toasters

toasters@lists.teaparty.net

1 participants
13528 discussions

Start a nNew thread

subscribe
by Farouk Al-Shorafa 23 Jul '98

23 Jul '98

subscribe -farouk

1 0

Re: ndmpcopy?
by grant＠netapp.com 23 Jul '98

23 Jul '98

Hi, > > > I need to move about 56GB of data from one F520 to another. Does > > anyone have experience using ndmpcopy for that? It looks like it > > might fit the bill, but I'd be interested in hearing of any > > good-bad-indifferent experiences with it, and particularly what rate > > it can transfer data from one filer to another. > > Answer here will help me out as well... > > Gotta move 20GB from a little F210 to a new box... > > > I also need to move 36G from F220 to F520. > > Please post answer. > With Data OnTap 5.1 you now have options: If you are migrating a complete volume from one filer to another (or even copying one volume to another on the same filer) you can use SnapCopy(tm) which allows you to copy either the active filesystem or the active filesystem *plus* all the current snapshots. Its a licensed product and uses the vol copy command. NDMPcopy can copy complete volumes either locally or remotely, but it can also do sub-directories or quota trees and is useful if splitting a large volume into several smaller volumes. Although dump creates a snapshot to backup only the destination's active filesystem image is updated via NDMPcopy. I wouldn't count on seeing NDMPcopy achieve > 6 GB/hr (sustained) until sometime next year, when we *hope* to have some improvements. Cheers, Grant

1 0

Re: ndmpcopy?
by grant＠netapp.com 23 Jul '98

23 Jul '98

Hi Matt, > > Sorry, I should have been more clear. My filer contains a tree of data > that a web server serves up to the net. In a mass restore situation, I > want to put the web server up right away on that small amount of data, and > let the rest fill in in the background. > > The idea here was that once we kicked off the restore, some data would be > available right away, rendering the system 'up'. Proper balancing and > placement of files on the filesystem would even ensure that the most > important data came back first. > If that's your goal and you can identify what data is important to get back first it may be worth throwing this important data in a quota tree and backing it up separately. It may take more tape juggling to restore all your data, but you may be able to relax a little once you know you are serving the important data again. I say use a quota tree mainly to help with the backing up part, since in Data OnTap 5.1 we have optimized dumping full volumes and full quota trees. Cheers, Grant

1 0

RE: ndmpcopy?
by Kelly Wyatt 22 Jul '98

22 Jul '98

I recently moved 65gb from one filer to another using ndmpcopy. The first try was successful from an ndmpcopy standpoint, but I ran out of space on my target volume (duh!). However, succeeding tries were not successful - it crashed the *source* (production) filer. I see from a followup post that this is probably caused by the level of my dump... I also heard from netapp that this should be fixed in 5.01. I was running 4.3.1 on the source filer and 5.1 on the target filer. Due to unforeseen circumstances (let's just say it wasn't pretty), this filer is now at 5.01. I plan to try a copy again. By the way, we achieved about 6gb per hour on 100bT ethernet between 2 F630's. Kelly ------- 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>

2 1

Re: ndmpcopy?
by fred.abounader＠vantis.com 21 Jul '98

21 Jul '98

I also need to move 36G from F220 to F520. Please post answer. ---}X-Pgp-Fingerprint: D8 24 CC E6 47 5F E4 60 BF B7 6E FA BF C7 6E C5 ---} ---}On Tue, Jul 21, 1998 at 01:37:58PM -0700, Jim Davis wrote: ---}> I need to move about 56GB of data from one F520 to another. Does ---}> anyone have experience using ndmpcopy for that? It looks like it ---}> might fit the bill, but I'd be interested in hearing of any ---}> good-bad-indifferent experiences with it, and particularly what rate ---}> it can transfer data from one filer to another. ---} ---}Answer here will help me out as well... ---} ---}Gotta move 20GB from a little F210 to a new box... ---} ---}-- ---}Mike Horwath Admin & Manager @ Vector Internet Services, Inc. ---}IRC: Drechsau HOME: drechsau(a)Geeks.ORG WORK: drechsau(a)yuck.net ---}Minnesota ISP with multiple T3s to the 'net? http://www.visi.com/ ---} Garbage In -- Gospel Out. - berkeley fortune(6) ---}

