toasters

toasters@lists.teaparty.net

13514 discussions

RE: "Case survey" stuff from NetApp
by Mohler, Jeff 26 Apr '01

26 Apr '01

I would think that it would take more of my time, to load up the WWW browser to work it there, than to insert five numbers between the ()'s. -----Original Message----- From: Sullivan, Justin [mailto:Justin.Sullivan@netapp.com] Sent: Wednesday, April 25, 2001 1:22 PM To: 'Chris Thompson'; toasters(a)mathworks.com Subject: RE: "Case survey" stuff from NetApp Capital idea.. We would certainly like to have more surveys returned - we should like to see EVERY survey returned. You have an excellent point - why not have a web-based survey form? Easy, friendly, quick.. Back in the days when I was a NetApp customer, I admit, I threw them away too - too much trouble to fill out the e-mail form; who has that kind of time anymore? I have passed your idea along to the folks in Customer Satisfaction who can make this happen. Cheers! --- Justin Sullivan Network Appliance, Technical Support Engineer Network Appliance Certified Associate justins(a)netapp.com Get answers NOW! - NetApp On the Web - http://now.netapp.com Tech Support Hotline: 1-888-4NETAPP -----Original Message----- From: Chris Thompson [mailto:cet1@cus.cam.ac.uk] Sent: Wednesday, April 25, 2001 3:04 PM To: toasters(a)mathworks.com Subject: "Case survey" stuff from NetApp What do you do with the the e-mail that arrives from Quality.Manager(a)netapp.com after a problem is closed with NetApp, inviting you to fill in a "5 STARS Survey" form? I admit I throw them in the e-wastebin. It seems to me that providing only a method of returning these (probably only marginally meaningful) answers by e-mail is absolutely pessimal. If they really want to increase the response rate, surely NetApp should provide a method using forms at now.netapp.com? My vague recollection is that at one time a WWW-browser-based method was offered, but this doesn't seem to be the case now. Chris Thompson University of Cambridge Computing Service, Email: cet1(a)ucs.cam.ac.uk New Museums Site, Cambridge CB2 3QG, Phone: +44 1223 334715 United Kingdom.

2 1

RE: Adding a 36gb shelf to F740 with 18gb shelves
by Sullivan, Justin 26 Apr '01

26 Apr '01

So, my apologies.. Sam corrected me. This changed with the new blockmap structure in ONTAP 6.0 and above (all my testing was with 5.3.7R3). I do not need "reprogramming" - I don't live in California. :) I was not saying create a new volume. I was saying create a new RAID group in the existing volume. This is where the 'raidsize' volume option comes in. You can do it manually, of course, but 'raidsize' is set for each volume (not the whole filer), and it's less error-prone to change 'raidsize' to the desired value. You can mix drive sizes within volumes without any problem, but all the drives in a given RAID group in the volume should be the same size. Set 'raidsize' on the volume in question to the size of the existing 18GB drive RAID group, run 'sysconfig -r' for details. When you go to add the 36GB drives - you will have to add at least two if the RAID group is already at 'raidsize' - it will automatically create a new RAID group with your spiffy new 36GB drives. You will lose one drive to parity, but it could avoid performance woes down the road. Lacking ASCII artistic skills, imagine having ten small juice glasses and two big ice tea glasses all lined up in a row. This is where your water (essential for all life, also known as "data") goes. As you fill up the small juice glasses, you can only keep pouring into the two big ice tea glasses, but you won't be able to pour it nearly as fast as you could if you were filling up more glasses. It is still a bad idea to mix drive sizes within a RAID group, because of what can happen to performance as things start to fill up. Creating a new RAID group is still (in my opinion), the way to go, but of course it's your data, your way. If capacity is more important than performance, you don't want to use a precious 36GB drive for parity. - Justin -----Original Message----- From: Jeff Bryer [mailto:bryer@sfu.ca] Sent: Wednesday, April 25, 2001 9:48 PM To: Justin.Sullivan(a)netapp.com Cc: toasters(a)mathworks.com Subject: Re: Adding a 36gb shelf to F740 with 18gb shelves Thanks Justin. So we can't change the parity disk from an 18gb disk to a 36gb disk kind of on the fly. We'd have to create a new volume and do a vol copy or some such thing. Not sure where we got the idea we could 'upgrade the parity disk'. So we either have to buy 18gb shelves or re-architect our layout. (or waste half a disk adding a 36gb to an 18gb set but that's not a great option as our volume is growing quickly). > > Yes, you're going to have a problem.. :( > > If you add 36GB drives to an existing RAID group of 18GB disks, the 36GB disks will be reported and used as 18GB drives. > > Once a RAID group is established with a parity drive of xxGB, any disks added to that RAID group will only be used to the same capacity (xxGB) as the parity drive. > > If you reverse the situation, and add 18GB drives to an existing 36GB drive RAID group, all drives will be used to their full capacity, but you will run into performance troubles as the volume fills up and the system is forced to write only to the larger disks, thereby reducing the number of physical spindles working for you. > > You will definitely want to create a new RAID group (or a new volume) for your 36GB drives to take advantage of the higher capacity. > > --- > Justin Sullivan > Network Appliance, Technical Support Engineer > Network Appliance Certified Associate > justins(a)netapp.com > Get answers NOW! - NetApp On the Web - http://now.netapp.com > Tech Support Hotline: 1-888-4NETAPP > -- Jeff Bryer bryer(a)sfu.ca Systems Administrator (604) 291-4935 Academic Computing, Simon Fraser University

