toasters

toasters@lists.teaparty.net

2 participants
13529 discussions

Re: Incremental NDMP backup after volume migration.
by Roger Stansfield 30 Sep '05

30 Sep '05

After getting some advice on this list (don't use ndmpcopy, use Snapmirror), I raised this as a support case with NetApp. Since someone asked me feed back any answers to toasters, here is the essence of the NetApp reply after they had made a practical test: After doing: incremental Veritas Netbackup by ndmp of vol2 ndmpcopy /vol/vol2 /vol/vol2flex (to migrate to a flexible volume, vol2 is traditional) vol rename vol2 vol2trad vol rename vol2flex vol2 An incremental Netbackup by ndmp of vol2 now backs up all files (as a level 0). Roger Stansfield. >Date: Tue, 20 Sep 2005 11:55:18 +0100 >To: toasters(a)mathworks.com >From: Roger Stansfield <r.stansfield(a)rri.sari.ac.uk> >Subject: Incremental NDMP backup after volume migration. > >I asked the following on the NOW Backup Community Forum but I haven't yet >had any reply. Can anyone help, please? > >I have upgraded to ONTAP 7.0.1R1. I shall use ndmpcopy to copy vol2 to a >new vol2flex- there's enough space. I shall remame vol2 to vol2trad and >vol2flex to vol2. vol2 contains files accessed by CIFS. > >We run nightly ndmp incremental backups (Netbackup, Windows). > >1. Will the backup after the volume renaming be as normal (because most >file modification times are still prior to the last incremental) or will >we get a backup of everything (because some archive status bit shows none >of the files have been previously backed up)? > >2. To migrate, I may, in the event, do a level 0 ndmpcopy on a live system >followed by a level 1 ndmpcopy with the volume restricted. Does this make >a difference? > >3. Later, I shall handle vol1 which has files accessed by both NFS and >CIFS. Will the situation be different on this volume? > >4. If a "level 0" backup is going to be produced, is there some way of >avoiding this or are there good reasons why we should want to get a full >backup? -- > Roger Stansfield, > Rowett Research Institute, Bucksburn, Aberdeen, AB21 9SB, Scotland, U.K. > Telephone: 01224 716677. Fax: 01224 715349. > mailto:R.Stansfield@rri.sari.ac.uk http://www.rowett.ac.uk/

1 0

Re: moving shelves between heads
by Blake Golliher 30 Sep '05

30 Sep '05

Yup that will work just fine. You should watch to make sure the network cards are in the same spots as they are in your replacement head, or you'll be stuck trying to configure the nic on the console with only rdfile/wrfile to do it*. You don't need to worry about the disk HBA's at all, they can be anywhere allowable. I witnessed this happen in production not long ago, with a 840 to a 960. Worked as smooth as anything. Of course that's only true if you maintain platform arch. Since the 840 is an Intel based system, and the 960 is an Intel based system it works fine. But if you have a 760, and you want to just attach it's shelves to a 960 and have it boot, there are problem since the 760 is an Alpha (DEC/Alpha 21164 proc @600mhz, 'cause I knew you were going to ask) under the hood, OnTap will have to be changed before it'll work. It's not impossible, just harder. But that's only if you have a 980 you want to be a spare for a 760, or visa versa. Probably not to relevant. But then, I'm rambling. Whatever happened to the idea of partitioned nvram cards on the filer, with infiniband switches for something close to N+1 failover? Like, having 5 heads with 4 in production, the 5th is a hot standby that can be a cluster partner to any one of the 4 production systems. If one of the 4 nodes crash, that 5th head is available to do a CFO for that head. That'd be hot. Toss in a vixel (dumb)switch for disk connectivity... -Blake *when, oh WHEN, will there be something other then 1980's concat type editor OnTap? Can't we get something like pico into OnTap one fine day? > On 9/29/05, John Jetmore <jetmore(a)cinergycom.com> wrote: > > > > My company is working on upgrading our netapp infrastructure. At the > > moment we have quite a few F760s with a spare F760 head we can swap out if > > any of the others die. Someone today raised a question of whether the > > spare head had to be the same as the production head. That is, could we > > commit to buying anything from the 900 series lineand then use, say, a 980 > > to spare for a 960? > > > > So the question boils down to, could I take the shelves off of a 960 and > > move them to a 980 and have it "just work"? I have my own guess on > > whether it would work but I though someone may no for sure or have tried > > it. > > > > Thanks > > --John > > >

