toasters

toasters@lists.teaparty.net

2 participants
13529 discussions

Problems with too many cifs clients behind a single IP NAT device?
by Robert McDermott 22 Mar '11

22 Mar '11

We've encountered a problem were clients behind a NAT firewall device are having intermittent problems accessing shares on the NetApp vfiler. Clinets that are not behind the NAT firewall device have no problems. We've switched out the OpenBSD NAT device with an F5 BigIP and the problem still exists. Do you know of a limitation of the NetApp to work correctly with hundreds of CIFS clients coming from a single IP address? It's a NetApp FAS3070 running OnTap 7.3.5P1. Thanks, -Robert rmcdermo(a)fhcrc.org

4 3

RE: DS14 (LRC) - ESH2 Modules?
by Woods, Mark 17 Mar '11

17 Mar '11

Hi Jimmy & Toasters at large, I double-checked with our Technical Marketing Engineer for disk drives/shelves to be certain about the advice I gave in an earlier message. Below is his response to my inquiry. By the way, EOS means End Of Support, which is 5 years after the last shipment of a NetApp product. > Hello Mark, > > Here is what we officially support/supported: > > * DS14mk4 FC w ESH4. > * DS14mk2 FC w ESH2 or ESH4. > * DS14mk2 AT w FC (EOS), FC2 (EOS), or FCX. > * DS14mk1 FC (EOS) w LRC (EOS), ESH (EOS), or ESH2 (this combination is EOS > as the enclosure itself is EOS). > > This is all a moot point as DS14mk1, ESH, and LRC are all END OF SUPPORT in 7.3.x > and later --- plugging in an ESH2 does not grant you support for the DS14mk1 shelf in > 7.3.x or later --- the shelf enclosure (and the drives) are EOS --- period. > > ESH4 was never supported in, and will not work with, DS14mk1 FC. > > ESH2 support is being dropped in 8.1. > > Regards, > > Jay I hope this clears up any confusion. Best regards, Mark Woods Product Marketing Manager Solid State Products & Disk Shelves mark.woods(a)netapp.com -----Original Message----- From: Vervloesem Wouter [mailto:wouter.vervloesem@neoria.be] Sent: Thursday, March 17, 2011 3:42 AM To: Jimmy Corncrake Cc: Kennedy, Jeffrey; Woods, Mark; toasters(a)mathworks.com; Stefan Funke Subject: Re: DS14 (LRC) - ESH2 Modules? It is supported to replace your LRC modules with ESH2 modules, but the question is if the shelf itself is supported on your ontap version. As indicated before, starting from ontap 7.3 DS14 shelves are not supported, only DS14-MK2 or DS14-MK4. Mvg, Wouter Vervloesem Neoria - Uptime Group Business Park King Square Veldkant 35D B-2550 Kontich Tel: +32 (0)3 451 23 82 Mailto: wouter.vervloesem(a)neoria.be Web: http://www.uptimegroup.be Op 17-mrt-2011, om 10:33 heeft Jimmy Corncrake het volgende geschreven: > We replaced LCR Modules on DS14 Shelves last year with ESH4 Modules. This was fully supported by Network Appliance and PS were involved. Contact your presales contact for advise. This is definitely a supported option. > > best regards, > Jimmy. > > On Wed, Mar 9, 2011 at 5:47 PM, Kennedy, Jeffrey <jkennedy(a)qualcomm.com> wrote: > I remember a presentation on the failure topic at FAST 07 by Google. Here's the link in case anyone is interested. > > http://labs.google.com/papers/disk_failures.pdf > > Their correlation between temp and failure was interesting. Basically they found that high temperature is not a notable factor, but rather large fluctuations in temperature. > > An mildly interesting read unless you also like reading tech manuals, in which case you'll go banana's on it. > > Jeff Kennedy > Qualcomm, Incorporated > QCT Engineering Compute > 858-651-6592 > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: owner-toasters(a)mathworks.com [mailto:owner-toasters@mathworks.com] > > On Behalf Of Woods, Mark > > Sent: Monday, March 07, 2011 5:00 PM > > To: toasters(a)mathworks.com > > Cc: Stefan Funke > > Subject: RE: DS14 (LRC) - ESH2 Modules? > > > > Hi René, > > > > The technical marketing engineer for NetApp disk shelves says that replacing > > LRC modules with ESH2 modules in a DS14 shelf for use with Data ONTAP 7.3 > > will not be supported and, more importantly, will not work. > > > > I recommend that your replace the disk shelves and the hard disk drives, which > > must be at least five years old at this time. Manufacturers design enterprise > > HDDs for five years of operation. The rate of failure increases steadily and > > substantially past that age. > > > > For this reason, NetApp does not support disk shelves aged beyond five years. > > > > Best regards, > > > > Mark Woods > > > > Product Marketing Manager > > Solid State Products & Disk Shelves > > mark.woods(a)netapp.com > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Stefan Funke [mailto:bundy@usage.de] > > Sent: Monday, March 07, 2011 12:22 PM > > To: toasters(a)mathworks.com > > Subject: Re: DS14 (LRC) - ESH2 Modules? > > > > Am 07.03.2011 12:46, schrieb René Bormann: > > > > > Hello all, > > > > > > we got some old DS14 Shelfs with LRC Modules. > > > > > > Is it possible to replace the LRC Modules with ESH2? > > > > Possible, but may be unsupported: > > > > > > [Source: > > http://now.netapp.com/NOW/knowledge/docs/ontap/rel732/html/ontap/rnote/rel_n > > otes/concept/c_oc_rn_feat73-DS14shelves.html] > > > > Systems including DS14 shelves, ESH modules or LRC modules are not > > supported Beginning with Data ONTAP 7.3, DS14 disk shelves, LRC storage > > I/O modules, and ESH storage I/O modules are no longer supported. > > > > Upgrading a system with any of these devices attached to it will result > > in an unsupported configuration. If even one of these devices is > > attached to your storage system, you should not upgrade to Data ONTAP > > 7.3 or later. > > > > Some models of the DS14 shelves, LRC modules, and ESH modules are no > > longer supported. This means that the following disk shelf > > configurations are no longer supported: > > > > ESH2 modules with DS14 disk shelves > > ESH modules with DS14 or DS14mk2 FC disk shelves > > LRC modules with DS14 or DS14mk2 FC disk shelves > > > > >

