toasters

toasters@lists.teaparty.net

13523 discussions

Start a nNew thread

Please unsubscribe
by Stringer, Douglas 04 Apr '01

04 Apr '01

Doug Stringer stringer(a)netapp.com

1 0

RE: performance question ablout oracle on F840 filer
by Neil Stichbury 04 Apr '01

04 Apr '01

How many users ?. 1GB may be not be enough. Rather then splitting the using of the Gigabyte you might like to consider Trunking with Roundrobin. I am given to understand that Solaris 8 offers performance improvements over 7. Neil -----Original Message----- From: brynay_cradle [mailto:bryany@cradle.com.tw] Sent: Wednesday, 4 April 2001 18:30 To: toasters Subject: performance question ablout oracle on F840 filer Hi , My customer setup oracle 8.15 on sun E3500 (Solaris.7) and put oracle database on filer F840 , but performance is poor. Hardware environment as Filer 840 Giga Ethernet II * 2 FC9 disk shelf * 1 about 350 GB Sun E3500 (Solaris.7) Cpu 1 ~ 4 memory 1 GB giga Ethernet * 2 ( direct to filer ) configuration as oracle database on /vol/vol0 use e6 giga ethernet channel oracle index on /vol/vol1 use e7 giga ethernet channel load data to database table about 70000 records , filer ops 1000 ~ 2000 sun 1 cpu usage 30% ~ 40% even add to 4 cpu (20% ~ 30%, never over 50%) , oracle process speed still slow , ops increase just to 2500 ~ 3000 it seems filer wait for sun process oracle data , but I can not increase cpu load I tuned filer and sun , gigaethernet and nfs configurations already , but performance do not get better. Could you kind to provide any suggestion or solution for this case Thanks a lots Cradle Technology Corp. Infrastructure Integration Department Bryan Yuan Tel: (886) 2 87682688 Ex: 634 bryany(a)cradle.com.tw <mailto:bryany@cradle.com.tw> _____ This e-mail message has been scanned and cleared by MailMarshal <http://www.gen-i.co.nz> www.gen-i.co.nz _____ This e-mail message has been scanned and cleared by MailMarshal http://www.gen-i.co.nz

1 0

RE: Filer Serial Connectivity
by Charles Randall 04 Apr '01

04 Apr '01

Any pointers on a device that allows SSH instead of telnet for on-net access? E.g., ssh to the console server and then connect to the serial interface of a connected device? Charles -----Original Message----- From: mitch(a)netline.com [mailto:mitch@netline.com] Sent: Monday, April 02, 2001 1:02 PM To: 'toasters(a)mathworks.com' Subject: Re: Filer Serial Connectivity I'm pretty fond of our Console Server 3200 by Lightwave Communications. It allows for telnet access and/or serial access. Multiple people can view at the same time and it has scrollback. It has a number of other very nice features... I use it with our filers, Suns, and various PC based UNIX systems. http://www.lightwavecom.com/ ~mitch

3 2

Re: performance question ablout oracle on F840 filer
by Rick Hulsey 04 Apr '01

04 Apr '01

Are you using the SBUS or PCI cards in the Sun. We have used both and found the SBUS cards to perform poorly as compared to the PCI cards. I don't remember what our peak nfs ops were, but I'm sure we were getting better results than what you are experiencing. Did you use the Oracle white paper at http://www.netapp.com/tech_library/3047.html to setup the database on the filer? We followed this whitepaper pretty closely because I've been told that other than references to ${ORACLE_HOME} these guidelines are pretty much requirements for system performance and data availability. >>> "brynay_cradle" <bryany(a)cradle.com.tw> 04/04/01 01:30AM >>> Hi , My customer setup oracle 8.15 on sun E3500 (Solaris.7) and put oracle database on filer F840 , but performance is poor. Hardware environment as Filer 840 Giga Ethernet II * 2 FC9 disk shelf * 1 about 350 GB Sun E3500 (Solaris.7) Cpu 1 ~ 4 memory 1 GB giga Ethernet * 2 ( direct to filer ) configuration as oracle database on /vol/vol0 use e6 giga ethernet channel oracle index on /vol/vol1 use e7 giga ethernet channel load data to database table about 70000 records , filer ops 1000 ~ 2000 sun 1 cpu usage 30% ~ 40% even add to 4 cpu (20% ~ 30%, never over 50%) , oracle process speed still slow , ops increase just to 2500 ~ 3000 it seems filer wait for sun process oracle data , but I can not increase cpu load I tuned filer and sun , gigaethernet and nfs configurations already , but performance do not get better. Could you kind to provide any suggestion or solution for this case Thanks a lots Cradle Technology Corp. Infrastructure Integration Department Bryan Yuan Tel: (886) 2 87682688 Ex: 634 bryany(a)cradle.com.tw

