toasters

toasters@lists.teaparty.net

1 participants
13523 discussions

Hyperion Enterprise on a NetApp
by Gifford, Josh 16 Nov '01

16 Nov '01

Hello Everyone, This might be a long shot, but I'm curious to know if anyone is running Hyperion Enterprise on a NetApp filer. I'm having a ton of issues with Hyperion running on a Windows 2000 box and I'm looking for alternatives. Thanks in advance! Best Regards, Josh J Gifford MCP NT Systems Engineer Siemens Power Transmission & Distribution 7000 Siemens Rd Wendell, NC 27591 Phone: (919) 365-2806; Fax: (919) 365-1080

1 0

Re: quota problem ?
by Rune Bakken 16 Nov '01

16 Nov '01

daniel <daniel(a)interq.or.jp> writes: > I have a user who can not upload any files to his home dir using ftp and > the error message he gets is "disk quota exceeded". > I checked his users quota from the filer and noticed that he is indeed > over the limit of his quota. Then you may need to increase his users quota as the filer counts all files owned by each user in each of the quota type, and hence a simple df -s will not work. From my own quotas file: #Quota Target type disk files rb user@/vol/users/home 8G 300K Any files I own on or below /vol/users/home will be counted in the quota. Even if they exists outside my designated $HOME. quota -v <user> on Solaris gives you the this output: kavringen(root) local 501# quota -v rb Disk quotas for rb (uid 392): Filesystem usage quota limit timeleft files quota limit timeleft /home/nfs/users 2522412 8388608 8388608 50844 307200 307200 I would suspect that other OS' has similar tools. >>>>>>>.rune -- Rune Bakken "I feel sorry for people who don't drink. System Administrator When they wake up in the morning, that's as Nextra, good as they're going to feel all day." - Telenor Company - Frank Sinatra

5 4

Re: quota problem ?
by Andrew Curry 16 Nov '01

16 Nov '01

On Fri 16 Nov 2001 at 16:39, daniel wrote: > I have a user who can not upload any files to his home dir using ftp and > the error message he gets is "disk quota exceeded". > > When I did du -sk on his home dir as root , I find that it is not even > close to his maximum quota limit. Quota is set as follows for this volume, > qtree, X disk limit and no limit on # of files. > > I checked his users quota from the filer and noticed that he is indeed > over the limit of his quota. > > Filer is F840 and Ontap version is 6.0.1R3. > > Any ideas? I imagine he must own some files which are not in his home directory. Do 'find <home dir> -user <uname>| wc -l' to count the number of files that he owns in his directory and compare that with the number of files that quota reports. Do 'find <disk> -user <uname>' to find all the files on the disk that he owns. Andrew Curry Faculty of Computing Sciences and Engineering De Montfort University, Leicester, UK

1 0

quota problem ?
by daniel 16 Nov '01

16 Nov '01

Hi all, I have a user who can not upload any files to his home dir using ftp and the error message he gets is "disk quota exceeded". When I did du -sk on his home dir as root , I find that it is not even close to his maximum quota limit. Quota is set as follows for this volume, qtree, X disk limit and no limit on # of files. I checked his users quota from the filer and noticed that he is indeed over the limit of his quota. Filer is F840 and Ontap version is 6.0.1R3. Any ideas? Thanks in advance. Daniel Jung System Administrator GMO inc

1 0

F840 or F880
by Jennifer Armenta 14 Nov '01

14 Nov '01

Do you see any point in upgrading from a F840 to a F880 or F880c, besides the clustering factor? Does anyone have any good advantage point to this type of upgrade that would justify the cost. Jennifer )

3 2

RE: F840 or F880
by Joe Luchtenberg 14 Nov '01

14 Nov '01

Yes, it dies. That's what I was referring to (earlier reply that you may not have seen posted yet) when I indicated that the 2nd CPU is for performance, not availability (see http://now.netapp.com/Knowledgebase/solutionarea.asp?id=ntapcs2897 <http://now.netapp.com/Knowledgebase/solutionarea.asp?id=ntapcs2897> ). I think one CPU is dedicated to indexing and other such processes. Joe -----Original Message----- From: Honeycutt, Michael [mailto:MichaelHoneycutt@NC.SLR.com] Sent: Wednesday, November 14, 2001 3:15 PM To: 'Jennifer Armenta'; toasters(a)mathworks.com Subject: RE: F840 or F880 Good quesiton. Does anyone know if the filer dies if a CPU fails? It would be nice if it paniced and came back up on 1 CPU while support was working to get it replaced. -----Original Message----- From: Jennifer Armenta [mailto:ArmentaJ@mascorp.com] Sent: Wednesday, November 14, 2001 2:25 PM To: toasters(a)mathworks.com Subject: F840 or F880 Do you see any point in upgrading from a F840 to a F880 or F880c, besides the clustering factor? Does anyone have any good advantage point to this type of upgrade that would justify the cost. Jennifer )

1 0

RE: F840 or F880
by Honeycutt, Michael 14 Nov '01

14 Nov '01

Good quesiton. Does anyone know if the filer dies if a CPU fails? It would be nice if it paniced and came back up on 1 CPU while support was working to get it replaced. -----Original Message----- From: Jennifer Armenta [mailto:ArmentaJ@mascorp.com] Sent: Wednesday, November 14, 2001 2:25 PM To: toasters(a)mathworks.com Subject: F840 or F880 Do you see any point in upgrading from a F840 to a F880 or F880c, besides the clustering factor? Does anyone have any good advantage point to this type of upgrade that would justify the cost. Jennifer )

