toasters

toasters@lists.teaparty.net

13520 discussions

HSM and the filers ...
by Waters, G Scott DSTI 28 Dec '01

28 Dec '01

I was wondering if anyone is aware of or using any type of Hierarchical Storage Management (HSM) with their filers. We have been throwing and throwing disk space at the users and the (of course) continue to 'gobble' it up at a tremendous pace. We would like some sort of system that ages inactive files and moves them off to 'near-line' storage. We had a meeting with our Veritas reps today and they had nothing. In fact they spent most of the meeting blasting NetApp. In your responses please do not talk about quotas and all that good stuff. The current thought process is to allow 'unlimited storage' ... we just need to manage it through HSM. Thanks in advance for your help. Scott Waters Technical Manager - DSTI Network Systems Team - US Army HQ SBCCOM scott.waters(a)sbccom.apgea.army.mil

5 5

RE: HSM and the filers ...
by Loux, Linda (Rosetta) 28 Dec '01

28 Dec '01

We have a similar need, and have not yet found the definitive answer. I am looking at a product called CyberLAB that is a software product that can move data to/from any hardware. We may combine this software with a hardware solution that is not yet determined to provide near line access. Linda Loux Infrastructure Operations Manager Rosetta Inpharmatics -----Original Message----- From: Waters, G Scott DSTI [mailto:scott.waters@SBCCOM.APGEA.ARMY.MIL] Sent: Friday, December 28, 2001 12:11 PM To: 'toasters(a)mathworks.com' Subject: HSM and the filers ... I was wondering if anyone is aware of or using any type of Hierarchical Storage Management (HSM) with their filers. We have been throwing and throwing disk space at the users and the (of course) continue to 'gobble' it up at a tremendous pace. We would like some sort of system that ages inactive files and moves them off to 'near-line' storage. We had a meeting with our Veritas reps today and they had nothing. In fact they spent most of the meeting blasting NetApp. In your responses please do not talk about quotas and all that good stuff. The current thought process is to allow 'unlimited storage' ... we just need to manage it through HSM. Thanks in advance for your help. Scott Waters Technical Manager - DSTI Network Systems Team - US Army HQ SBCCOM scott.waters(a)sbccom.apgea.army.mil

1 0

Re: Legato Networker NDMP, anyone?
by MCope＠isisph.com 28 Dec '01

28 Dec '01

I've been using Networker 6.1.1 (patched) since about September and am really pleased with it. Most of the limitations I've seen are with the NDMP protocol. The inability to make clones is definitely a big problem but I've been told that's coming. I don't recall if that was a Legato issue or the protocol. Legato was the first to offer Direct Access Restore (DAR) and I've actually had the opportunity to use it on a number of occasions and it is unbelievably fast. The inability to do a rename-on-recover/non-destructive restore had me concerned as well but it's never come up in the restores I've done. I'm inclined to say it's an error in the documentation. As for being able to restore to another filesystem, I'm getting conflicting answers about that but haven't had the time to actually test it out. The separate tape pool doesn't sit well with me. The NDMP tapes have to be formatted/labeled in the NDMP device and supposedly can't be used except in another NDMP device (why????). One thing Legato hasn't brought enough attention to is that you need dedicated non-NDMP formatted tapes in the backup server that belong to the NDMP pool. These tapes store the indexes and since many weeks can fit on one tape if the tape goes bad you've "lost" all those indexes. It also makes media management difficult. You have to keep these tapes separate from the NDMP tapes. If you want to send a set of tapes offsite you need to send the index tape(s) as well. Networker and NDMP both have flaws but what they offer makes these acceptable. I spent 4 months evaluating different products and found Networker to be the most capable (Bakbone was my first choice because they have a GREAT product but it's still lacking some features and the company's stability is questionable. To be fair, they're a local company and I know some former employees so I hear a lot of negative things concerning their financial state that generally wouldn't be in the press) Michael Cope Unix Systems Administrator Isis Pharmaceuticals Marion Hakanson <hakanson(a)cse.ogi.edu> Sent by: owner-toasters(a)mathworks.com 12/27/01 10:25 AM To: toasters(a)mathworks.com cc: Subject: Legato Networker NDMP, anyone? Folks, I'm studying up on networker-6.1.1, in preparation for converting from BudTool to NetWorker, and according to the docs, there are some pretty serious (to me) limitations in Networker's NDMP support. I would very much like to hear from anyone out there who is already using this backup software with their NetApp (or with other NDMP devices), so I can get a better idea about what's ahead for us. Oh, you're probably going to ask me anyway, so here's my list of things that NetWorker NDMP cannot do, which I can currently do with BudTool: (1) Cannot clone (e.g. for offsite storage) NDMP backups. (2) Cannot rename-on-recover; Non-destructive save-set recovery is not supported; It looks like you might be able to work around this by using a directed recovery (i.e. to non-original location), although they indicate this is used to restore to a different NDMP host. (3) Cannot backup to a remote (non-NDMP) tape device, unless you buy an extra software module (SnapImage, which also does other stuff). (4) Cannot send NDMP backups to a filesystem device (not even if you have SnapImage). (5) Must have separate (tape) pools for NDMP and non-NDMP backups. Suggestions, corrections, and comments are welcome. Regards, -- Marion Hakanson <hakanson(a)cse.ogi.edu> CSE Computing Facilities