1 0

"Case survey" stuff from NetApp
by Chris Thompson 26 Apr '01

26 Apr '01

What do you do with the the e-mail that arrives from Quality.Manager(a)netapp.com after a problem is closed with NetApp, inviting you to fill in a "5 STARS Survey" form? I admit I throw them in the e-wastebin. It seems to me that providing only a method of returning these (probably only marginally meaningful) answers by e-mail is absolutely pessimal. If they really want to increase the response rate, surely NetApp should provide a method using forms at now.netapp.com? My vague recollection is that at one time a WWW-browser-based method was offered, but this doesn't seem to be the case now. Chris Thompson University of Cambridge Computing Service, Email: cet1(a)ucs.cam.ac.uk New Museums Site, Cambridge CB2 3QG, Phone: +44 1223 334715 United Kingdom.

3 2

Client Pak Restore Problems
by David C Baumgardner 26 Apr '01

26 Apr '01

Is anyone using Legato's Client Pak backing up to a windows system? I have been having on going problems getting restores from tape for the last four months. Each release they issue seems to work fine for a while then quits working(as far as the restore is concerned). The only recovery that works now is the SSID recover with the "-a" option for single file or directory. That can take up to 6 to 7 hours by the time it runs through the save set. I would like to hear from anyone having troubles with Client Pak . David Baumgardner CAD/CAM Administrator Container Engineering Owens Brockway Glass Containers Voice 419-247-8274 Fax 419-247-7608 Email David.Baumgardner(a)owens-ill.com

