toasters

toasters@lists.teaparty.net

13515 discussions

RE: Jumbo frame
by Debbie.Lane＠intermec.com 23 Apr '04

23 Apr '04

Are you using a VIF? My understanding is that the 6509 does not support aggregation and jumbo frames. The 6509 supports aggregation OR jumbo, but not both together. -----Original Message----- From: Derek Lai [mailto:Derek.Lai@onyxco.com] Sent: Thursday, April 22, 2004 4:15 PM To: toasters(a)mathworks.com Subject: Jumbo frame Hi I just took over the administration of a F940C cluster. They and the servers are on a dedicated network running Gigabit Ethernet through a Cisco 6509 switch. I noticed that jumbo frame was not turned on. I had asked the previous administrator why and he said that they had tested the systems initially with Jumbo frame and did not notice any appreciable difference in performance. The main applications we are running are 3 databases - Oracle on HP-UX, Oracle on NT and SQLServer 2000 on NT. Anyone has good performance numbers using Jumbo frame vs. not using Jumbo frame? Jumbo frame is one of the highly recommended things by NetApp and I'd like to implement it but it sure would be nice to have some idea so I can set the right expectations. Thanks. Derek

1 0

Jumbo frame
by Derek Lai 22 Apr '04

22 Apr '04

Hi I just took over the administration of a F940C cluster. They and the servers are on a dedicated network running Gigabit Ethernet through a Cisco 6509 switch. I noticed that jumbo frame was not turned on. I had asked the previous administrator why and he said that they had tested the systems initially with Jumbo frame and did not notice any appreciable difference in performance. The main applications we are running are 3 databases - Oracle on HP-UX, Oracle on NT and SQLServer 2000 on NT. Anyone has good performance numbers using Jumbo frame vs. not using Jumbo frame? Jumbo frame is one of the highly recommended things by NetApp and I'd like to implement it but it sure would be nice to have some idea so I can set the right expectations. Thanks. Derek

1 0

RE: Trend Micro on the NetApp Filer
by Bender, Marilee 20 Apr '04

20 Apr '04

Just a guess. On the filer type vscan options and make sure the vscan options mandatory_scan is OFF. -----Original Message----- From: owner-toasters(a)mathworks.com [mailto:owner-toasters@mathworks.com] On Behalf Of Ahmed AlHussaini Sent: Tuesday, April 20, 2004 12:30 PM To: toasters(a)mathworks.com Subject: Trend Micro on the NetApp Filer I have Just recently installed Trend Micro antivirus for the Filer. I got a problem that I cannot access any file on the Filer. Any body can help on how to setup Trend Micro for F85 Filer ? Ahmad Alhussaini

1 0

Trend Micro on the NetApp Filer
by Ahmed AlHussaini 20 Apr '04

20 Apr '04

I have Just recently installed Trend Micro antivirus for the Filer. I got a problem that I cannot access any file on the Filer. Any body can help on how to setup Trend Micro for F85 Filer ? Ahmad Alhussaini

1 0

SnapMirror Monitoring
by Alan Biren 19 Apr '04

19 Apr '04

I am looking for a tool to monitor the SnapMirror status and provide notification upon problems. Anyone know of anything? ***************************************************************************************************** If you have received this email in error please notify the the system manager or the sender immediately and do not disclosed the to anyone or make copies. ** eSafe scanned this email for viruses, vandals or malicious content ** ** To find out eSafe(TM) and other Aladdin Security Products, contact AMC Corporation at (212) 620-0700 *****************************************************************************************************

1 0

Block size and ops/sec
by Edward Hibbert (eh＠dataconnection.com) 19 Apr '04

19 Apr '04

Suppose you have 20K of data to write. You could write that as a 20K chunk, or 10 chunks of 2K. I'd have thought that writing a chunk of 20K would be less expensive for the filer. Does anyone have any actual info about the effect that tuning the block size can have on the number of ops/second you can expect from a given filer? Regards, Edward Hibbert.

