toasters

toasters@lists.teaparty.net

13520 discussions

FC_AL in slot 8?
by Öberg Mats 15 Mar '02

15 Mar '02

Hi, does anyone know if it's ok to use slot 8 in the F760 for fc-al? I'm asking this because it's in that slot right now, and it seems to be working, but the filer keeps telling me that it should be in any slot but slot8, so I was going to move it, but then I found this on the now site: ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- ------------------------------- Make optimal use of Slot 8 This method of improving filer performance applies to F700 series filers only. The fastest available PCI slot in an F700 series filer that is not clustered is Slot 8. If your filer uses a 64-bit network interface card, put it in Slot 8 to take advantage of the speed. If the filer does not use a 64-bit network interface card, put the main FC-AL adapter in this slot. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- ------------------------------- So, if it´s ok then how can I get rid of theese annoying error messages? By the way were at OnTap 6.1.1R2. ---- Mats

3 2

RE: MS SQL Server
by Venkat, Narayan 15 Mar '02

15 Mar '02

Paul, SnapDrive for Microsoft SQL Server 2000 is designed using NetApp's Virtual Local Disk technology, which enhances NTFS volume management to provide local disk emulation. With SnapDrive, you get high reliability and is ideal for high-volume transaction environments. In addition, SnapDrive supports front-end application clustering (using Microsoft Cluster Server) and allows the usage of a filer volume as a quorum disk. If you need more information, please feel free to contact me. My contact number is below. Thanks. Narayan Venkat Manager, Windows Marketing Tel: (408) 822-3718 Cell: (408) 221-4297 -----Original Message----- From: Jay Newton (Email) [mailto:jnewton@chkenergy.com] Sent: Friday, March 15, 2002 7:47 AM To: 'Carruthers, Paul A'; 'toasters(a)mathworks.com' Subject: RE: MS SQL Server We tried it for several months and had nothing but problems with it. We connected our SQL servers to our F840 Filer using a private GigE backbone as NetApp suggested. Using both NT4 and Windows 2000, the transactions we were making would end up causing the redirector to fail and we would lose connection to the database. This is a flaw with Microsoft and not NetApp. These disconnects caused multiple database corruptions making us restore from older dumps. We have since moved all our SQL and Oracle databases back to local storage due to this problem. There is a product called SnapDrive (I think) from NetApp. It basically replaces the redirector. You have to be using Win2k and SQL2k with a dedicated volume per database server. Unless you use that, I wouldn't recommend putting SQL databases on a Filer. -----Original Message----- From: Carruthers, Paul A [ mailto:Paul_Carruthers@AIMFUNDS.COM <mailto:Paul_Carruthers@AIMFUNDS.COM> ] Sent: Friday, March 15, 2002 8:53 AM To: 'toasters(a)mathworks.com' Subject: MS SQL Server Anybody willing to share their experiences running SQL Server against their filers. Good or bad, both appreciated... :) Cheers -- Paul.

1 0

RE: MS SQL Server
by Jay Newton (Email) 15 Mar '02

15 Mar '02

We tried it for several months and had nothing but problems with it. We connected our SQL servers to our F840 Filer using a private GigE backbone as NetApp suggested. Using both NT4 and Windows 2000, the transactions we were making would end up causing the redirector to fail and we would lose connection to the database. This is a flaw with Microsoft and not NetApp. These disconnects caused multiple database corruptions making us restore from older dumps. We have since moved all our SQL and Oracle databases back to local storage due to this problem. There is a product called SnapDrive (I think) from NetApp. It basically replaces the redirector. You have to be using Win2k and SQL2k with a dedicated volume per database server. Unless you use that, I wouldn't recommend putting SQL databases on a Filer. -----Original Message----- From: Carruthers, Paul A [mailto:Paul_Carruthers@AIMFUNDS.COM] Sent: Friday, March 15, 2002 8:53 AM To: 'toasters(a)mathworks.com' Subject: MS SQL Server Anybody willing to share their experiences running SQL Server against their filers. Good or bad, both appreciated... :) Cheers -- Paul.

1 0

RE: FC_AL in slot 8?
by Sam Schorr 15 Mar '02

15 Mar '02

We have had both FCALs and Gig NICs in what the filer considers a non-optimal slot. However, these are just warnings - the impact, if there is any, can be in performance, as far as I know. We have run 4 F760s for a couple of years getting this same message, but since we did not want to take them down (24x7x235 availability) for something that was just a warning, we left them alone. No problems ever encountered. -----Original Message----- From: Öberg Mats [mailto:mats.oberg@tietoenator.com] Sent: Friday, March 15, 2002 3:13 AM To: Toasters (E-mail) Subject: FC_AL in slot 8? Hi, does anyone know if it's ok to use slot 8 in the F760 for fc-al? I'm asking this because it's in that slot right now, and it seems to be working, but the filer keeps telling me that it should be in any slot but slot8, so I was going to move it, but then I found this on the now site: ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- ------------------------------- Make optimal use of Slot 8 This method of improving filer performance applies to F700 series filers only. The fastest available PCI slot in an F700 series filer that is not clustered is Slot 8. If your filer uses a 64-bit network interface card, put it in Slot 8 to take advantage of the speed. If the filer does not use a 64-bit network interface card, put the main FC-AL adapter in this slot. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- ------------------------------- So, if it´s ok then how can I get rid of theese annoying error messages? By the way were at OnTap 6.1.1R2. ---- Mats

1 0

MS SQL Server
by Carruthers, Paul A 15 Mar '02

15 Mar '02

Anybody willing to share their experiences running SQL Server against their filers. Good or bad, both appreciated... :) Cheers -- Paul.