1 0

RE: Adding a 36gb shelf to F740 with 18gb shelves
by Sullivan, Justin 26 Apr '01

26 Apr '01

Yes, you're going to have a problem.. :( If you add 36GB drives to an existing RAID group of 18GB disks, the 36GB disks will be reported and used as 18GB drives. Once a RAID group is established with a parity drive of xxGB, any disks added to that RAID group will only be used to the same capacity (xxGB) as the parity drive. If you reverse the situation, and add 18GB drives to an existing 36GB drive RAID group, all drives will be used to their full capacity, but you will run into performance troubles as the volume fills up and the system is forced to write only to the larger disks, thereby reducing the number of physical spindles working for you. You will definitely want to create a new RAID group (or a new volume) for your 36GB drives to take advantage of the higher capacity. --- Justin Sullivan Network Appliance, Technical Support Engineer Network Appliance Certified Associate justins(a)netapp.com Get answers NOW! - NetApp On the Web - http://now.netapp.com Tech Support Hotline: 1-888-4NETAPP -----Original Message----- From: Jeff Bryer [mailto:bryer@sfu.ca] Sent: Wednesday, April 25, 2001 6:26 PM To: toasters(a)mathworks.com Subject: Adding a 36gb shelf to F740 with 18gb shelves We have an F740 with 3 shelves of 18GB disks. It's config'd as two volumes (two raid sets). We've almost outgrown the capacity (we're down to one hot spare and a free disk). We want to add a new disk shelf to the system, but we're wondering if we're going to lose anything by going to a shelf of 36gb disks. We don't have any intention of adding new volumes (or new raid sets), just growing the existing volumes. Can we add a shelf of 36gb disks and then switch our 2 existing 18gb parity disks over to 36gb disks? We'd keep a 36gb disk as a hot spare and use all of the 18gb disks in the volumes (including the 2 freed up parity disks and the freed up hot spare). Are we going to run into problems with this? Or do we need to keep an 18gb disk around as a hot spare as well (ie when an 18gb disks dies and uses a 36gb disks as a hot spare, can we force it to go back to the 18gb disk once the faulty 18gb disk has been replaced?). Are the 36gb disks going to be used at full capacity in this situation (when mixed with the 18gb)? Or is there a better way to do this? Thanks, -- Jeff Bryer bryer(a)sfu.ca Systems Administrator (604) 291-4935 Academic Computing, Simon Fraser University

5 5

RE: Input/output errors from Linux clients?
by Bond, Andrew 26 Apr '01

26 Apr '01

Soft mounts are not recommended if you are writing to the filesystem. Use hard mounts. The errors are likely caused by network problems, which could be a simple misconfiguration. You should open a call with NetApp Customer Support. Regards, Andrew > -----Original Message----- > From: Nick's Lists [mailto:mrlist@noid.org] > Sent: 26 April 2001 07:18 > To: toasters(a)mathworks.com > Subject: Input/output errors from Linux clients? > > > I've been getting some strange errors from my Linux clients... > > cp: Input/output error > and > cat: write Input/output error > > They occur randomly when I try to copy or cat 20 - 40mb sized > files to and > from a filer. Solaris (x86 and Sparc) servers copying the > same size files > around are not experiencing the same problem. > > The file systems are all mounted with nfs2, soft, bg, intr. > > Has anyone else seen this before? > > TIA! > > - Nick > > > > >

