toasters

toasters@lists.teaparty.net

3 participants
13514 discussions

OSSV questions !
by Premanshu Jain 14 Mar '06

14 Mar '06

Question 1 Netapp open source snap vault (OSSV) supports only a local attached disk based file system. I need to use OSSV to dump a NFS mounted partition. Any leads to this will be appreciated. Question 2 Anybody using OSSV to snapvault perforce data ?

2 1

RE: CPU Stats on multi-proc filers
by Hill, Aaron 14 Mar '06

14 Mar '06

Same issue with DFM for years and we have never come across a fix. We use sysstat -m as NetApp suggests when "zooming in" for closer analysis. Aaron _____ From: owner-toasters(a)mathworks.com [mailto:owner-toasters@mathworks.com] On Behalf Of markallen(a)micron.com Sent: Wednesday, 15 March 2006 6:25 AM To: markallen(a)micron.com; toasters(a)mathworks.com Subject: RE: CPU Stats on multi-proc filers I use DFM and MRTG to monitor several of filers. I've ran into issues with CPU stats for multi-processor systems. DFM and MRTG will report the "any value" versus the average value. I've had several discussions with Netapp tech support on this topic and there was never a clear direction on with metric to key off of. Tech support informed me that I should be looking at the CPU utilization with sysstat -m and key off of the AVG value. rsh filer sysstat -m 1 ANY AVG CPU0 CPU1 CPU2 CPU3 69% 25% 3% 50% 0% 44% 77% 23% 2% 48% 1% 43% 100% 30% 1% 46% 0% 49% 100% 31% 2% 70% 1% 81% 100% 33% 2% 67% 0% 62% 100% 30% 1% 62% 0% 55% 99% 30% 1% 61% 0% 56% 93% 29% 2% 60% 0% 54% 41% 13% 2% 28% 0% 22% 49% 16% 2% 34% 0% 28% 50% 16% 2% 34% 0% 28% 43% 14% 2% 30% 0% 26% 51% 17% 2% 34% 0% 32% My metrics using DFM and MRTG captures the "any" value. According to Netapp it is not the metric that should be captured. Is anyone else having these challenges and is their a fix in DFM to collect the correct metric on multi-proc systems? Thanks -Mark ************** IMPORTANT MESSAGE ************** This e-mail message is intended only for the addressee(s) and contains information which may be confidential. If you are not the intended recipient please advise the sender by return email, do not use or disclose the contents, and delete the message and any attachments from your system. Unless specifically indicated, this email does not constitute formal advice or commitment by the sender or the Commonwealth Bank of Australia (ABN 48 123 123 124) or its subsidiaries. We can be contacted through our web site: commbank.com.au. If you no longer wish to receive commercial electronic messages from us, please reply to this e-mail by typing Unsubscribe in the subject line. ***************************************************************

1 0

RE: CPU Stats on multi-proc filers
by Davin Milun 14 Mar '06

14 Mar '06

At 12:25, on Mar 14, 2006, markallen(a)micron.com wrote: > I use DFM and MRTG to monitor several of filers. I've ran into issues > with CPU stats for multi-processor systems. DFM and MRTG will report > the "any value" versus the average value. I've had several discussions > with Netapp tech support on this topic and there was never a clear > direction on with metric to key off of. Tech support informed me that > I should be looking at the CPU utilization with sysstat -m and key off > of the AVG value. > ... > > My metrics using DFM and MRTG captures the "any" value. According to > Netapp it is not the metric that should be captured. Is anyone else > having these challenges and is their a fix in DFM to collect the > correct metric on multi-proc systems? Which MRTG are you using? I've found that querying SNMP for the CPU busy (.1.3.6.1.4.1.789.1.2.1.2) use will indeed graph the AVG CPU, which is the sane one. I've never understood why most NetApp tools (all the way down to regular sysstat (except for -m)) report the ANY value. Davin.

2 1

RE: Block access (iSCSI etc)
by Glenn Walker 14 Mar '06

14 Mar '06

Having worked for NetApp supporting Exchange\iSCSI\FCP, and as a customer using NetApp\iSCSI storage for a rather large Exchange infrastructure, I have nothing but good things to say... it works and works very well. There are some things that FCP does better: - Speed 2Gb/s vs. iSCSI @ 1Gb/s - Resiliency MPIO on FCP has been around longer than MPIO on iSCSI - Track Record It's very old technology by comparison - iSCSI is still relatively new However: iSCSI will likely get a huge boost in speed once 10Gb/s networking hits with full force compared to FCP's next jump to only 4Gb/s. iSCSI costs way less to implement than FCP due to use of generic\commodity equipment (ie, off the shelf Gig-E switches\NICs\Cables) vs. FCP's specialized\expensive gear (ever price a McData or Brocade switch??). I am somewhat biased in my opinion - I know that NetApp makes very good HW\SW and has excellent support... I can't speak to the other vendors out there because I frankly don't know them all that well. Glenn -----Original Message----- From: owner-toasters(a)mathworks.com [mailto:owner-toasters@mathworks.com] On Behalf Of Graeme Fowler Sent: Tuesday, March 14, 2006 11:34 AM To: toasters(a)mathworks.com Subject: Block access (iSCSI etc) Hi all I've recently moved jobs, and one of my new projects is being involved in a major email overhaul for my new employer. We're currently evaluating a whole heap of different aspects (desktop client, web client, clients for unsupported operating systems, diary/calendar, server software etc etc), two of which are Oracle Collaboration Suite (OCS) and MS Exchange. Both of these require block-level access to disk resources, whether direct attach, across a network using iSCSI, or directly into an FC SAN. Does anyone on the list have any stories - good, bad, or indifferent - about running the above pieces of software using a filer backend, generally over iSCSI *or* by breaking into the FC backend and hooking the filer into a SAN environment? If you do, I'd be pleased to hear them - offlist if necessary. If you're running either of them with a SAN backend which isn't NetApp, that's just as useful a data point. There's a lot of views being expressed in my direction at present which appear to be without foundation, so I'm very interested in any "real world" tales :) Thanks Graeme