1 0

Re: No CPU stats with filer-mrtg (fwd)
by Tom Yates 20 Jul '98

20 Jul '98

thanks to all for the very kind offers to host the list. i'd sort of thought that this para i sent last week cleared that up, but apparently not, so: my replacement here at MathWorks has agreed to shoulder the SYSMAN's burden and continue with the list. again, though, thanks to the many kind offers of space for same - it's much appreciated. Tom Yates - Unix Chap - The Mathworks, Inc. - +1 (508) 647 7561 MAG#65061 DoD#0135 AMA#461546 1024/CFDFDE39 0C E7 46 60 BB 96 87 05 04 BD FB F8 BB 20 C1 8C ---------- Forwarded message ---------- Date: Fri, 17 Jul 1998 13:55:51 -0400 (EDT) From: Tom Yates <madlists(a)mathworks.com> To: Kendall Libby <fubar(a)mathworks.com> Cc: toasters(a)mathworks.com Subject: Re: No CPU stats with filer-mrtg [...] errrm, not quite. i hope that people are using http://teaparty.mathworks.com:1999/toasters . this will be valid indefinitely, afaik. [...]

1 0

Re: No CPU stats with filer-mrtg
by tjt＠netapp.com 19 Jul '98

19 Jul '98

> > I still have a problem with NFS ops. > > ... due to the fact that this filer unlike the others has been up > > 34 days and done 2,725,616,890 nfs ops I've fixed the filer-mrtg package so that it properly handles the NFS ops value when it rolls over. (I also fixed the perl path problem that was mentioned.) It will be updated on the NOW site shortly, but if you want a copy before that, just send me email. There is now a nifty "Subscribe" feature on the Tools&Utilities page of the NOW site, so if you want to be notified about new and updated tools, you should subscribe to it, and you'll get email whenever things are added or updated. ...Tim Thompson...Network Appliance, Inc...tjt(a)netapp.com...

1 0

Re: INN 1.7.2+insync/Overview/5.0.1 F520-110
by David Power 19 Jul '98

19 Jul '98

We had a similar problem and my admin(aos) had to re-write the file locking code.We never did get it working entirely to my satisfaction, though it did fix the overview problems. We are now running Typhoon (Sparc20/630) and all of our INN problems (or most anyways) have gone away. --- On Sun, 19 Jul 1998 20:40:14 +0200 sthaug(a)nethelp.no wrote: >> We recently (~6-8 weeks ago) put up a F520-110 Filer running >> 5.0.1 software. When I try to run INN (InterNetNews) 1.7.2 and >> put it's overview files on the filer, I get Overchan hanging very regularly >> on a fcntl(F_SETLK,...)/fcntl(F_SETLKW,...) loop. >> >> My question for the assembled guru's is: Is anyone else seeing this? What >> other information should/could I supply to help? > >Yes, we have seen this, with an F330 running 3.1.5. I "fixed" it by simply >removing the code that locks the overview files - would rather risk having >two processes access the file at the same time than having these loops. As >far as I can see, all we risk is one of the readers getting inconsistent >overview data for a group - we can live with that. > >We recently upgraded to 4.3.3D2 - haven't tried using the locking code >again after this upgrade. > >Steinar Haug, Nethelp consulting, sthaug(a)nethelp.no > -----------------End of Original Message----------------- David Power |Price,Quality,Service V-P Operations | Insync.Internet.Services.Inc.|Pick any two out of three.

1 0

Re: INN 1.7.2+insync/Overview/5.0.1 F520-110
by sthaug＠nethelp.no 19 Jul '98

19 Jul '98

> We recently (~6-8 weeks ago) put up a F520-110 Filer running > 5.0.1 software. When I try to run INN (InterNetNews) 1.7.2 and > put it's overview files on the filer, I get Overchan hanging very regularly > on a fcntl(F_SETLK,...)/fcntl(F_SETLKW,...) loop. > > My question for the assembled guru's is: Is anyone else seeing this? What > other information should/could I supply to help? Yes, we have seen this, with an F330 running 3.1.5. I "fixed" it by simply removing the code that locks the overview files - would rather risk having two processes access the file at the same time than having these loops. As far as I can see, all we risk is one of the readers getting inconsistent overview data for a group - we can live with that. We recently upgraded to 4.3.3D2 - haven't tried using the locking code again after this upgrade. Steinar Haug, Nethelp consulting, sthaug(a)nethelp.no

2 1

anyone want UNIX/toaster admins. in the UK?
by Tom Yates 19 Jul '98

19 Jul '98

my wife and i are leaving our current UNIX admin. positions with mathworks in order to move (back) to the UK. if anyone in the UK has any interest in UNIX admins. with heavy Solaris and toaster experience, please drop me a line at madhatta(a)mathworks.com until july 24th, or call us on 01206 542530 after september 15th. Tom Yates - Unix Chap - The Mathworks, Inc. - +1 (508) 647 7561 MAG#65061 DoD#0135 AMA#461546 1024/CFDFDE39 0C E7 46 60 BB 96 87 05 04 BD FB F8 BB 20 C1 8C

3 2

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