1 0

moving shelves between heads
by John Jetmore 30 Sep '05

30 Sep '05

My company is working on upgrading our netapp infrastructure. At the moment we have quite a few F760s with a spare F760 head we can swap out if any of the others die. Someone today raised a question of whether the spare head had to be the same as the production head. That is, could we commit to buying anything from the 900 series lineand then use, say, a 980 to spare for a 960? So the question boils down to, could I take the shelves off of a 960 and move them to a 980 and have it "just work"? I have my own guess on whether it would work but I though someone may no for sure or have tried it. Thanks --John

1 0

VFM/StorageX remote replication agent capacity/scalability
by Hill, Aaron 28 Sep '05

28 Sep '05

Hi there, Does anyone have any capacity/scalability limitations they can share regarding VFM (or StorageX) and its remote replication agents? I cannot seem to get any information from Network Appliance. Scenario; * Using VFM 5.5 to manage (and monitor) the replication of data from 1 filer to many (maybe 1000+) Windows 2003 servers. * 1-way replication over many WAN links of varying capacity, latency etc. Effectively a "push" from filer to Windows servers. * Windows servers have the remote replication agent installed. * Data will be scheduled to transfer during specific times. * Expected maximum of 1-2Gb of data to be baseline synchronisation. * Expected <1mb per day changes to be replicated. Has anyone implemented anything of this scale or larger? Is there a maximum number of replications that a single VFM server & the replication agent infrastructure can manage? Is it a function of VFM/StorageX, Windows Server 2003, the filers or all the above? Thanks in advance for any experiences, Aaron ************** 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. ***************************************************************

2 1

You toasters@mathworks.com are not member (mule-ja ML)
by mule-ja-admin＠m17n.org 28 Sep '05

28 Sep '05

あなたはこのメーリングリスト <mule-ja(a)m17n.org> のメンバーではありません。メーリングリストについての一般的な案内はメールの本文に guide と書いたメールを mule-ja-ctl(a)m17n.org 宛に送ると送られてきます。

1 0

RE: Qual_devices + new disk error
by Chan, Paul 28 Sep '05

28 Sep '05

You can download the current qual_devices file at: http://now.netapp.com/NOW/download/tools/diskfw/ see the link at the very top of this page. Hope this helps. Paul -----Original Message----- From: Julian Grunnell [mailto:julian.grunnell@pipex.net] Sent: Tuesday, September 27, 2005 2:53 AM To: 'John Stoffel' Cc: toasters(a)mathworks.com Subject: RE: Qual_devices + new disk error Hi - thanks John. They don't want to work. Not 100% sure where they came from to be honest. But the NetApps does recognise them ... just only 17gb of them and not the 36gb. As each install takes forever, 8 floppy disks? Are they having a laugh? Anyway doing a fresh install with my 2 x 36gb 15K drives and 3 x 36gb 10k drives installed. It chooses to use the 2 15k drives as vol0 - I had no choice in this matter it just did it, maybe because it sees these as the "smallest" drives? So ended up again with the system reporting vol0 as being made up of 2 x 17gb drives. So did another install, this time with 5 x 10k 36gb drives, all went well. All disks shown as expected. I then edited the qual_devices file and added an entry for my 15k drives based on the format shown and did a reboot. Rebooted okay, no errors at all. So pulled one of the data drives and replaced it with a 15k drive. It then reports an error with qual_devices file: Tue Sep 27 09:10:02 GMT [disk.dynamicqual.failure.invalidFile:error]: Device qualification information file (/etc/qual_devices) is invalid. Please refer to the qual_devices man page for corrective action. This problem must be corrected within 72 hour(s) to avoid a forced system shutdown. The following disk(s) remain unqualified: 1.3 etc... So the NetApps must do some sort of sanity check on this file when disks are added. Again the disk is reported as 17gb only. Plug the 10k 36gb drive back in and all is well again. Anyway, took a while but worth a go I suppose and answered a few questions. Doing a search on NOW for "ST336753FC" gives only one reply in the NOW Forums to do with a FAS920, which wasn't much help but thought I'd include it in my reply anyway. X271A -36GB 15K sysconfig output (from parts finder): Seagate>>>NETAPP X271_S15K3036F15 ?Cheetah 36GB 15K ST336753FC Thanks - Julian. -----Original Message----- From: John Stoffel [mailto:john.stoffel@taec.toshiba.com] Sent: 26 September 2005 15:53 To: Julian Grunnell Cc: toasters(a)mathworks.com Subject: Re: Qual_devices + new disk error Julian> Got an F740 with a single disk shelf attached, running OnTap Julian> 6.5.5. Been goofing around with it, rebuilding it. The disks Julian> installed at present are: Julian> 0: SEAGATE ST136403FC NA13 34.5GB ( 71132960 512B/sect) Julian> 1: SEAGATE ST336753FC 0005 17.0GB ( 71687367 512B/sect) Julian> 2: SEAGATE ST136403FC NA13 34.5GB ( 71132960 512B/sect) Julian> 3: SEAGATE ST136403FC NA13 34.5GB ( 71132960 512B/sect) Julian> 4: SEAGATE ST336753FC 0002 17.0GB ( 71687367 512B/sect) Julian> Now 1.1 + 1.4 are actually 36gb 15k drives, whereas the others Julian> are 36gb 10k drives. When the 15k drives are installed I get the Julian> following warning message: I assume you got these 15k drives from somewhere else and not Netapp? Julian> Now the file /etc/qual_devices is there, I even got the one from Julian> now.netapp.com - dated Dec 2000!!?!?! (is that the Julian> latest?) but the disks above don't appear to be listed. Can Julian> anyone tell me if these disks will actaully work? As having just Julian> 17gb available is not a great deal of use. Well, if you're just playing, you could certainly try to just add a new entry to the qual_devices line and see what happens. But you'll be on your own. Julian> And if these disks are supported is it possible to mix 10k & 15k Julian> drives? I really just want the full capacity of the drives. There's no real reason they won't work together, it's just that Netapp won't support you if something goes wrong. *grin* >From the look of the file, all you'd need to add is a line like this: D SEAGATE ST336753FC 0002 512 and see what happens. you might need a reboot to make it take effect after you do the edit. The key is probably the '512' part, since you don't want to mess around with the Zone Checksums (or is it block? I can't remember...) since you disk most likely is setup for 512 byte blocks, not the 520 byte blocks. Good luck, John