1 0

RE: HSM and the filers ...
by Mike Sphar 28 Dec '01

28 Dec '01

A Legato rep once told me about an archiving package they offered that supposedly had some features for backing up and removing inactive files. I don't recall much of the details though. One thing to consider is how you define an "Inactive" file. One that has not been read for a period of time? If so, how do you filter out accesses by backup software, virus scanners, find commands, etc while still detecting legitimate reads by users? We've been contemplating developing some in-house tools to do similar file off-lining, as we suffer from the same infinite space consumption of our users, but we haven't yet figured out a good way to really identify inactive files. -- Mike Sphar - Sr Systems Administrator - Engineering Support Peregrine Systems, Inc. -----Original Message----- From: Waters, G Scott DSTI [mailto:scott.waters@sbccom.apgea.army.mil] Sent: Friday, December 28, 2001 2:11 PM To: 'toasters(a)mathworks.com' Subject: HSM and the filers ... I was wondering if anyone is aware of or using any type of Hierarchical Storage Management (HSM) with their filers. We have been throwing and throwing disk space at the users and the (of course) continue to 'gobble' it up at a tremendous pace. We would like some sort of system that ages inactive files and moves them off to 'near-line' storage. We had a meeting with our Veritas reps today and they had nothing. In fact they spent most of the meeting blasting NetApp. In your responses please do not talk about quotas and all that good stuff. The current thought process is to allow 'unlimited storage' ... we just need to manage it through HSM. Thanks in advance for your help. Scott Waters Technical Manager - DSTI Network Systems Team - US Army HQ SBCCOM scott.waters(a)sbccom.apgea.army.mil

1 0

Re: License transfers
by ScottUCE＠aol.com 28 Dec '01

28 Dec '01

Hello, Kevin: "Standard" filer licenses will neither transfer to different filers nor to new users. Thus, for the protection of their company's investment, it is important that buyers of new NetApp filers insist on transferable licenses. There are used (and deeply discounted) F700 series systems -- with licenses that WILL transfer freely to the new owner -- which we would be happy to discuss with you. Regards, Scott Fischmann Union Computer Exchange, Inc. 6233 Idylwood Lane Minneapolis, MN 55436 Phone: 952 935 7282 FAX: 952 935 5056 scott(a)unioncomputer.com ****************************************************************************** ***************************************** In a message dated 12/27/2001 5:29:10 PM Central Standard Time, kgraham(a)dotnetdotcom.org writes: > Does anyone know the limits of transferrability of the standard filer > license? I was just considering swapping an older box for something newer > (but used) and was wondering if anyone had looked into the contract > language of "transferring" the licenses to the newer filer.. > > ..kg.. >

1 0

License transfers
by kevin graham 27 Dec '01

27 Dec '01

Does anyone know the limits of transferrability of the standard filer license? I was just considering swapping an older box for something newer (but used) and was wondering if anyone had looked into the contract language of "transferring" the licenses to the newer filer.. ..kg..

1 0

Legato Networker NDMP, anyone?
by Marion Hakanson 27 Dec '01

27 Dec '01

Folks, I'm studying up on networker-6.1.1, in preparation for converting from BudTool to NetWorker, and according to the docs, there are some pretty serious (to me) limitations in Networker's NDMP support. I would very much like to hear from anyone out there who is already using this backup software with their NetApp (or with other NDMP devices), so I can get a better idea about what's ahead for us. Oh, you're probably going to ask me anyway, so here's my list of things that NetWorker NDMP cannot do, which I can currently do with BudTool: (1) Cannot clone (e.g. for offsite storage) NDMP backups. (2) Cannot rename-on-recover; Non-destructive save-set recovery is not supported; It looks like you might be able to work around this by using a directed recovery (i.e. to non-original location), although they indicate this is used to restore to a different NDMP host. (3) Cannot backup to a remote (non-NDMP) tape device, unless you buy an extra software module (SnapImage, which also does other stuff). (4) Cannot send NDMP backups to a filesystem device (not even if you have SnapImage). (5) Must have separate (tape) pools for NDMP and non-NDMP backups. Suggestions, corrections, and comments are welcome. Regards, -- Marion Hakanson <hakanson(a)cse.ogi.edu> CSE Computing Facilities

1 0

converting from single volume structure to qtrees
by Igor Schein 27 Dec '01

27 Dec '01

Hi, I have 1 jumbo volume with a number of project directories on it. I wanna have each of the directory to be a separate qtree. If I try to create a new qtree, it complains that the name already exists, and there's no way to force overwrite. If I rename the existing directory, create a qtree with desired name and move the data underneath it, it does copy-and-delete, rather than just move, so if I have a directory of 100GB in size ( which I do ), it takes forever. Do I have any other viable options? Thanks Igor

