toasters

toasters@lists.teaparty.net

13515 discussions

Aggregate size question
by Willeke, Jochen 24 Feb '06

24 Feb '06

Hi everyboby, i have a little question about aggregate sizing. I have a aggregate called aggr1 consisting of 24 disks â 137 GB hosted on a FAS920c running Ontap 7.0.1R1. As i have 2 raidgroups 4 disks are parity. I took the 20 left disks and calculated the following: 20 (disks) x 137 GB (size) x 0,90 (10% WAFL) x 0,95 (5% Aggr Snapshot) = 2342,7 GB When i perform a 'df -Ahr' i only see this: df -Ahr Aggregate total used avail reserved aggr1 2270GB 1924GB 346GB 0GB aggr1/.snapshot 119GB 34GB 84GB 0GB So i have a difference of about 70 GB between my result and the total which Ontap shows me. Ok, 70 GB won't make the world turn faster :-) but i would like to understand why i am missing 70 GB. Thanks in advance Jochen

1 0

I would like to browse this speedily.
by Kereem 24 Feb '06

24 Feb '06

Good morning Godfrey, Just read, I saw in the Oprah that the market for my home has steadily been decreasing. even though it seems like its been a record couple wks, everything looks like it's been so overvauled now. Gladly, rates are still low enough for me to take advantage of the value in my place. I came across this place, http://au.geocities.com/leopoldo_sitar/, last week and they assisted me get the value of my house out. They're great b/c there is no annonying people and they don't try to sell you anything. Hope this is what u were looking for, Kereem

1 0

Re[1]:
by Jacklyn Baez 24 Feb '06

24 Feb '06

Hey toasters(a)mathworks.com, Simple, Quick and affordab1e. Pri_vate 0n1_!ne 0rd_er!ng. -------------------------------- copy the address below and paste in u your web browser: aplastic.herownpc.com -------------------------------- vali d for 24 hurs. Swim the delicate brothers, the Pleiades.. Believe in the right, let none push you back.=20. While ravening clouds, the burial clouds, in black masses spreading,. I am the woman who worked in the field=20. With these kisses let me remove your tears;=20. See you later, Vance Schulz

1 0

We pay for your opinion!
by recruiting-support＠brandinstitute.com 23 Feb '06

23 Feb '06

Greetings from Brand Institute, Inc.! Would you like to help create the most popular brands in the market while getting paid for your opinion? Brand Institute, a leading consulting firm needs your help. We conduct live and online market research surveys/brainstorming sessions to help our customers develop new and exciting names for their products. We need your ideas and opinions to come up with the best possible names. We will pay you for your contribution according to the difficulty of the assignment; we only ask for a few minutes of your time and a lot of your creativity! If you think you have what it takes to name the next hit television network or the newest household product, please sign up at our website: http://www.brandinst.com/survey/ <https://www.brandinst.com/MEMBERSERVICES/cg_reg.asp?RefId=E1257391&lang uage=English> . We will not use your information for anything except the surveys, and of course.to mail you your check! We will not sell your information to any lists or use it for illicit advertising. Please feel free to pass this message along to anyone you think would enjoy making extra money while getting involved in the creation of tomorrow's products. Thank you very much; we appreciate your help! Soon, your ideas may be part of a national marketing campaign! Kind regards, The Brand Institute Team recruiting-support(a)brandinstitute.com

