toasters

toasters@lists.teaparty.net

2 participants
13529 discussions

RE: Archives
by Allen, Pat 23 May '02

23 May '02

There's a search front-end at http://teaparty.mathworks.com:1999/toasters/Search.html -- Pat -----Original Message----- From: Michael Galloway [mailto:mgx@ornl.gov] Sent: Thursday, May 23, 2002 6:29 AM To: Aldrich David S Cc: 'toasters(a)mathworks.com' Subject: Re: Archives Hi Aldrich! here is the one i use. no searchable archive that i'm aware of. http://teaparty.mathworks.com/toasters/ -- michael On Thu, 23 May 2002, Aldrich David S wrote: > How do I access the archives of this list? > > Thanks. > > David S. Aldrich > > John Deere Waterloo Works > P.O. Box 270 > Waterloo, Iowa 50701 > > Phone 319-292-8638 > Fax 319-287-1154 > Email AldrichDavidS(a)JohnDeere.com > > > >

1 0

NetApp CP exams
by Jacek Nogala 21 May '02

21 May '02

I am just preparing myself for NSO-400 and NSO-500 exams. Any hints regarding exam preparations and learning resources (except NOW/TechLib/documentation) will be greatly appreciated. Best regards, Jacek Nogala __________ Jacek Nogala /______/__/ Al. Jerozolimskie 65/79 jacek.nogala(a)solidex.com.pl _\____\___/ 00-697 Warszawa, Poland http://www.solidex.com.pl /______/__/ Tel: +48 (22) 630 66 11 SOLIDEX S.A. Fax: +48 (22) 630 66 13

1 0

RE: head swap
by Joe Luchtenberg 20 May '02

20 May '02

Since you indicated that you have a 600GB vol0 on an F740, that may mean that you've already maxed out on capacity (depending on what you meant by 600GB -- raw/useable?; any other volumes?). Therefore, you may have to do the head swap first and then create the new vol0 once you're up and running on the F840. Joe > -----Original Message----- > From: Chris Blackmor [SMTP:chris.blackmor@amd.com] > Sent: Monday, May 20, 2002 4:30 PM > To: Leonard, Roger > Cc: 'toasters(a)mathworks.com' > Subject: Re: head swap > > Roger, > The 7XX to 8XX swap is a different architecture and requires very delicate > > handling to avoid problems. We have done two in the past and I found out > just how to screw it up on the first one. ;) > > 1. Changing root volume > You can create a 2 disk volume naming it something other than vol0 > and copy over all of /etc from vol0 > Do a vol rename on the original root volume to something other than > vol0 > Do a vol rename on the 2 disk volume to vol0 > Set the 2 disk volume to a root volume with the vol options command > Reboot > > Once up and running you can remove the original /etc/ dir from the > original volume and your new volume will now hold all your > data. This also assumes that no one is mounting the data > from vol0 at the time. That is another can of worms. > > This will put the 2 disk volume as the root volume but it is > something > that you need to do quickly so that everything in root on the new > volume is the same as on the original volume > > 2. Changing the head for a 7->8 was a long time ago for me and I don't > want > to steer you wrong. You should really contact tech support and make > sure > that they give you all the steps. > > Good luck. > C- > > > On Mon, May 20, 2002 at 02:45:56PM -0400, Leonard, Roger wrote: > > i am thinking about swapping out a 740 for an 840 head. The 740 has a > big > > vol0 (600G) that i would like to rename to something else in the process > and > > dedicate a 2 disk RAID set to vol0 on the new head with a new 6.1 > install. > > is it a simple matter of configuring the new vol0 on the new head and > > plugging in the old vol0 and rebooting? or do i need to do some sort of > > rename and wipe out the old OS somehow. never having done a head swap > > before i would appreciate any pointers anyone could give me. > > > > thanks > > > > roger > > > > -- > -------------------------------------------------------------------------- > --- > * | When you give a lesson > * > * Chris Blackmor _______ | in meanness > * > * Advanced Micro Devices \____ | | to a critter or a > person, * > * Phone: (512) 602-1608 /| | | | don't be surprised > * > * Fax: (512) 602-5155 | |___| | | if they learn their > * > * Email: chris.blackmor(a)amd.com |____/ \| | lesson > * > * | Author > Unknown* > -------------------------------------------------------------------------- > --- > * My comments are mine, and mine alone. > * > -------------------------------------------------------------------------- > ---