1 0

Fwd: Re: OT - swag (fwd)
by Jeff Innis 26 Apr '01

26 Apr '01

3 2

RE: "Case survey" stuff from NetApp
by Mike Sphar 25 Apr '01

25 Apr '01

It depends on how you open the browser. If it's just a pre-defined URL that takes you right to the survey form where you just type your answers and submit it, that would likely be faster for me. But it depends on your email client and your work habits, how long your machine takes to bring up a browser, etc. Ideally, if it were up to me, both options would work. There would be a URL at the top of the message and also the ability to reply with your answers. -- Mike Sphar - Sr Systems Administrator - Engineering Support Services - Remedy Corporation BOFH, GWP, MCP, MCP+I, MCSE, BFD -----Original Message----- From: Mohler, Jeff [mailto:jeff.mohler@netapp.com] Sent: Wednesday, April 25, 2001 3:44 PM To: Sullivan, Justin; 'Chris Thompson'; toasters(a)mathworks.com Subject: RE: "Case survey" stuff from NetApp I would think that it would take more of my time, to load up the WWW browser to work it there, than to insert five numbers between the ()'s. -----Original Message----- From: Sullivan, Justin [mailto:Justin.Sullivan@netapp.com] Sent: Wednesday, April 25, 2001 1:22 PM To: 'Chris Thompson'; toasters(a)mathworks.com Subject: RE: "Case survey" stuff from NetApp Capital idea.. We would certainly like to have more surveys returned - we should like to see EVERY survey returned. You have an excellent point - why not have a web-based survey form? Easy, friendly, quick.. Back in the days when I was a NetApp customer, I admit, I threw them away too - too much trouble to fill out the e-mail form; who has that kind of time anymore? I have passed your idea along to the folks in Customer Satisfaction who can make this happen. Cheers! --- Justin Sullivan Network Appliance, Technical Support Engineer Network Appliance Certified Associate justins(a)netapp.com Get answers NOW! - NetApp On the Web - http://now.netapp.com Tech Support Hotline: 1-888-4NETAPP -----Original Message----- From: Chris Thompson [mailto:cet1@cus.cam.ac.uk] Sent: Wednesday, April 25, 2001 3:04 PM To: toasters(a)mathworks.com Subject: "Case survey" stuff from NetApp What do you do with the the e-mail that arrives from Quality.Manager(a)netapp.com after a problem is closed with NetApp, inviting you to fill in a "5 STARS Survey" form? I admit I throw them in the e-wastebin. It seems to me that providing only a method of returning these (probably only marginally meaningful) answers by e-mail is absolutely pessimal. If they really want to increase the response rate, surely NetApp should provide a method using forms at now.netapp.com? My vague recollection is that at one time a WWW-browser-based method was offered, but this doesn't seem to be the case now. Chris Thompson University of Cambridge Computing Service, Email: cet1(a)ucs.cam.ac.uk New Museums Site, Cambridge CB2 3QG, Phone: +44 1223 334715 United Kingdom.

1 0

Seeking ONTAP version information
by John Jetmore 25 Apr '01

25 Apr '01

My company is potentially needing to upgrade the OS on one of our Filers (760). I believe that 6.0.1R3 is the latest in the 6.* family. Is it fairly stable? We are running 5.3.6R1 right now. Does anyone see any potential problems with that upgrade path? Any information or shared experiences would be appreciated. Thanks, --John Jetmore

2 1

Re: snapshot backup
by Rick Hulsey 25 Apr '01

25 Apr '01

It is different in that the snapshots represent read only copies of the files in the filesystem. When you use NFS to mount the snapshot and copy the files to tape, Legato will still look at the time stamps on the files and backup the files that have changed since the time stamp in the Legato client file index. This means that Legato will backup files that have changed since the last backup if you specify an incremental backup. However, that is different than the block level changes that are always ongoing in the WAFL filesystem, and it is that characteristic that enable snapshots to work. All of the stuff related to WAFL (internal filesystem stuff) is, and has to be transparent to the backup software and even the operating system. Based on all of that stuff it looks to me like Legato can not do what you are looking for. >>> "E.J. Jantz" <ej_jantz(a)bswintl.com> 04/25/01 08:55AM >>> just a question: If the 'snapshots are "copy on writes' doesn't that mean that a backup of .snapshot is equal to and functions as a full backup? If not, can Legato using a NFS mount on a unix server capture just the info the .snapshot uses? If so, how? thanks... EJ Jantz, IST Dept. BSW International One West Third, Ste 100 Tulsa, OK 74103-3505 918 582-8771 ej_jantz(a)bswintl.com 918 295-4166 918 587-3594 fax >>> "Clawson, Simon" <simon_clawson(a)mentorg.com> 4/25/01 4:32:08 AM >>> Is it possible to backup just the .snapshot and then perform a restore from this data? I am looking for ways to speed up the backups and this seems to be a possible option. It was suggested to me by a colleague as a method of backing up Clearcase VOBS, but would it be viable for the whole filer. Of course I would need to run a full backup at tleast once a month, but this would help me speed up most of my weekly runs. Any ideas/suggestions/views? Simon Simon Clawson HDS Team Systems Administrator Mentor Graphics Uk Rivergate London Road Newbury Berkshire RG14 2QB <<Clawson, Simon.vcf>>

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