1 0

RE: F840 or F880
by Joe Luchtenberg 14 Nov '01

14 Nov '01

F880 dual-CPU is for performance purposes only. It is not for redundancy and does not enhance availability. There are some other enhancements, such as the PC card boot. If you need clustering for high(er) availability, F840c or F880c both deliver. Considering you already have the F840, it would seem to me that an F840c is the better option from an investment protection perspective. I.e. you're not going to get full purchase price (by any stretch) back as trade in for your F840 if you go with the F880c. Joe -----Original Message----- From: Jennifer Armenta [mailto:ArmentaJ@mascorp.com] Sent: Wednesday, November 14, 2001 2:25 PM To: toasters(a)mathworks.com Subject: F840 or F880 Do you see any point in upgrading from a F840 to a F880 or F880c, besides the clustering factor? Does anyone have any good advantage point to this type of upgrade that would justify the cost. Jennifer )

1 0

heavy CPU and NIC usage, not so heavy ops usage
by Todd C. Merrill 14 Nov '01

14 Nov '01

Funny thing has started happening of late. The CPU is pegged or nearly pegged on an F760 running 6.1R1, but yet the ops usage isn't all that high. The NIC card seems to be doing an incredible amount of work (I've seen it in the 90-95% range over about a minute sampling time.) No errors or anything unusual on the port on the Cisco switch. A decent amount of network output, a goodly amount of disk reads, hardly any writes, a low but not disasterous cache age, not too many cp-from-cp points, etc. I'm stumped. Any ideas? Just plain overloaded? filer00*> ps -h Process statistics over 365.789 seconds... ID State Domain %CPU StackUsed %StackUsed Name 1 RR i 6% 464 11% idle_thread0 22 RR k 81% 7232 14% GbE-II/e7 filer00*> sysconfig -v [...] slot 7: Gigabit Ethernet Controller II e7 MAC Address: 00:d0:b7:b9:f7:6d (auto-1000sx-fd-up) Device Type: Rev 3 [...] filer00*> sysstat -x 2 CPU NFS CIFS HTTP Total Net kB/s Disk kB/s Tape kB/s Cache Cache CP CP Disk in out read write read write age hit time ty util 98% 2657 2883 0 5540 1950 5418 5733 305 0 0 3 94% 22% : 42% 92% 2254 2679 0 4933 2590 7882 3888 0 0 0 3 96% 0% - 40% 99% 2512 2462 0 4974 1910 4408 2519 828 0 0 3 96% 49% F 33% 99% 2333 2128 0 4461 3463 2552 1827 3647 0 0 3 95% 55% : 72% 95% 2082 2565 0 4647 1156 3400 2648 7 0 0 3 95% 0% - 30% 97% 2535 2296 0 4831 1378 3683 1922 1189 0 0 3 98% 28% F 44% 95% 3445 2236 0 5681 1660 3850 2788 122 0 0 3 92% 14% : 33% 97% 2772 2059 0 4831 1466 4029 3219 7 0 0 3 95% 0% - 35% 95% 2878 2312 0 5190 1414 3455 1735 7 0 0 3 95% 0% - 30% 99% 2246 1665 0 3911 2398 3821 2664 1506 0 0 3 97% 43% F 39% 99% 2081 2027 0 4108 1236 5428 1889 2338 0 0 3 98% 62% : 45% 98% 2832 2127 0 4959 1710 8653 3610 7 0 0 4 95% 0% - 38% 95% 3135 2515 0 5650 1521 5354 3440 7 0 0 4 95% 0% - 27% 96% 3267 2335 0 5602 1401 5129 1655 2 0 0 4 98% 4% F 17% 100% 3169 2361 0 5530 2754 4236 1113 3251 0 0 4 96% 100% : 49% 98% 3392 3023 0 6415 1733 3280 2462 977 0 0 4 98% 22% : 26% 97% 3419 2152 0 5571 1588 4163 2908 7 0 0 4 93% 0% - 26% Until next time... The Mathworks, Inc. 508-647-7000 x7792 3 Apple Hill Drive, Natick, MA 01760-2098 508-647-7001 FAX tmerrill(a)mathworks.com http://www.mathworks.com ---

1 0

RE: F880c
by Joe Luchtenberg 14 Nov '01

14 Nov '01

I presume you meant "arguments." ;-) (Also, did you mean F740c or just a stand-alone F740?) Given the dramatic price difference, it simply depends on the scope of your requirements. - do you require a single platform that scales to 18TB? - what about performance? - (I assume you meant F740c, but just in case you are comparing clustered and non-clustered platforms...) what about cluster failover high availability? The lotta-little-filers-versus-a-coupla-big-ones issue can be reasonably argued on both sides focussing on many issues. - manageability/ease of administration - cost - performance - availability - complexity - etc. With either platform you get the full range of capabilities associated with Data ONTAP -- WAFL, SnapShots, available support for multi-protocol environments with SecureShare single-instance data sharing, available value-added features including SnapRestore, SnapMirror, SnapManager for Exchange, Global Data Fabric management capability with Content Director/Content Reporter, etc. <End of NetApp commercial> FWIW, the F740 is an alpha-based platform. The F880c is built on an Intel SMB architecture. The F8xx series is the latest generation from NetApp, and it is reasonable to expect that they will be available and supported long after the F740 model has been retired. HTH. Joe Joe Luchtenberg Dataline, Inc. 757-858-0600 757-285-1223 (mobile) 757-858-0606 (fax) joe.luchtenberg(a)data-line.com www.data-line.com -----Original Message----- From: Jennifer Armenta [mailto:ArmentaJ@mascorp.com] Sent: Tuesday, November 13, 2001 5:05 PM To: 'toasters(a)mathworks.com' Subject: F880c Any augments for going with F880c verses F740 filer. Jennifer

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