3 3

RE: Database on F740
by Alex Soo 28 Sep '05

28 Sep '05

Hi Alan, There is almost nothing there when I try this in the evening when I only have a few station log on. 1% 0 1 0 0 0 23 23 0 0 >60 1% 0 1 0 0 0 37 40 0 0 >60 1% 0 2 0 0 0 21 21 0 0 >60 1% 0 0 0 0 0 21 23 0 0 >60 1% 0 2 0 0 0 39 43 0 0 >60 1% 0 1 0 0 0 18 25 0 0 >60 4% 0 117 0 16 36 33 49 0 0 >60 1% 0 4 0 1 3 43 57 0 0 >60 1% 0 9 0 2 10 24 27 0 0 >60 1% 0 1 0 0 0 34 42 0 0 >60 1% 0 2 0 0 0 58 39 0 0 >60 2% 0 39 0 8 162 46 23 0 0 >60 1% 0 2 0 1 51 51 58 0 0 >60 1% 0 0 0 0 0 18 21 0 0 >60 1% 0 0 0 0 0 20 21 0 0 >60 1% 0 0 0 0 0 30 42 0 0 >60 1% 0 1 0 0 0 19 21 0 0 >60 1% 0 0 0 0 0 19 21 0 0 >60 1% 0 0 0 0 0 36 39 0 0 >60 CPU NFS CIFS HTTP Net kB/s Disk kB/s Tape kB/s Cache in out read write read write age 1% 0 0 0 0 0 19 21 0 0 >60 1% 0 0 0 0 0 35 39 0 0 >60 The application is good for 10min and slow down after that. Logoff and logon again to the application its working good for another 10min. this happen to every individual workstation. And 1 work station logon or off does not affect another. Any other clue to look out for. Thanks Alex Soo _____ From: Alan Biren [mailto:ABiren@asisystem.com] Sent: Tuesday, 27 September, 2005 8:10 PM To: Alex Soo Subject: RE: Database on F740 Alex, you should get performance numbers from the Filer to see what the utilitzation is at sysstat is usually the first command to check. Also, check the workstations for any performance problems. _____ From: owner-toasters(a)mathworks.com [mailto:owner-toasters@mathworks.com] On Behalf Of Alex Soo Sent: Tuesday, September 27, 2005 7:24 AM To: toasters(a)mathworks.com Subject: Database on F740 Would like to find out if anybody has come across this problem. We are Running a database application off the F740 with gigabit connection on filer and workstation. We have about 6 to 8 workstation connected to the application at any time. During the first 5 to 10 min of any workstation log on, the application will works fine, after that it will be slower by about 50 to 60%. The users can logoff and logon immediately and every thing will be working fine again until like 5 to 10 min later. Any body has any clue of what setting should I be looking out? Thanks, Alex Soo CONFIDENTIAL NOTE: The information contained in this email is intended only for the use of the individual or entity named above and may contain information that is privileged, confidential and exempt from disclosure under applicable law. If the reader of this message is not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution or copying of this communication is strictly prohibited. If you have received this message in error, please immediately notify the sender and delete the mail. Thank you. **************************************************************************** ************************* Note: ASI System Integration Inc, is located at 48 West 37th Street, New York, NY 10018. The contents of this email and any attachments are confidential. It is intended for the named recipient(s) only. If you have received this email in error please notify the system manager or the sender immediately and do not disclose the contents to anyone or make copies. ** eSafe scanned this email for viruses, vandals or malicious content ** **************************************************************************** ************************* CONFIDENTIAL NOTE: The information contained in this email is intended only for the use of the individual or entity named above and may contain information that is privileged, confidential and exempt from disclosure under applicable law. If the reader of this message is not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution or copying of this communication is strictly prohibited. If you have received this message in error, please immediately notify the sender and delete the mail. Thank you.