1 0

RE: restoring ndmp tapes on solaris
by Toal, Dave 26 Dec '01

26 Dec '01

Ernie, Ok, yes, very good point. The tapes with the 2-record headers I described were written by Veritas Netbackup, not the netapp's dump command. It also wrote short 1-block files between each data dump file. |====||===,===,================||===||===,===,============... ^ ^ ufsrestore here, assuming monospace font. As always, YMMV. -----Original Message----- From: Bokkelkamp Ernst To: Toal, Dave; 'neil lehrer '; 'toasters ' Sent: 12/26/01 2:35 PM Subject: RE: restoring ndmp tapes on solaris Actually, that is not 100% correct ;-( The Data Management Application (~ your backup application) can control the tape drive by sending SCSI commands through NDMP (SCSI pass-through). This allows the application to write additional information to the tape drive, such as labels used to identify the tape media. Depending on the backup application you may have to skip some more blocks. Under Networker 6.0 this should be 2 blocks of 32Kb. Looking back at a problem I helped with a few weeks ago it may be possible that the two blocks mentioned below are actually tape labels written by the backup application and not by ONTAP dump. We recovered the data by moving the ndmp tape forward by two blocks and then used restore to recover the data. Bye Ernie -----Original Message----- From: Toal, Dave [mailto:dave.toal@t-t.com] Sent: Mittwoch, 26. Dezember 2001 17:44 To: 'neil lehrer '; 'toasters ' Subject: RE: restoring ndmp tapes on solaris Neil, Yes, ndmp dump tapes work with sun ufsrestore. The catch is, though, that the netapp writes 2 records at the beginning of the dump, that ufsrestore isn't expecting. So, mt fsf to the dump file on your tape, then mt fsr 2 (norewind device both times, natch). Then ufsrestore as usual. -- Dave Toal unix person Thomson & Thomson N Quincy, MA -----Original Message----- From: neil lehrer To: toasters Sent: 12/26/01 11:09 AM Subject: restoring ndmp tapes on solaris hi, since ndmp uses ontap dump to create backups and "Dump command data format The data is written to tape in a format compatible with the standard BSD-dump format. This means that you can restore Network Appliance dump tapes using the Solaris ufsrestore command. The only data that you cannot restore with this command are the CIFS (Windows NT) attributes, because Solaris does not support them. However, the data itself is accessible." can a backup tape written locally on a filer using ndmp be taken to a solaris box with a compatible drive and restored? thanks. -- regards +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ + Neil Lehrer + + United States International Broadcasting Bureau + System Development Division + + voice 202 619-2524 + fax 202 619-3576 + nlehrer(a)ibb.gov + + " is this crisis an opportunity or just + another grab the fire extinguisher moment?" + +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

1 0

RE: restoring ndmp tapes on solaris
by Bokkelkamp Ernst 26 Dec '01

26 Dec '01

Actually, that is not 100% correct ;-( The Data Management Application (~ your backup application) can control the tape drive by sending SCSI commands through NDMP (SCSI pass-through). This allows the application to write additional information to the tape drive, such as labels used to identify the tape media. Depending on the backup application you may have to skip some more blocks. Under Networker 6.0 this should be 2 blocks of 32Kb. Looking back at a problem I helped with a few weeks ago it may be possible that the two blocks mentioned below are actually tape labels written by the backup application and not by ONTAP dump. We recovered the data by moving the ndmp tape forward by two blocks and then used restore to recover the data. Bye Ernie -----Original Message----- From: Toal, Dave [mailto:dave.toal@t-t.com] Sent: Mittwoch, 26. Dezember 2001 17:44 To: 'neil lehrer '; 'toasters ' Subject: RE: restoring ndmp tapes on solaris Neil, Yes, ndmp dump tapes work with sun ufsrestore. The catch is, though, that the netapp writes 2 records at the beginning of the dump, that ufsrestore isn't expecting. So, mt fsf to the dump file on your tape, then mt fsr 2 (norewind device both times, natch). Then ufsrestore as usual. -- Dave Toal unix person Thomson & Thomson N Quincy, MA -----Original Message----- From: neil lehrer To: toasters Sent: 12/26/01 11:09 AM Subject: restoring ndmp tapes on solaris hi, since ndmp uses ontap dump to create backups and "Dump command data format The data is written to tape in a format compatible with the standard BSD-dump format. This means that you can restore Network Appliance dump tapes using the Solaris ufsrestore command. The only data that you cannot restore with this command are the CIFS (Windows NT) attributes, because Solaris does not support them. However, the data itself is accessible." can a backup tape written locally on a filer using ndmp be taken to a solaris box with a compatible drive and restored? thanks. -- regards +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ + Neil Lehrer + + United States International Broadcasting Bureau + System Development Division + + voice 202 619-2524 + fax 202 619-3576 + nlehrer(a)ibb.gov + + " is this crisis an opportunity or just + another grab the fire extinguisher moment?" + +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

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