1 0

Take me off list
by Steve Upchurch 04 Apr '01

04 Apr '01

Take me off list. Unsubscribe.

1 0

RE: Inodes a go go
by Tom "Mad Dog" Yergeau 04 Apr '01

04 Apr '01

Agreed. You can't want more than 1 inode per 4K WAFL block, right? This application generates reports by generating directories. Each report can generate hundreds of directories on the filer. I don't know why it works this way but I'm told changing it will be quite a headache. So, all these directories take up lots and lots of inodes, but no real space on the filer. Tom -----Original Message----- From: Chris Thompson [mailto:cet1@cus.cam.ac.uk] Sent: Tuesday, April 03, 2001 4:25 PM To: MadDog(a)fool.com Cc: toasters(a)mathworks.com Subject: Re: Inodes a go go MadDog(a)fool.com (Tom \"Mad Dog\" Yergeau) writes: > > Okay, so the maximum number of inodes is 95% of the true (not usable) size > of a volume divided by four. > > And if you're daring enough to type this into your filer, it will tell you > that anyway: > > usvasvfile-001> maxfiles inquisition 50000000000000000 > Max inode count cannot exceed 201249946 > > > Now here's the problem. I just passed this information on to the developers > who wrote the program that uses up this exceedingly ridiculous number of > inodes, and they tell me that they are going to start using them up even > faster than in the past, and we may run out within six months, and is there > anything we can do to get more inodes? > > I suggested they re-write their program to not generate tens of thousands of > directories every day, but I don't know how well that will fly. > > Can anyone think of a way to get more inodes? NetApp folks, any hope a RFE > for a higher inode limit would go through? Ummm... can you tell us more about this application that eats thousands of inodes for breakfast every day? What are the contents of these inodes? One would normally expect every inode to have at least one 4K block of data associated with it unless 1. It is a regular file with length <= 64 bytes (fits in the inode). 2. It is a symbolic link with length <= 64 bytes (ditto). 3. It is a device, or socket, or named pipe, or some other implictly zero-length object. That is presumably the rationale behind NetApp's "you can't possibly want more than 1 inode per 4 KB of data, can you?" upper limit. 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.

5 7

RE: ONTAP v 6.1
by Knight, Jason 04 Apr '01

04 Apr '01

We just upgraded all of our mirror filers (630's and 760's) to v6.1 and one of our development (760) filers to v6.1 and have seen no problems in the past few weeks (knock wood). The more nice features that are added it seems the more I want, for instance SnapMirror now states Transferring (0% complete, 100MB done), but what would really help is knowing how much needs to transfer and an estimation on how long it will take at the current rate. Overall, it is a big step forward from the 5.x days, and I must admit working with Network Appliance Filers is actually fun! Jason Knight -----Original Message----- From: Palmer, Jason (London) [mailto:jason.palmer@wcom.co.uk] Sent: Wednesday, April 04, 2001 9:51 AM To: toasters(a)mathworks.com Subject: ONTAP v 6.1 I have recently upgraded to ONTAP v6.1 on out F760s 2 x clustered and 1 x Non clustered... It appears to work extreemly well and I ahve had no problems so far... ...it has some neat little features, and the dismounting of volumes without a reboot makes things a lot easier. Anyone else gone to 6.1 yet ? If so, had any problems at all ? Jason Palmer WorldCom Server Engineering and Design Group