1 0

Re: maxing out the filesystem
by Chris Thompson 23 Feb '06

23 Feb '06

"Glenn Dekhayser" <gdekhayser(a)voyantinc.com> writes: > Netapp recommends that you keep the fileysystems at 80% or less. Otherwise, > WAFL starts to work very hard finding places to put data, and you'll > see CPU spikes, High disk utilization, and degraded performance. while Jeff Burton <jburto1(a)yahoo.com> writes: > We have a FAS940C that has 2 trad volumes (5TB & 3TB, 144GB/FC drives) that are > always around 95%+ full because of funding and timing issues. Only when we run > out of space do we start deleting snapshots, otherwise there are always a few > hundred GB of snapshots. We've been running over 90% for the past year and > have never had an outage or major hiccup...just a few disk failures. We > typically have 4k-5k active CIFS connections and around 100 NFS connections. > Clients have never noticed a performance problem, and our CPU utilization > hovers between 30% and 50%. So maybe we do not notice a problem because there > is more than enough CPU cycles left over for DOT/WAFL to deal with the full > file system. which seems a clear case of YMMV ! It's worth remembering that ONTAP already imposes a 10% reserve on the filing system size (including snapshot reserve); or on the sum of sizes, for flexible volumes in an aggregate. A "100% full" tradvol/aggregate is actually only using 90% of the blocks on the discs. Or looked at another way, the difference in congestion between "90% full" and "100% full" is 2:1, not infinity:1. "Blake Golliher" <thelastman(a)gmail.com> writes: > A filer can be written to over 100% space utilization, it'll just keep > growing. I've seen filers go up tot 107% space utilization before. and "George, Andrew" <georgea(a)anz.com> replies: > Interesting > We run a fair few filers in the 97%-99% arena, mainly as CIFS NAS devices. > Every time I've seen it hit 100% 0 bytes available CIFS has refused to > save anything. That's my experience, with NFS. I would be interested (from a theoretical point of view!) to know how Blake gets the space utilisation that high. (Snapshot usage vs reserve as shown by "df" can go over 100%, of course.) -- Chris Thompson Email: cet1(a)cam.ac.uk

1 0

Doris Browne
by Kareem Kane 23 Feb '06

23 Feb '06

Earle, %CUSTOM_LINK Kareem Kane

1 0

RE: maxing out the filesystem
by George, Andrew 23 Feb '06

23 Feb '06

Interesting We run a fair few filers in the 97%-99% arena, mainly as CIFS NAS devices. Every time I've seen it hit 100% 0 bytes available CIFS has refused to save anything. I've definitely seen he performance hit of adding too few disks at the same time...my usual trick is to add in half or full raidgroups and do it on a weekend so theres a chance for weekend users to fill up some disk. If I need to use less disks I usually do it on a Sat morning and run wafl scan reallocate to respread the data over the weekend...thats usually a big hit to snapshot space for us and in recent versions of Ontap, reallocate will hang if there isn't about 10% free snapshot and 10% free disk -----Original Message----- From: owner-toasters(a)mathworks.com [mailto:owner-toasters@mathworks.com] On Behalf Of Blake Golliher Sent: Thursday, 23 February 2006 4:26 PM To: jburto1(a)yahoo.com Cc: toasters(a)mathworks.com Subject: Re: maxing out the filesystem A filer can be written to over 100% space utilization, it'll just keep growing. I've seen filers go up tot 107% space utilization before. On a full volume, what you'll see suffer are writes, as the filer has to work harder to find free contiguous space to write a stripe to. You may see read problems, but only if you have high churn. It sounds like you aren't all that performance centric, however. I'd say keep it in the 90% range. When you get the chance get some disks. I'd recommend you add disks in sets of raidgroups. If you have a 10 disk raid group, add another 10 (watch the vol option raidsize setting!). Do not add one disk at a time, since your setting yourself up for failure. All your new writes will go to the new disks, and so all reads will as well. -Blake On 2/22/06, Jeff Burton <jburto1(a)yahoo.com> wrote: > We have a FAS940C that has 2 trad volumes (5TB & 3TB, 144GB/FC drives) > that are always around 95%+ full because of funding and timing issues. > Only when we run out of space do we start deleting snapshots, > otherwise there are always a few hundred GB of snapshots. We've been > running over 90% for the past year and have never had an outage or > major hiccup...just a few disk failures. We typically have 4k-5k active CIFS connections and around 100 NFS connections. > Clients have never noticed a performance problem, and our CPU > utilization hovers between 30% and 50%. So maybe we do not notice a > problem because there is more than enough CPU cycles left over for > DOT/WAFL to deal with the full file system. > > Jeff > > --- Glenn Dekhayser <gdekhayser(a)voyantinc.com> wrote: > > > Netapp recommends that you keep the fileysystems at 80% or less. > > Otherwise, WAFL starts to work very hard finding places to put data, > > and you'll see CPU spikes, High disk utilization, and degraded performance. > > > > Glenn > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: owner-toasters(a)mathworks.com > > [mailto:owner-toasters@mathworks.com] On Behalf Of Philippe Jackson > > Sent: Wednesday, February 22, 2006 12:09 PM > > To: toasters(a)mathworks.com > > Subject: maxing out the filesystem > > > > This is my first time posting Â... I just inherited 2 older filers. > > 840 and 960 models > > > > Unfortunately they didnÂ't come with nearly enough disk space for our needs. > > > > I know I canÂ't fill the volumes to 100% and expect them to work > > Â... but how > > > > high can I fill the volumes and expect it to work and performance > > not to sufferÂ.... Can I go to 95% if I turn off snapshots? > > > > Any feedback or experience from filers at 95% would be appreciated > > Â... IÂ'm hoping to learn from other peopleÂ's mistakes this time. > > > > Of course thereÂ's always the option of buying more disk Â... but > > for now I need to see what I can do with what we've been given > > without spending more money. > > > > Cheers > > Philip > > > > _________________________________________________________________ > > On the road to retirement? Check out MSN Life Events for advice on > > how to get there! > > http://lifeevents.msn.com/category.aspx?cid=Retirement > > > > > > > > > __________________________________________________ > Do You Yahoo!? > Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around > http://mail.yahoo.com >