1 0

Re: FC_AL in slot 8?
by Rune Bakken 15 Mar '02

15 Mar '02

Öberg Mats <mats.oberg(a)tietoenator.com> writes: > Hi, does anyone know if it's ok to use slot 8 in the F760 for fc-al? Which card do you have, the X2030A or the X2040B ?? You may want to check the System Configuration Guide NOW. >>>>>>>>>>>>.rune -- Rune Bakken Senior System Administrator Telenor Business Company (Nextra), IP-Services Ph: +47 22 77 03 93

1 0

Solaris Jumpstart against a filer..
by kevin graham 15 Mar '02

15 Mar '02

Getting entirely too excited about tftp.server, I've convererted a rather hefty Jumpstart setup over to using dhcp and doing tftp/root nfs/install nfs all off the filer. Its working beautifully, and just generally rocks. The one problem I'm having though is going booting from a snapmirrored volume. The client is always denied write access via mount options, so write operations always fail. .... However, when the volume is in ro snapmirrored state, the boot will hang after physical device probes. If I break the mirror, things work perfectly (w/o changes export options, etc). I was going to take this up w/ Sun and did in further myself, but I thought I'd run it by the list to see if anyone knew how filesystem semantics change when a volume is snapmirrored. ..kg..

2 2

Is the "New Bug Alerts Profiler" working?
by Chris Thompson 15 Mar '02

15 Mar '02

Has anyone received an alert yet from this new mechanism, which has replaced the old weekly New Bugs mailing list (which certainly did stop after 25 February as announced)? I set up a fairly inclusive profile (with the intention of pruning it a bit later if necessary), but have received absolutely nothing, and I'm getting a little suspicious ... Chris Thompson Email: cet1(a)cam.ac.uk

1 0

RE: SQL I/O error
by Lella Bennett 14 Mar '02

14 Mar '02

We've seen it quite a bit, actually. In fact, this error is the reason we ended up removing our production databases from netapp filers. We've gone round and round with both NetApp and Microsoft on this issue and the bottom line is this: this error is due to the fact that the SQL traffic is going through the TCP/IP stack. Evidently, there is some latency that SQL server experiences while trying to communicate with the data file and the SQL server thinks that it's lost the connection and throws this error, marks the database suspect, etc... The other reason why this error may occur is that you've reached the maximum number of threads available. If this is the case, you will see an error in the NT event log referring to this. You can increase the number of available threads using a reg hack. If it's not caused by the threads issue, then I can't help ya. Like I said we experienced A LOT of pain due to this error and never could find a solution to it. Lella Bennett Systems Engineer NAREX Inc. 303.526.4000 ext 714 303.526.5130 fax 720.333.8175 cell www.narex.com -----Original Message----- From: Maglinger, Paul [mailto:PMAGLINGER@scvl.com] Sent: Thursday, March 14, 2002 3:55 PM To: 'NetApps list server' Subject: SQL I/O error Anyone seen an SQL Server Error Log message saying : I/O error 59(An unexpected network error occurred.) detected during read of BUF pointer = 0x14685900, page ptr = 0x64c78000, pageid = (0x1:0x378), dbid = 7, status = 0x801, file = e:\sqldevices\dynamics\dyn\gpsdyn1dat.mdf.. where the e drive is mapped to our 740 filer running 6.1.1R2P1. We were looking at sysstat and CPU was at 95-100%, cache age fell from 35 to 0. Paul Maglinger, A+, CA, CET, MCSE Systems Administrator Shoe Carnival Inc. (812)867-4674 pmaglinger(a)scvl.com

1 0

SQL I/O error
by Maglinger, Paul 14 Mar '02

14 Mar '02

Anyone seen an SQL Server Error Log message saying : I/O error 59(An unexpected network error occurred.) detected during read of BUF pointer = 0x14685900, page ptr = 0x64c78000, pageid = (0x1:0x378), dbid = 7, status = 0x801, file = e:\sqldevices\dynamics\dyn\gpsdyn1dat.mdf.. where the e drive is mapped to our 740 filer running 6.1.1R2P1. We were looking at sysstat and CPU was at 95-100%, cache age fell from 35 to 0. Paul Maglinger, A+, CA, CET, MCSE Systems Administrator Shoe Carnival Inc. (812)867-4674 pmaglinger(a)scvl.com

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