would be the safest way to shutdown the system? Thanks, --Leila.

3 2

CODA support on NetApp
by Dan Bethe 06 Sep '98

06 Sep '98

Hi there everyone. What is the likelihood of NetApp ever supporting the CODA filesystem? http://www.coda.cs.cmu.edu Thanks! ` ~ ^ ' ~ ' ` ^ ~ ~ ^ ' ~ ` ` ~ ' ^ ` ~ ~ ` " ` ~ ' ^ " ^ ` ~ ' ~ ^ " ' ~ ` ^ ~ "If I seem too inconclusive, well it's just because it's so elusive." This email has been licensed by the GPL (http://www.gnu.org/philosophy) Dan ((((now seeking a Linux/Unix sysadmin job in Silicon Valley!)))) Bethe

5 6

Re: CODA support on NetApp
by Daniel Quinlan 05 Sep '98

05 Sep '98

Dan Bethe <dtm(a)hex.net> writes: >> Hi there everyone. What is the likelihood of NetApp ever >> supporting the CODA filesystem? >> http://www.coda.cs.cmu.edu Brian Pawlowski <beepy(a)netapp.com> writes: > As in grandson of AFS, disconnected operation? > > I'm curious, who is supporting it now? Many of our engineers who encounter problems using NFS have asked us about CODA and AFS. I am more interested in fixing some of the problems we encounter with NFS rather than introducing new ones, but CODA might be the answer. So, does NetApp have a better answer? - Dan

1 0

volumes and RAID groups
by Brian Rice 05 Sep '98

05 Sep '98

I just got in an F630 with 5.0.2 and four fully-loaded differential shelves. Yowza. It showed up with one volume, vol0, two RAID groups (one for each pair of shelves, I guess), and only two disks in use, in vol0. I want to live dangerously, with one big volume and one RAID group for it. After all, that's how my other F630's running 4.x are configured, and it's worked fine for a long time. So naturally I did something stooopid. I (a) added all the disks, except for a spare, to vol0, (b) set the RAID group size of vol0 to 26, and then (c) noticed in the 5.x documentation that setting the RAID group size AFTER the fact don't do squat. :-( I might have had a prayer if I'd done (b) then (a). Here's what I have now: pacer> sysconfig -r Volume vol0 RAID group 0 RAID Disk HA.Disk_ID Used (MB/blks) Phys (MB/blks) --------- ---------- -------------- -------------- parity 8b.13 8600/17612800 8683/17783240 data 8b.14 8600/17612800 8683/17783240 data 8b.1 8600/17612800 8683/17783240 data 8a.1 8600/17612800 8683/17783240 data 8a.2 8600/17612800 8683/17783240 data 8a.3 8600/17612800 8683/17783240 data 8a.4 8600/17612800 8683/17783240 data 8a.5 8600/17612800 8683/17783240 data 8a.8 8600/17612800 8683/17783240 data 8a.9 8600/17612800 8683/17783240 data 8a.10 8600/17612800 8683/17783240 data 8a.11 8600/17612800 8683/17783240 data 8a.12 8600/17612800 8683/17783240 data 8a.13 8600/17612800 8683/17783240 RAID group 1 RAID Disk HA.Disk_ID Used (MB/blks) Phys (MB/blks) --------- ---------- -------------- -------------- parity 8b.2 8600/17612800 8683/17783240 data 8a.14 8600/17612800 8683/17783240 data 8b.3 8600/17612800 8683/17783240 data 8b.4 8600/17612800 8683/17783240 data 8b.5 8600/17612800 8683/17783240 data 8b.8 8600/17612800 8683/17783240 data 8b.9 8600/17612800 8683/17783240 data 8b.10 8600/17612800 8683/17783240 data 8b.11 8600/17612800 8683/17783240 data 8b.12 8600/17612800 8683/17783240 Spare disks RAID Disk HA.Disk_ID Used (MB/blks) Phys (MB/blks) --------- ---------- -------------- -------------- spare 8b.0 0 8683/17783240 spare 8a.0 0 8683/17783240 And what I want to have is only one RAID group, 0, with one parity and one spare. It looks like I am going to have to clobber vol0 and start over. Am I right? Anybody have experience with offlining then destroying vol0? Brian Rice brice(a)gnac.com

6 7

Re: volumes and RAID groups
by Daniel Quinlan 05 Sep '98

05 Sep '98

Mike Horwath <drechsau(a)tiny.net> writes: > So, with 2 raid groups...it is all still one filesystem? It can be with either one filesystem or two (each one with a single RAID group). There is a nice picture and explanation at: http://www.netapp.com/technology/level3/3027.html To avoid fragmentation problems (as in "I have 50 GB free on one filesystem and 50 GB free on another, but I need 100 GB in one place"), all of our filers are single volume (filesystem). Using multiple RAID groups is a much easier decision. Dan

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