toasters

toasters@lists.teaparty.net

13515 discussions

RE: cannot create incremental snapshot
by Somavarapu, Nagender 12 May '08

12 May '08

Hi Chaim, setting fractional_reserve to 0 has some side effects with LUNs which could be undesirable. You may like to understand this option in more detail before disabling it. thanks S Nagender -----Original Message----- From: Chaim Rieger [mailto:lists@up-south.com] Sent: Friday, May 09, 2008 12:04 AM To: Stephen C. Losen Cc: toasters(a)mathworks.com Subject: Re: cannot create incremental snapshot Stephen C. Losen wrote: > > You probably need to set the fractional reserve on the source volume > to zero: > > vol options qryndbcore fractional_reserve 0 > > > > Steve Losen scl(a)virginia.edu phone: 434-924-0640 > > University of Virginia ITC Unix Support > that did the trick thanx

1 0

RE: Exports file
by Kevin Parker 09 May '08

09 May '08

Most permissive permission always applies. So here, client will get RW from the "rw=-123.123.4.0/24" statement. ro will be dropped as client gets most permissive permission when conflict. Try it! You can also play with 'exportfs -c' (I think "-c" is the arg - give it a client name and it will show you what exported and how) Best regards, ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Kevin Parker Mobile: 919.606.8737 http://theparkerz.com <blocked::http://theparkerz.com/> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ _____ From: owner-toasters(a)mathworks.com [mailto:owner-toasters@mathworks.com] On Behalf Of Conner, Neil Sent: Thursday, May 08, 2008 6:28 PM To: Toasters Subject: Exports file I want configure an exports file to grant a client ro access when I've excluded the subnet the client belongs to from rw access. The man page reads: "You cannot exclude an NFS client identifier from the ro= or rw= option and include the same NFS client identifier in the other option", but I'm wondering if that restriction applies to subnets. This is what I have now: /vol/vol0/dir1 -sec=sys,rw=-123.123.4.0/24:123.123.0.0/16,root=adminhost And I want something like this: /vol/vol0/dir1 -sec=sys,ro=123.123.4.4,rw=-123.123.4.0/24:123.123.0.0/16,root=adminhost Is this possible?

6 8

Re: Max of 20MB/sec through FC attached LTO tape drive? Overland neo 2000
by Holloway, Chris 09 May '08

09 May '08

I have seen the minra option on the volume have a major affect on backup speed. Have you got it set to minra=on on any of your volumes? Cheers Chris ----- Original Message ----- From: owner-toasters(a)mathworks.com <owner-toasters(a)mathworks.com> To: Toasters <toasters(a)mathworks.com> Sent: Fri May 09 16:02:14 2008 Subject: Max of 20MB/sec through FC attached LTO tape drive? Overland neo 2000 Asking here because we don't have current Overland support for the fibre channel card and I would guess it is more of a problem with the card rather than netapp (we only used the FCO with a netapp), but maybe someone has encountered this... Around 2004 we bought a Overland Neo 2000 tape library with the FCO VIA scsi to FC converter board, and we got at most 20 or 25MB/sec through it (per tape drive) depending if we were writing or reading. This is both with NDMP dumps from the filer disks to tape, and also across the network into the filer to tape with NDMP. The backup software is Bakbone Netvault. Last year we tried attaching this library to a Unix host directly with SCSI and our speed almost doubled. I was floored, and shocked that we spent so many years missing out on performance, although 20-25 was the best I've seen anyone report for LTO2 so I never expected more. Recently we bought another Neo 2000 with LTO4 drives, and I decided to move the FCO card over to it and try again, hoping maybe there was a misconfiguration, but I could not find any and it still acts as if there is a mystery cap on the speed of 20MB/sec (it averages 18-19 after it gets going). I've been all through the configuration of the FCO card and it is set to 160M/sec per scsi bus, tried with and without domain validation, and I even got the FC channel to operate at 2Gbit but no improvement. If I cannot figure this out then I will just attach it to the Unix host with the other neo 2000, but its always nice to have more options. I would not bother operating a LTO4 drive at such a slow speed in production because shoe-shining would probably wear it out and the compression would be sub optimal or non-existent. -------------------------------------------------------- Christopher Holloway Lead Consultant Professional Services Main: +44 (0)1423 519000 Direct: +44 (0)1423 519099 Mobile: +44 (0)7867 783584 Fax: +44 (0)1423 504415 DNS Arrow launches new enhanced customer portal - Inform an e-commerce partner tool to help customers save time and money in procurement. For more information on Inform, please contact your account manager on 0800 983 2525 or register for an account at www.dnsarrow.co.uk/inform DNS Arrow Nidderdale House Beckwith Knowle Harrogate HG3 1SA www.DNSarrow.co.uk Email Confidentiality Notice: This message is private and confidential. If you have received this message in error, please notify us and remove it from your system. "DNS Arrow" means Digital Network Services (UK) Limited, a company registered in England. Company Registration Number 3952678. Registered Office: Nidderdale House, Otley Road, Beckwith Knowle, Harrogate HG3 1SA, UK.

