toasters

toasters@lists.teaparty.net

2 participants
13522 discussions

RE: FAS3020 - aggr best practises.
by Parisi, Justin 21 Mar '07

21 Mar '07

Here's a good document to browse over for this particular issue... http://www.netapp.com/library/tr/3437.pdf ________________________________ From: owner-toasters(a)mathworks.com [mailto:owner-toasters@mathworks.com] On Behalf Of Jason Herring Sent: Monday, March 19, 2007 3:08 PM To: Sphar, Mike; toasters(a)mathworks.com Subject: RE: FAS3020 - aggr best practises. You can always go with a larger RAID group size - it does support up to 28. However, at some point you have to bite the bullet and lose 2 more disks to parity. It depends on how you want the math to work out in the long run. The reason you want to add the disks in large sets is so you have a more level writing of the data to the disks - you don't want to get 3-4 'hot disks' slowing the whole aggregate down until the data is spread evenly among the aggregate.'s new disks... -----Original Message----- From: owner-toasters(a)mathworks.com on behalf of Sphar, Mike Sent: Mon 3/19/2007 11:06 AM To: toasters(a)mathworks.com Cc: Subject: RE: FAS3020 - aggr best practises. Point one reminds me of a question I've been pondering. I've got a filer using RAID-DP with 3X14-disk raid groups, and currently 7 spares. Ideally I'd only keep two spares, but I'm still not clear on the pros/cons of adding a 5 disk raid group, effectively only adding three more data disks to the volume. I'm not in a space crunch currently but I certainly will be at some point. Is it best to leave so many extra spares until I can add a full raid group all at once? Or in my case is it not that important? -- Michael W. Sphar - IS&T - Lead Systems Administrator SMBU Engineering Support Services, BMC Software ________________________________ From: owner-toasters(a)mathworks.com [mailto:owner-toasters@mathworks.com] On Behalf Of Learmonth, Peter Sent: Saturday, March 17, 2007 6:43 PM To: Darish Rajanayagam; toasters(a)mathworks.com Subject: RE: FAS3020 - aggr best practises. Hi Darish Welcome to NetApp and to Toasters! 1. You can do an "aggr add aggr0 56" or use the FilerView GUI and add all 56 of the new disks into the existing aggregate. You can physically add the shelves and add them to the aggr while the filer is up and running. I see no disadvantages, and that is the best practice. (Add disks in large sets, ideally the raid group size).

6 5

Re: Snapdrive for Windows and FIN_WAIT_2
by Kevin Davis 20 Mar '07

20 Mar '07

> We have noticed an interesting phenomenom on our Windows 2003 servers > that are running Snapdrive for Windows. Every snapdrive operation adds > a TCP connection to the filer at port 139 in a FIN_WAIT_2 status. These > never clear until the server is rebooted. In the case of our heaviest > used Oracle server, which has 4 LUNs mirrored to 3 different filers, > this results in exhaustion of all available TCP ports over a period of > time, resulting in no more CIFS authentication. > > Has anyone else seen anything like this? Any ideas how to fix it, short > of installing Service Pack 1 for 2003 as that is not approved for us to > install yet? > Bug. And it's biting us BADLY. http://now.netapp.com/NOW/cgi-bin/bol?Type=Detail&Display=234480 ---snip--- ON TCP disconnect, CIFS client sends a FIN to the filer. Filer acknowledged the FIN and called soabort. Due to a software bug, filer didn't not send RST out to close down the TCP connection on the client, leaving the client socket in FIN_WAIT2. ---snip--- No published software workaround. It's rather nasty. What Ontap are you running? We got pinched by it after upgrading from 7.2 to 7.2.1P1. -- *------------------------------------------*-----------------------* | Kevin Davis (UNIX Sysadmin) | Natick, Massachusetts | | 508.647.7660 | 01760-2098 | | mailto:kevin.davis@mathworks.com *-----------------------* | http://www.mathworks.com | | *------------------------------------------*-----------------------*

1 0

Throughput on 3020
by Knut Kristan Weber 19 Mar '07

19 Mar '07

Hello, this is my first posting to this list. A customer of us has a NetApp 3020 with 3 S-ATA shelfes each filled with 500 GB disks. He has a trunked 2*1 GBit network connection. He has 3 volumes, each volume resides on a different aggregate built from the disks of one shelf each. Via NFS he gets a perfomrance of sustained 60 MB per second with large and small files. Only one connection used during the test, no aditional traffic on the system and network segment. He expected the performance to be "much" better. Besides any possible calculations - what´s the performance he can expect in real world practice under best circumstances? ------------------------------------------------------------ with kind regards ______________________________________creating IT solutions Dipl.-Chem. Knut Kristan Weber Senior Systems Engineer CAx Professional Services science + computing ag Hagellocher Weg 73 phone +49 7071 94 57 473 72070 Tübingen, Germany fax +49 7071 94 57 411 http://www.science-computing.de The trouble with doing something right the first time is that nobody appreciates how difficult it was.