1 0

RE: CPU Stats on multi-proc filers
by markallen＠micron.com 14 Mar '06

14 Mar '06

> I use DFM and MRTG to monitor several of filers. I've ran into issues > with CPU stats for multi-processor systems. DFM and MRTG will report > the "any value" versus the average value. I've had several discussions > with Netapp tech support on this topic and there was never a clear > direction on with metric to key off of. Tech support informed me that > I should be looking at the CPU utilization with sysstat -m and key off > of the AVG value. > > rsh filer sysstat -m 1 > > ANY AVG CPU0 CPU1 CPU2 CPU3 > 69% 25% 3% 50% 0% 44% > 77% 23% 2% 48% 1% 43% > 100% 30% 1% 46% 0% 49% > 100% 31% 2% 70% 1% 81% > 100% 33% 2% 67% 0% 62% > 100% 30% 1% 62% 0% 55% > 99% 30% 1% 61% 0% 56% > 93% 29% 2% 60% 0% 54% > 41% 13% 2% 28% 0% 22% > 49% 16% 2% 34% 0% 28% > 50% 16% 2% 34% 0% 28% > 43% 14% 2% 30% 0% 26% > 51% 17% 2% 34% 0% 32% > > My metrics using DFM and MRTG captures the "any" value. According to > Netapp it is not the metric that should be captured. Is anyone else > having these challenges and is their a fix in DFM to collect the > correct metric on multi-proc systems? > > Thanks > > -Mark

1 0

RE: Just a spam resource now...
by Ferrett, Simon 14 Mar '06

14 Mar '06

I'd think that moderating new subscribers until they've made a couple of salient on-topic posts that indicate they're not spam-machines would probably go a long way to addressing the issue. I'm not sure if the list owner, or anyone, has time to do that (or what the rate of new subscribers is) though... Simon.

1 0

Block access (iSCSI etc)
by Graeme Fowler 14 Mar '06

14 Mar '06

Hi all I've recently moved jobs, and one of my new projects is being involved in a major email overhaul for my new employer. We're currently evaluating a whole heap of different aspects (desktop client, web client, clients for unsupported operating systems, diary/calendar, server software etc etc), two of which are Oracle Collaboration Suite (OCS) and MS Exchange. Both of these require block-level access to disk resources, whether direct attach, across a network using iSCSI, or directly into an FC SAN. Does anyone on the list have any stories - good, bad, or indifferent - about running the above pieces of software using a filer backend, generally over iSCSI *or* by breaking into the FC backend and hooking the filer into a SAN environment? If you do, I'd be pleased to hear them - offlist if necessary. If you're running either of them with a SAN backend which isn't NetApp, that's just as useful a data point. There's a lot of views being expressed in my direction at present which appear to be without foundation, so I'm very interested in any "real world" tales :) Thanks Graeme

1 0

Just a spam resource now...
by Clawson, Simon 14 Mar '06

14 Mar '06

I have to say that what was once a great mailing list is now just a resource for Spam. Is there any way this rubbish can be filtered out? I am getting the same message over and over again... Simon Clawson Mentor Graphics Ireland Ltd Rivergate House London Road, Newbury, Berkshire RG14 2QB Office: 01635 811409 Mobile: 07833 787969

2 1

GRACE INTERNATIONAL IMPORT & EXPORT COMPANY
by g.graceinternational＠virgilio.it 14 Mar '06

14 Mar '06

Your Kind Attention: I am the PRESIDENT OF GRACE INTERNATIONAL, Import and Export Company based in the China. My company exports consumable proceesing raw materials and other goods/services for world trade. What we really require is someone who can represent this company in the US/CANADA and some parts of Europe. We have been having problems with clients in these regions because they are politely refusing to pay for shipments on one excuse or the other so we need a representative that can assist us in clearing our money in their respective countries. Be informed that as our representative, you will receive 10% of whatever amount you receive for the company and the balance will be paid into an account we will avail to you. The second thing required of you would be for you to establish a relationship on behalf of our company with other similar companies in your country so that we can have new ideas and directions. This job is rather easy and does not require a lot of expertise. If you are interested in this business offer, please email me at: shunlao(a)netscape.net Very Respectfully, Shun Lao. President GRACE INTERNATIONAL. Goods for Import / Export & Freight Fwdg. Svcs.

1 0

GRACE INTERNATIONAL IMPORT & EXPORT COMPANY
by g.graceinternational＠virgilio.it 14 Mar '06

14 Mar '06

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