2 1

Re: Max of 20MB/sec through FC attached LTO tape drive? Overland neo 2000
by Webster, Stetson 09 May '08

09 May '08

Hey Folks, Bringing up 'minra' starts to tread into a performance issue. I highly recommend that a NetApp support case be opened to ensure that this is handled with the appropriate skillset, experience and attention. Pardon brevity, typos, etc; sent from mobile. -----Original Message----- From: Holloway, Chris [mailto:chris.holloway@DNSArrow.co.uk] Sent: Friday, May 09, 2008 12:26 PM Pacific Standard Time To: mcdouga9(a)egr.msu.edu; toasters(a)mathworks.com Subject: Re: Max of 20MB/sec through FC attached LTO tape drive? Overland neo 2000 I have seen the minra option on the volume have a major affect on backup speed. Have you got it set to minra=on on any of your volumes? Cheers Chris ----- Original Message ----- From: owner-toasters(a)mathworks.com <owner-toasters(a)mathworks.com> To: Toasters <toasters(a)mathworks.com> Sent: Fri May 09 16:02:14 2008 Subject: Max of 20MB/sec through FC attached LTO tape drive? Overland neo 2000 Asking here because we don't have current Overland support for the fibre channel card and I would guess it is more of a problem with the card rather than netapp (we only used the FCO with a netapp), but maybe someone has encountered this... Around 2004 we bought a Overland Neo 2000 tape library with the FCO VIA scsi to FC converter board, and we got at most 20 or 25MB/sec through it (per tape drive) depending if we were writing or reading. This is both with NDMP dumps from the filer disks to tape, and also across the network into the filer to tape with NDMP. The backup software is Bakbone Netvault. Last year we tried attaching this library to a Unix host directly with SCSI and our speed almost doubled. I was floored, and shocked that we spent so many years missing out on performance, although 20-25 was the best I've seen anyone report for LTO2 so I never expected more. Recently we bought another Neo 2000 with LTO4 drives, and I decided to move the FCO card over to it and try again, hoping maybe there was a misconfiguration, but I could not find any and it still acts as if there is a mystery cap on the speed of 20MB/sec (it averages 18-19 after it gets going). I've been all through the configuration of the FCO card and it is set to 160M/sec per scsi bus, tried with and without domain validation, and I even got the FC channel to operate at 2Gbit but no improvement. If I cannot figure this out then I will just attach it to the Unix host with the other neo 2000, but its always nice to have more options. I would not bother operating a LTO4 drive at such a slow speed in production because shoe-shining would probably wear it out and the compression would be sub optimal or non-existent. -------------------------------------------------------- Christopher Holloway Lead Consultant Professional Services Main: +44 (0)1423 519000 Direct: +44 (0)1423 519099 Mobile: +44 (0)7867 783584 Fax: +44 (0)1423 504415 DNS Arrow launches new enhanced customer portal - Inform an e-commerce partner tool to help customers save time and money in procurement. For more information on Inform, please contact your account manager on 0800 983 2525 or register for an account at www.dnsarrow.co.uk/inform DNS Arrow Nidderdale House Beckwith Knowle Harrogate HG3 1SA www.DNSarrow.co.uk Email Confidentiality Notice: This message is private and confidential. If you have received this message in error, please notify us and remove it from your system. "DNS Arrow" means Digital Network Services (UK) Limited, a company registered in England. Company Registration Number 3952678. Registered Office: Nidderdale House, Otley Road, Beckwith Knowle, Harrogate HG3 1SA, UK.