1 0

head swap
by Leonard, Roger 20 May '02

20 May '02

i am thinking about swapping out a 740 for an 840 head. The 740 has a big vol0 (600G) that i would like to rename to something else in the process and dedicate a 2 disk RAID set to vol0 on the new head with a new 6.1 install. is it a simple matter of configuring the new vol0 on the new head and plugging in the old vol0 and rebooting? or do i need to do some sort of rename and wipe out the old OS somehow. never having done a head swap before i would appreciate any pointers anyone could give me. thanks roger

2 1

ip.tcp.sack.enable spontaneously toggling in 6.2 ?
by Chris Thompson 17 May '02

17 May '02

I have an F740 running ONTAP 6.2. Something odd seems to be happening to the value of "options ip.tcp.sack.enable" - it toggles spontaneously between "off" and "on" once an hour for no apparent reason! This seems to happen at the same time that /etc/registry is rewritten with a new "state.config.refresh.last" value. Can anyone else running 6.2 or 6.2R1 confirm that they see the same effect? [ For amusement only: I run a weekly job to check that all the options are what I expect and to report any differences. I noticed an oddity (now explained by the above) when I updated the reference values after upgrading 6.2 over 6 weeks ago, but didn't investigate at the time. The jobs always run at the same time of day, and so there have been an even number of toggles between them ... but the "once an hour" turns out to be more like "one hour plus one second", and the slow drift has apparently now caused there to be an odd number of toggles during the last week! This is what I guess from looking at /etc/registry in the snapshots, at least. ] Chris Thompson Email: cet1(a)cam.ac.uk

2 2

RE: nfs performance problems
by Leonard, Roger 17 May '02

17 May '02

what seemed to help my situation was turning on nfs V3 on the filer along with putting 5.37r3 down. the cp-from-cp went down, but not away and the client timeouts stopped. my filer load is still way high but i think the client not having to resend all those 32k blocks cut down a lot on the net load. -----Original Message----- From: Kelvin Edwards [mailto:kelvin@jlab.org] Sent: Friday, May 17, 2002 2:36 PM Cc: 'toasters(a)mathworks.com' Subject: Re: nfs performance problems We've been chasing some NFS timeout issues here as well. The systat 1 command on the filer doesn't look very bad, however, I did the wafl_susp -z followed by a wafl_susp -w after a few minutes(approx 5). The value at that time was >= 1 and it continued to increase over time. The recommendation below was to wait 30 seconds before checking the value, but does it matter. Does a value other than 0 in this parameter mean the filer is denying write requests to users ? Kelvin Edwards System Admin Jefferson Lab Brian Long wrote: > >The other command you can use to gather meaninful data is wafl_susp. Run >wafl_susp -z to reset the stats. Wait 30 seconds or more and then run >wafl_susp -w (you may want to do this via rsh and save the output to a >file). > >In the output, there is a field called "cp_from_cp". If this is called at >all, your NVRAM is overflowing and denying write requests to users. >cp_from_cp means you're in the middle of checkpointing the first half of >NVRAM and yet the second half already filled up and needs to checkpoint as >well. This is VERY bad. > >

2 1

RE: Antivirus Scanning in DOT 6.1.3
by Nail, Larry 17 May '02

17 May '02

1. What kind of performance impacts do you see in production environments? With at 2 scanners per head, we've seen no impact. Whilst one scanner is busy with a big file, the 2nd will take up the slack. Now if they're all down, no files served depending on your timeout settings. Also, watch your extension list & adjust it accordingly. We scan more than the default extensions (we dumped this in the rc file < vscan extensions add PIF,VB?,WJS,WSF,ADP,EML,LNK,CHM,VBE >) 2. What type of network interconnects are you using? In particular, would a VLAN on top of gigabit Ethernet be OK? We're using an isolated Gigabit Ethernet (Copper) network to connect all the scanners & heads. We considered VLAN, but it cost us more for ports on a Cisco 6513 vs. just buying a 3805 (I believe that is the model #) with fiber to copper transcievers. If you've got the ports for VLAN, it'll work great. You can also do cross-over cables, but it won't work if a cluster fails over. 3. Are there any recommendations about the vendors? We use Trend ScanMail for our Exchange servers and have been happy with that product. We also use NAV for our desktops. In our eval of Carrier Scan, McAfee & Trend - Trend won hands down. 4. Are there any horror/satisfaction stories or questions I missed? Nope, it's pretty straight forward once you're set up. THANKS! --- Pat Allen (pat(a)mbari.org) Monterey Bay Aquarium Research Institute (MBARI) 7700 Sandholdt Rd, Moss Landing, CA 95039 (voice) 831-775-1724; (fax) 831-775-1620