1 0

RE: maxing out the filesystem
by Glenn Dekhayser 23 Feb '06

23 Feb '06

Netapp recommends that you keep the fileysystems at 80% or less. Otherwise, WAFL starts to work very hard finding places to put data, and you'll see CPU spikes, High disk utilization, and degraded performance. Glenn -----Original Message----- From: owner-toasters(a)mathworks.com [mailto:owner-toasters@mathworks.com] On Behalf Of Philippe Jackson Sent: Wednesday, February 22, 2006 12:09 PM To: toasters(a)mathworks.com Subject: maxing out the filesystem This is my first time posting Â... I just inherited 2 older filers. 840 and 960 models Unfortunately they didnÂ't come with nearly enough disk space for our needs. I know I canÂ't fill the volumes to 100% and expect them to work Â... but how high can I fill the volumes and expect it to work and performance not to sufferÂ.... Can I go to 95% if I turn off snapshots? Any feedback or experience from filers at 95% would be appreciated Â... IÂ'm hoping to learn from other peopleÂ's mistakes this time. Of course thereÂ's always the option of buying more disk Â... but for now I need to see what I can do with what we've been given without spending more money. Cheers Philip _________________________________________________________________ On the road to retirement? Check out MSN Life Events for advice on how to get there! http://lifeevents.msn.com/category.aspx?cid=Retirement

3 2

Look into this proposal with me, can you?
by Sybilla 23 Feb '06

23 Feb '06

Yo Wunand, I've been talking about for the past couple months that the market for real estate is crashing and now's the perfect chance to take out some cash before it crashes. I'm in the market for another place in Texas right now and I hooked up with this firm at www.khcbw.org/cyw/tnq/yt6/, that is helping me get it. It was rather quite easy and no hassles with them. I basically told them what I wanted and they did it without any problems I gotta run, but I hope that you can give them a look and have the same experiences I did with them. It's worth the 30 sec. it takes to get more info from them. Talk to you later, Sybilla

1 0

RE: Daylight saving changes from April to March on 2007!
by Ehrhart, Rick 22 Feb '06

22 Feb '06

Network Appliance is working on providing new timezone files without running zic and a procedure to load the new timezone files. - Rick - > -----Original Message----- > From: George, Andrew [mailto:georgea@anz.com] > Sent: Thursday, February 16, 2006 2:45 PM > To: Cao, Vinh V (Vinh); toasters(a)mathworks.com > Subject: RE: Daylight saving changes from April to March on 2007! > > > I asked about Australia as we've got a change due to the commonwealth > games > Netapps response was to point me to the Brazil time KB > article and tell > me roll my own zonefiles > Being a 99% windows only shop I was less than impressed with trying to > locate a Unix box with zic on top of it so I could compile > the binaries > (wound up using a linux box) considering just about every other > enterprise vendor I've seen was happy to supply updated zone files. > > I didn't succumb to temptation and name the new timezone time code to > "Netapp Sucks" (though it was awfully tempting to send a > couple of weeks > autosupport logs in with that just to get the message across > > Andrew > > -----Original Message----- > From: owner-toasters(a)mathworks.com > [mailto:owner-toasters@mathworks.com] > On Behalf Of Cao, Vinh V (Vinh) > Sent: Friday, 17 February 2006 6:06 AM > To: toasters(a)mathworks.com > Subject: Daylight saving changes from April to March on 2007! > > Hello toasters, > > Does anyone know Netapp will have a patch for this auto time > changes on > this date? > > Read Change to Daylight Saving Time > > > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Energy_Policy_Act_of_2005#Change_ to_Dayligh t_Saving_Time Just curiosity, Vinh

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