7 6

new scrub feature...
by tmac 19 Mar '07

19 Mar '07

Not sure how many know about this, but kind cool We all know that scrubbing usually takes place at Sunday@1am There is a new option: raid.scrub.schedule Not sure when it came into being, but here is a valid use: 8h@mon@22,8h@tue@22,8h@wed@22,8h@thu@22,8h@fri@22,18h@sat@6,24h@sun@0 This schedule allows the scrub to run for 8 hours, mon-fri starting at 10pm. It also allows the scrub to run all day sat & sun. This is good for my environment, manipulate it to work with yours. The man page says that if a #m or #h is specified, then it overrides the default scrub duration option. As a precaution, I changed mine to 8 hours (from -1, which means run until completion) Not sure how well it works, I just tried this this morning. My FAS980 scrubs all finish before I get in Mondays. My R200s though usually run until about mid-day or late afternoon on monday. I will let you all know if it works next week.... -- --tmac RedHat Certified Engineer

2 2

FAS3020 - aggr best practises.
by Darish Rajanayagam 19 Mar '07

19 Mar '07

Greetings: I am new to the NetApp world and am looking for some advice/guidance. We purchased a NetApp 3020i with two shelves (10K 144GB FC drives) a few months ago. We have now placed an order for 4 additional shelves (fully loaded) with 10K 144GB drives. The current configuration is one large RAID DP Group with 1 HotSpare (27 Disk DP RAID Group), which belong to one aggregate (aggr0). My question: 1. The new enclosures, should I create 2 x 28 Disk DP RAID groups and add it to the existing aggregate? The application we run is IO intensive and more spindles the better. Does anyone see any disadvantages of doing the above? 2. Does anyone have a formula to calculate mean time to Repair on the 10K 144GB disks on a busy filer? I only have one hot spare disk, should I add more, is there a rule of thumb? 3. We currently have multiple volumes on the filer, after adding the new shelves/spindles, if I run a reallocate on the existing volumes, would it take advantage of the additional spindles. Any help/guidance greatly appreciated. Thanks, Darish.

6 8

FAS270: DOT on SATA disks possible?
by Alexander Schalek 17 Mar '07

17 Mar '07

Hi, I have a question regarding SATA drives in a FAS270. Is it possible to use a FAS270 with just 14x500GB SATA drives in an expansion shelf and run ontap on the sata disks? Or do I need 3 FC Disks as well for ontap? thanks in advance, Alexander -- Mit freundlichen Grüssen | Kind regards, -- Alexander Schalek Bacher Systems EDV GmbH - Technical Services Clemens-Holzmeister-Strasse 4 A-1100 Wien, Business Park Vienna phone: +43 (1) 60 126-34 | fax: +43 (1) 60 126-4 e-mail: as(a)bacher.at | http://www.bacher.at NetApp Certified Expert | Sun Certified Professional

3 2

More Auditing File Contents Questions....
by jbrigman＠nc.rr.com 16 Mar '07

16 Mar '07

Toasters; I'm currently using "treesize pro" to help me understand what kinds of files are being stored on my filer by the users. It's a good windows- only app that gives all kinds of good info. Do others of you out there have any good recommendations for how to do reporting on files, space reporting, etc. on your filers? Thanks; JKB

4 4

Auditing CIFS shares for compliance purposes
by Skip Norman 16 Mar '07

16 Mar '07

I am currently faced with having to provide which users have access to what directories within our CIFS shares on our 270 and 3020 filers. The only auditing that I have been successful with thus far is pulling success and failures of access to the shares using the cifs.audit.enable option and then viewing the event log via windows. Has anybody else been faced with having to provide a log of who has access to what directories? I would imagine that I am not the only one that has come across this...Any help would be greatly appreciated. I am using Ontap 7.0.5 if that helps. Thanks, Skip

3 2

avg rtt is okay but maximum is high
by Willeke, Jochen 15 Mar '07

15 Mar '07

Hi Toasters, we have a database on nfs space and i wonder about the output of nfs_hist. v3 read: 35280016 (blocking requests) - millisecond units 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 17347681 2028005 655821 757932 1061542 1463375 1943351 1721450 <16 <24 <32 <40 <48 <56 <64 UNUSED 6417253 1334072 338371 111465 43542 18991 10063 0 <128 <192 <256 <320 <384 <448 <512 UNUSED 20806 2364 1282 617 526 280 266 0 <1024 <1536 <2048 <2560 <3072 <3584 <4096 UNUSED 723 158 77 3 0 0 0 0 <8192 <12288 <16384 <20480 <24576 <28672 <32768 UNUSED 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 <65536 <98304 <131072 <163840 <196608 <229376 <262144 >262144 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Is the amount of read-calls with a RTT greater than 7ms ok, or is it something i have to wonder about?? I mean, the calls between 7-16ms are about 18%. But on the other hand nfs_hist shows only the blocking requests so the percentage of total calls will be even less than 18%. Does my nfs_hist look like a healthy system or do i have a problem? Regards and thanks for every answer :D Jochen

2 4

Block vs Zoned checksum disks
by Ronan Mullally 14 Mar '07

14 Mar '07

Hi, I've got an old lab filer with a shelf of X231 disks. I've got my hands on a couple of extra 36GB disks to act as spares, but it turns out they're X225s rather than X231s - ie a 512 byte sector size rather than a 520 byte sector size. The /etc/qual_devices file lists the following: D NETAPP X225_ST336704FC NA42 512 D NETAPP X231_ST336704FC NA42 520 The two disks are obviously identical seagate drives, but AFAIR (I could be wrong, it's been a long day) I can't use a 512 byte drive in a volume of 520 byte drives. Is this correct? If so, is there any way around this? I can re-format the drives with a 520 byte sector size - and add an X225 line with a 520 byte sector size, would that do the trick? If not, is there any way of changing the disk label from X225 to X231? Thanks in advance, -Ronan

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