2 1

RE: nfs performance problems
by Leonard, Roger 17 May '02

17 May '02

actually i meant nfs tcp, not version 3. sorry. -----Original Message----- From: Leonard, Roger [mailto:Roger.Leonard@marconi.com] Sent: Friday, May 17, 2002 3:43 PM To: 'Kelvin Edwards' Cc: 'toasters(a)mathworks.com' Subject: RE: nfs performance problems what seemed to help my situation was turning on nfs V3 on the filer along with putting 5.37r3 down. the cp-from-cp went down, but not away and the client timeouts stopped. my filer load is still way high but i think the client not having to resend all those 32k blocks cut down a lot on the net load. -----Original Message----- From: Kelvin Edwards [mailto:kelvin@jlab.org] Sent: Friday, May 17, 2002 2:36 PM Cc: 'toasters(a)mathworks.com' Subject: Re: nfs performance problems We've been chasing some NFS timeout issues here as well. The systat 1 command on the filer doesn't look very bad, however, I did the wafl_susp -z followed by a wafl_susp -w after a few minutes(approx 5). The value at that time was >= 1 and it continued to increase over time. The recommendation below was to wait 30 seconds before checking the value, but does it matter. Does a value other than 0 in this parameter mean the filer is denying write requests to users ? Kelvin Edwards System Admin Jefferson Lab Brian Long wrote: > >The other command you can use to gather meaninful data is wafl_susp. Run >wafl_susp -z to reset the stats. Wait 30 seconds or more and then run >wafl_susp -w (you may want to do this via rsh and save the output to a >file). > >In the output, there is a field called "cp_from_cp". If this is called at >all, your NVRAM is overflowing and denying write requests to users. >cp_from_cp means you're in the middle of checkpointing the first half of >NVRAM and yet the second half already filled up and needs to checkpoint as >well. This is VERY bad. > >

1 0

nfs performance problems
by Leonard, Roger 17 May '02

17 May '02

I have a 740 with ~600GB of data. it is running 5.36r2. it has 512mb of ram and is running oc-3 (155mb) atm. periodically i see the good old "nfs server suchandsuch not responding" on various mid-range solaris boxes. and users complain about bad performance. general network performance is good for file transfers etc. there is a Ontap bug 12898 for 5.36r2 relating to these indications but in a TCP nfs environment. most of my solaris NFS mounts are V3 UDP. i am going to do an upgrade anyway but I was wondering if anyone else has seen this type of indication. also, see below the output of my sysstat. this goes on most of the day. it looks to me as if my filer is getting hammered. what do you guys think? thanks roger CPU NFS CIFS HTTP Net kB/s Disk kB/s Tape kB/s Cache 51% 4074 1 0 2854 3059 2040 908 0 0 1 100% 4146 0 0 4803 5471 6737 10593 0 0 1 67% 3228 1 0 4511 5770 3899 3587 0 0 1 81% 1894 0 0 3431 3363 8564 10631 0 0 1 71% 2308 0 0 5999 6482 3671 2843 0 0 1 57% 2108 1 0 2645 3359 4482 7641 0 0 1 65% 2882 1 0 5364 8072 3736 0 0 0 1 99% 2466 0 0 8339 7281 5808 6465 0 0 1 96% 2264 2 0 2869 3556 10404 12876 0 0 1 84% 4252 0 0 4003 2174 4090 12652 0 0 1 70% 3063 0 0 2939 4694 4820 5616 0 0 1 67% 3098 1 0 3097 4024 2878 10606 0 0 1 66% 4958 0 0 5352 2693 2137 0 0 0 1

4 3

ORA-07353 on NetApp F760 at 100MBit
by Joseph Bishop 17 May '02

17 May '02

Hello folks, Has anyone seen a message like this while trying to create an Oracle datafile from SUN Solaris under heavy Network load? ERROR at line 1: ORA-01119: error in creating database file '/blah/blah/blah.dbf' ORA-07353: sfccf: close error, unable to close file. SVR4 Error: 11: Resource temporarily unavailable There isn't much noted on the Oracle site. I am just curious if anyone has seen it and if it is an NFS timeout problem? I have checked /var/adm/messages but I don't seen anything. Joe

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