1 0

Microsoft System Center Data Protection Manager (DPM)
by ifstat 16 Mar '11

16 Mar '11

Is anyone using Microsoft DPM with a DR Site built? How do you replicate from site-site and what is the recovery process that you use? I have read TR-3900, but it explains that two DPM servers are required and 1 must be virtual. I was wondering if there is an alternative method or if i can reduce the number of servers to 1 virtual. We are trying to design a solution that integrates with NetApp SnapShot and Snapmirror. Curious to hear your feedback. -- View this message in context: http://old.nabble.com/Microsoft-System-Center-Data-Protection-Manager-%28DP… Sent from the Network Appliance - Toasters mailing list archive at Nabble.com.

2 1

Fabric MC. Minimum link speed on ISL
by Milazzo Giacomo 14 Mar '11

14 Mar '11

Hi all, is there some doc or some best practice that definitively states the minimum needed bandwidth on the two ISL that are present in a fabric MC? I mean, in case of use of the direct ISL on the two couple of SAN switches I expect to have 4 Gbps on the fibre wires But in case of use of DWDM what is the minimum have I to ask for or to expect? Regards,

1 0

SAN for SAS
by Raj Patel 12 Mar '11

12 Mar '11

Hi, A bit of a generic SAN question (not necessarily NetApp specific). I've got a team of 40 people who use a statistical analysis package (SAS) to crunch massive time-series data sets. They claim their biggest gripe is disk contention - not necessarily one person using the same data but 40. So they process these data-sets locally on high-spec PC's with several disks (one for OS, one for scratch, one for reads and one for writes). I think they'd be much better off utilising shared storage (ie a SAN) in a datacenter so at least the workloads are spread across multiple spindles and they only need to copy or replicate the data within the datacenter rather than schlep it up and down the WAN which is what they currently do to get it to their distributed team PC's. Are there any useful guides or comparisons for best practise in designing HPC environments on shared infrastructure ? Other than knowing what SAS does I'm not sure on its HPC capabilities (ie distributed computing, clustering etc) so I'll need to follow that angle up too. Thanks in advance, Raj.