1 0

Max of 20MB/sec through FC attached LTO tape drive? Overland neo 2000
by Adam McDougall 09 May '08

09 May '08

Asking here because we don't have current Overland support for the fibre channel card and I would guess it is more of a problem with the card rather than netapp (we only used the FCO with a netapp), but maybe someone has encountered this... Around 2004 we bought a Overland Neo 2000 tape library with the FCO VIA scsi to FC converter board, and we got at most 20 or 25MB/sec through it (per tape drive) depending if we were writing or reading. This is both with NDMP dumps from the filer disks to tape, and also across the network into the filer to tape with NDMP. The backup software is Bakbone Netvault. Last year we tried attaching this library to a Unix host directly with SCSI and our speed almost doubled. I was floored, and shocked that we spent so many years missing out on performance, although 20-25 was the best I've seen anyone report for LTO2 so I never expected more. Recently we bought another Neo 2000 with LTO4 drives, and I decided to move the FCO card over to it and try again, hoping maybe there was a misconfiguration, but I could not find any and it still acts as if there is a mystery cap on the speed of 20MB/sec (it averages 18-19 after it gets going). I've been all through the configuration of the FCO card and it is set to 160M/sec per scsi bus, tried with and without domain validation, and I even got the FC channel to operate at 2Gbit but no improvement. If I cannot figure this out then I will just attach it to the Unix host with the other neo 2000, but its always nice to have more options. I would not bother operating a LTO4 drive at such a slow speed in production because shoe-shining would probably wear it out and the compression would be sub optimal or non-existent.

2 2

Exports file
by Conner, Neil 08 May '08

08 May '08

I want configure an exports file to grant a client ro access when I¹ve excluded the subnet the client belongs to from rw access. The man page reads: ³You cannot exclude an NFS client identifier from the ro= or rw= option and include the same NFS client identifier in the other option², but I¹m wondering if that restriction applies to subnets. This is what I have now: /vol/vol0/dir1 -sec=sys,rw=-123.123.4.0/24:123.123.0.0/16,root=adminhost And I want something like this: /vol/vol0/dir1 -sec=sys,ro=123.123.4.4,rw=-123.123.4.0/24:123.123.0.0/16,root=adminhost Is this possible?

1 0

can not create incemental snapshot
by Chaim Rieger 08 May '08

08 May '08

trying to snapmirror /qryndbcore/ from irnetapp1 to irfl1 here are the space stats of the volume and general filer IRNetApp1> df -h qryndbcore Filesystem total used avail capacity Mounted on /vol/qryndbcore/ 1500GB 1361GB 138GB 91% /vol/qryndbcore/.snapshot 0TB 0TB 0TB ---% IRNetApp1> df -Ah Aggregate total used avail capacity aggr 3537GB 2461GB 1075GB 70% aggr/.snapshot 884GB 146GB 737GB 17% IRNetApp1> Thu May 8 09:44:25 PDT [IRNetApp1: snapmirror.src.err:error]: SnapMirror source transfer from qryndbcore to irfl2:qryndbcore : cannot create incremental snapshot. snap reserve is set to 0, however i think that 700gb (on the volume level) should be enough to create a snapshot.

2 1

cannot create incremental snapshot
by Chaim Rieger 08 May '08

08 May '08

2 2

Re: SnapDrive for Windows & CIFS
by Nils Vogels 08 May '08

08 May '08

On Thu, May 8, 2008 at 10:24 AM, De Wit Tom (Consultant) < tom.de.wit(a)volvo.com> wrote: > >Use the 'software install' or 'software upgrade' command to upgrade in > this way, that way you won't get any errors about CIFS being limited, and > the 'software upgrade' command adds in a package verification so that you > know everything actually downloaded correctly before beginning the actual > upgrade. > > I completely agree ! > As an added plus, it also eliminates pesky permissions problems that could result in weird errors *after* upgrading, when you unpack the exe as a user that doesn't have quite the right permissions in the ETC$ share. I've seen for instance java going horribly wrong in that way. This is because when running the 'software install' / 'software upgrade' commands, you are sure the commands are run as the local admin on the filer (=root). When using CIFS to place/unpack the files, you usually are performing that action with the permissions of "whoever is currently running explorer.exe", which might be the cause of spending some extra after-office hours, and (most importantly) might cause you to miss dinner @ home. Actually, I don't quite understand why NetApp still uses this method in their upgrade advisors, IMHO, they have developed far better alternatives by now by way of the 'software *' commands. Gr, Nils -- Simple guidelines to happiness: Work like you don't need the money, Love like your heart has never been broken and Dance like no one can see you.

1 0

SnapDrive for Windows & CIFS
by Milazzo Giacomo 08 May '08

08 May '08

Hi, this is a good question: must CIFS be licensed to use SnapDrive for Windows? I've never had the chance to perform some test but I think that the answer is "yes". And you know why: because SnapDrive for Windows needs to 'see' and 'reach' the volume where you create the LUN(s) by CIFS using a UNC path. It's also true that there a limited CIFS that permit to access to the administrative share C$ but, as example, when I've tried to upgrade a DataOntap using the windows package, without a full CIFS license, the unzip of data failed! So. Why customer ha sto spend money for an unused license if he needs only SAN functions. Regards

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