1 0

Revision to Your Amazon.com Information
by Amazon 28 Sep '05

28 Sep '05

1 0

VIRUS (Win32/MyDoom.O!Worm): IN UNA E-MAIL DA LEI INVIATA
by Content-filter at bootes.trampi.mpi.it 28 Sep '05

28 Sep '05

VIRUS ALERT Il sistema di scansione ha rilevato un problema in una email presumibilmente inviate da Lei -> (<toasters(a)mathworks.com>), per il seguente destinatario: -> rmee16500n(a)istruzione.it La consegna del messaggio non e' potuta avvenire Di seguito i riferimenti della e-Mail inviata: ------------------------- BEGIN HEADERS ----------------------------- Return-Path: <toasters(a)mathworks.com> Received: from mathworks.com (host160-102.pool81119.interbusiness.it [81.119.102.160]) by mx3.istruzione.it (Mail Service) with ESMTP id 25FEDBA9BE for <rmee16500n(a)istruzione.it>; Wed, 28 Sep 2005 10:27:39 +0200 (CEST) From: toasters(a)mathworks.com To: rmee16500n(a)istruzione.it Subject: Delivery reports about your e-mail Date: Wed, 28 Sep 2005 10:30:45 +0200 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0010_7D6F800F.ABAA83A5" X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2600.0000 X-MIMEOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2600.0000 Message-Id: <20050928082739.25FEDBA9BE(a)mx3.istruzione.it> -------------------------- END HEADERS ------------------------------

1 0

Qual_devices + new disk error
by Julian Grunnell 27 Sep '05

27 Sep '05

Hi - hoping someone can help me with a disk replacement problem I've run into. Got an F740 with a single disk shelf attached, running OnTap 6.5.5. Been goofing around with it, rebuilding it. The disks installed at present are: 0: SEAGATE ST136403FC NA13 34.5GB ( 71132960 512B/sect) 1: SEAGATE ST336753FC 0005 17.0GB ( 71687367 512B/sect) 2: SEAGATE ST136403FC NA13 34.5GB ( 71132960 512B/sect) 3: SEAGATE ST136403FC NA13 34.5GB ( 71132960 512B/sect) 4: SEAGATE ST336753FC 0002 17.0GB ( 71687367 512B/sect) Now 1.1 + 1.4 are actually 36gb 15k drives, whereas the others are 36gb 10k drives. When the 15k drives are installed I get the following warning message: Mon Sep 26 12:02:01 GMT [disk.dynamicqual.failure.missingFile:error]: Device Qua lification information file (/etc/qual_devices) is missing. Please refer to the qual_devices man page for corrective action. This problem must be corrected with in 72 hour(s) to avoid a forced system shutdown. The following disk(s) remain un Qualified ... Now the file /etc/qual_devices is there, I even got the one from now.netapp.com - dated Dec 2000!!?!?! (is that the latest?) but the disks above don't appear to be listed. Can anyone tell me if these disks will actaully work? As having just 17gb available is not a great deal of use. And if these disks are supported is it possible to mix 10k & 15k drives? I really just want the full capacity of the drives. Thanks - J.

4 5

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