5 7

Re: SAN for SAS
by McDonald, Alex 11 Mar '11

11 Mar '11

Iirc (and I'd check since my info may be out of date) SAS 50/50 is only that over the long run; it does a lot of reads (up to entire analysis sets) followed by a lot of writes, with quite a bit of IO to temporary files too. It can be quite a handful to manage on shared storage. You need a good understanding of the app to be able to size it properly. Alex McDonald NetApp, Office of the CTO Send on a bb, excuse the typos ----- Original Message ----- From: Raj Patel <phigmov(a)gmail.com> To: Maxwell Reid <max.reid(a)saikonetworks.com> Cc: toasters(a)mathworks.com <toasters(a)mathworks.com> Sent: Fri Mar 11 20:16:12 2011 Subject: Re: SAN for SAS Hi Max, There are a couple of issues for these guys - * Long copy times for the datasets from the data-center to their workstations * Long processing times for i/o intensive SAS processes on their PC - they're just using SAS Workstation and batching up the work themselves (ie not distributed by design but by necessity) WAN circuit costs are pricey so ideally we'd centralise their workloads - powerful SAS server plus plenty of disk or even 40 servers with individual workstation licenses (either VDI, Citrix or real) and shared disk. Their theory is that their tasks aren't necessarily CPU bound but disk i/o bound. SSD's are fine for reads but they're skeptical about writes. SAS apparently supports RAM disks but they're pretty pricey for the size they'd need. A bit of googling indicates SAS has a distributed processing mechanism. I'll have to chat to them about licensing (suspect its not cheap). Anyone using their SAN's for storing or running weather, population or financial simulations (ie massive data-sets with a 50/50 mix of reads/writes) ? Cheers to all for the tips so far ! Raj. On 3/12/11, Maxwell Reid <max.reid(a)saikonetworks.com> wrote: > HI Raj, > > Would I be correct in assuming that the main problem you're trying to solve > is reducing the replication via WAN to the local machines? > > In this case, moving the processing nodes to 40 machines in the datacenter > with or without a shared storage arrangement would fix that issue; RPC or > protocol based replication between nodes would be required unless you're > going to switch to a clustered filesystem or network filesystem. In this > case a SAN or NAS setup would work fine. > > From the HPC side of things, sticking a bunch of PCIe SSDs in the nodes and > connecting them together via 10GbE or Infiniband would certainly speed > things up without the need for a shared disk pool, but that's probably > overkill for what you're trying to accomplish. > > > ~Max > > > > > On Fri, Mar 11, 2011 at 10:43 AM, Raj Patel <phigmov(a)gmail.com> wrote: > >> Hi, >> >> A bit of a generic SAN question (not necessarily NetApp specific). >> >> I've got a team of 40 people who use a statistical analysis package >> (SAS) to crunch massive time-series data sets. >> >> They claim their biggest gripe is disk contention - not necessarily >> one person using the same data but 40. So they process these data-sets >> locally on high-spec PC's with several disks (one for OS, one for >> scratch, one for reads and one for writes). >> >> I think they'd be much better off utilising shared storage (ie a SAN) >> in a datacenter so at least the workloads are spread across multiple >> spindles and they only need to copy or replicate the data within the >> datacenter rather than schlep it up and down the WAN which is what >> they currently do to get it to their distributed team PC's. >> >> Are there any useful guides or comparisons for best practise in >> designing HPC environments on shared infrastructure ? >> >> Other than knowing what SAS does I'm not sure on its HPC capabilities >> (ie distributed computing, clustering etc) so I'll need to follow that >> angle up too. >> >> Thanks in advance, >> Raj. >> >

1 0

Do I need to update diagnostics firmware?
by Ray Van Dolson 10 Mar '11

10 Mar '11

About to bump my N3600 A20 (FAS 2050C) from Data ONTAP 7.3.1 to 7.3.5.1. Our BIOS and BMC are current at 3.0 and 1.2 respectively, but our diagnostics firmware is at 5.3.6 (the latest is 5.4.6). Couple of questions: - Should I really update the Diagnostics firmware, or do many of you just leave it as-is if you're at the latest BIOS anyways? - Is it possible to update the Diagnostics firmware only (don't reflash the BIOS, etc) and somehow avoid needing to fail-over to my other controller and reboot? Thanks! Ray

3 2

Deduplication limit on 2040
by Milazzo Giacomo 10 Mar '11

10 Mar '11

Hi all, on FAS2040 with DoT 7 the size limit for a volume with A-SIS enabled is 3 TB. I read that with DoT 8.0.1 this limit has been extended to 16 TB (note, the limit with A-SIS enabled, not the vol size limit!) but nowhere I find that this can be done ONLY if containing aggregate is 64 bit. So, question is: to have a deduplicated volume on a 2040 bigger that 3 TB and up to 16 TB the containing aggregate has to be 64 bit? Thanks, PS) I think so because with 32 bit aggregate you cannot dedup a 16 TB vol (max size of the vol) because in this case no space is left on volume/aggr to dedup.

1 0

SAN data migration
by Milazzo Giacomo 06 Mar '11

06 Mar '11

Hi all, once upon a time there was "ReplicatorX"...and now? :) Anyway I've never used it and I don't know about its pros and cons. I should plan a SAN data migration from dozens of servers and hundreds of LUNs on HP EVA 5000, IBM DS 4800, EMX CX700 and 300 and so on... ...and all of this has to be performed online, with no disruption, better if agentless (os are Windows, Linux, AIX and more, cluster based on Windows, RHEL, Suse, Oracle...) Just one restart could be admitted for each systems... Any suggestion, tools ... Thanks in advance,

5 5

NFS Latency on VMware hosts
by Rob 16 Feb '11

16 Feb '11

Is there a way to measure the latency at the VMware host for an NFS mount? TIA -Rob

4 3

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