1 0

Private Gig Switch for Oracle mounts
by Robert Borowicz 19 Apr '04

19 Apr '04

My boss bought two Cisco 3650 Gig switches of which he will expect me to interconnect our Filer ( FAS 940 ), 3 SunFire 880's, 3 Sun E450's and 6 Gateway 975 Twin Xeon SuSe boxes to. The 880's and the SuSe boxes will all run Oracle over the switch back to separate Volumes on the Filer. The filer's Gig card is a "X1025C-D" Gbit, NIC Fiber card. I've asked that we purchase another Gbit card on the Filer so that I can do a failover VIF. I'm concerned about utilization on the Gbit interface on the Filer. Anybody have a similar environment and been there already? I'd like to trade notes if so. Thanks -Rob

3 2

RE: Private Gig Switch for Oracle mounts
by Alan Biren 17 Apr '04

17 Apr '04

Rob, I have a customer that is running Oracle on 12 v480's connected to a NearStore R100 and another 4 v480's to a FAS940. I have a single Gig Card from each server connected to two Cisco 3750 switches with a dual connection on the back-plane. The NearStore has 2 dual-port gig cards that have been set in a four port multi-vif and the Filer has three quad-port gig cards set into four multi-vif's with a second level multi-vif combining the two of them. It is important to remember that when setting up a vif you'll need to configure etherchannelling on the switches to support it. Cisco currently only support 16 ports in an etherchannel (just like NetApp) but only eight are active and the remaining are backup. Cisco will handle all of the load balancing. Bench marks at the customer revealed at 35% increase in performance with the NearStore and 50% increase from the Filer. Before NetApp they had all A1000 direct SCSI attached to each host. This is more than what yo uare looking at but I hop ethat it shows what the Appliances are capable of handling. Remember also that 99% of Oracle Corp, runs on NetApp Storage. Good-Luck, Alan ________________________________ From: owner-toasters(a)mathworks.com on behalf of Robert Borowicz Sent: Fri 4/16/2004 4:37 PM To: toasters(a)mathworks.com Subject: Private Gig Switch for Oracle mounts My boss bought two Cisco 3650 Gig switches of which he will expect me to interconnect our Filer ( FAS 940 ), 3 SunFire 880's, 3 Sun E450's and 6 Gateway 975 Twin Xeon SuSe boxes to. The 880's and the SuSe boxes will all run Oracle over the switch back to separate Volumes on the Filer. The filer's Gig card is a "X1025C-D" Gbit, NIC Fiber card. I've asked that we purchase another Gbit card on the Filer so that I can do a failover VIF. I'm concerned about utilization on the Gbit interface on the Filer. Anybody have a similar environment and been there already? I'd like to trade notes if so. Thanks -Rob ***************************************************************************************************** If you have received this email in error please notify the the system manager or the sender immediately and do not disclosed the to anyone or make copies. ** eSafe scanned this email for viruses, vandals or malicious content ** ** To find out eSafe(TM) and other Aladdin Security Products, contact AMC Corporation at (212) 620-0700 *****************************************************************************************************

1 0

Robocopy issue
by Carlos A. Alvarez 16 Apr '04

16 Apr '04

Hi everybody, I wonder if someone expirienced the same situations. When I finish to move files with Robocopy /move (v 1.96) command from a qtree(ntfs) on Filer (6.4.3) to a server W2K, the qtree get unaccessible and every users connected to this qtree share get access denied. Access to qtree reenable when I delete and reconfigure this qtree share. Data inside this qtree is unavailable too if I access from root volumen where this qtree resides via C$ Any help will be appreciated. EXAMPLE: H:\scripts>robocopy T:\ Z:\depuraciones\filer880\TDisk *.zip /eta /z /move ---------------------------------------------------------------------- ROBOCOPY v 1.96 : Robust File Copy for Windows NT ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Started : Wed Apr 14 09:59:12 2004 Source : T:\ Dest : Z:\depuraciones\filer880\TDisk\ Files : *.zip Options : /MOVE /Z /ETA /R:1000000 /W:30 --------------------------------------------------------------------- 2 T:\ *EXTRA File 8362 Total.zip *EXTRA File 1798136 WBS2002CMA1.zip 100% New File 24131012 2.zip New File 10264667 c2600-is-mz.122-19a.zip 09:59 -> 100% --------------------------------------------------------------------- Total Copied Skipped Mismatch FAILED Extras Dirs : 1 0 1 0 0 0 Files : 2 2 0 0 0 2 Bytes : 32.80 m 32.80 m 0 0 0 1.72 m Times : 0:00:16 0:00:16 0:00:00 0:00:00 Speed : 2068913 bps. Speed : 118.384 mb/min. Ended : Wed Apr 14 09:59:29 2004 H:\scripts>dir T:\ Access is denied. H:\scripts>dir T:\ Access is denied. Thanks

1 0

Filer Shelfs used on non-NetApp Hardware
by Steve Evans 16 Apr '04

16 Apr '04

I have a couple FC8 shelfs that are no longer being used on Filers. Can I reuse them on non-NetApp hardware? Steve Evans SDSU Foundation

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