1 0

single mode trunc with a direct connection to unix host
by luis santos 04 Apr '01

04 Apr '01

Good day folks, we have ordered an F740 that we will be attaching to a M80 IBM aix host. with the Filer /unix host connection, we are planning to use a GB ethernet and 100 mbps ether card, with the 100 mbps card as the backup. We are exploring the possiblity of using a single mode trunk virtual interface. we are going to hook up the filer and the host direct with out the use of a switch and this will be a local dedicated network between the filer and the host. has anybody used a similar configuration and got it to work. the problem is that the IBM host has to be able to figure out which connection it will be talking to the filer and switch to the secondary if the primary fails. we will set the ether GB card as the favored path. regards, Luis Santos Loblaws Co. Ltd Toronto, Ontario Canada __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Get email at your own domain with Yahoo! Mail. http://personal.mail.yahoo.com/

2 1

RE: oplock problems
by Muhlestein, Mark 04 Apr '01

04 Apr '01

We've seen clients that didn't work properly unless the opendelta was set to 20 or more. If that fixes the issue and it's just on a few clients you might consider changing the NIC on those clients. If increasing opendelta doesn't help this could be a networking issue, so you might want to get a packet trace and if necessary open a case with customer support to get it analyzed. The disadvantage of disabling oplocks is that the clients can't do any caching, which can cause a noticeable performance impact, depending on your application mix. Mark -----Original Message----- From: Matt Graham [mailto:mgraham@resgen.com] Sent: Wednesday, April 04, 2001 7:58 AM To: Muhlestein, Mark; toasters Subject: Re: oplock problems I already did increase the value to 12, which didn't seem to help and seemed to make the problem computers take longer. I can try raising it higher if that will help. What are the disadvantages of running with oplocks disabled? "Muhlestein, Mark" wrote: > > Have you tried increasing the cifs.oplocks.opendelta parameter? If not, you might try a value like 16 or even 20 to see if it makes a difference. That is a hidden option which works around a bug in certain NIC/driver client setups. It is a timing issue which is seen if the server responds too quickly with an oplock break after a file is opened. The problem is not frequently seen with NT server because it is so much slower when handling opens. > > Mark Muhlestein -- NetApp CIFS engineering > > -----Original Message----- > From: Matt Graham [mailto:mgraham@resgen.com] > Sent: Tuesday, April 03, 2001 7:01 PM > To: toasters > Subject: oplock problems > > Hello, > > I have been having oplock break time outs, and I can't seem to isolate the > cause of the problem. It is only certain clients that are experiencing the > problem. One of the clients seemed to be fixed when I moved it from the switch > that it was on to a hub (which doesn't make any sense, and may be coincidental) > > Also, I never noticed these problems before we converted to a fully switched > network > > The clients are win98 and nt4. I am running NetApp Release 5.3.6R2. > > I am now running with oplocks disabled, but it seems like a poor solution to me. > > Any help appreciated, > Matt

1 0

Re: oplock problems
by Matt Graham 04 Apr '01

04 Apr '01

I already did increase the value to 12, which didn't seem to help and seemed to make the problem computers take longer. I can try raising it higher if that will help. What are the disadvantages of running with oplocks disabled? "Muhlestein, Mark" wrote: > > Have you tried increasing the cifs.oplocks.opendelta parameter? If not, you might try a value like 16 or even 20 to see if it makes a difference. That is a hidden option which works around a bug in certain NIC/driver client setups. It is a timing issue which is seen if the server responds too quickly with an oplock break after a file is opened. The problem is not frequently seen with NT server because it is so much slower when handling opens. > > Mark Muhlestein -- NetApp CIFS engineering > > -----Original Message----- > From: Matt Graham [mailto:mgraham@resgen.com] > Sent: Tuesday, April 03, 2001 7:01 PM > To: toasters > Subject: oplock problems > > Hello, > > I have been having oplock break time outs, and I can't seem to isolate the > cause of the problem. It is only certain clients that are experiencing the > problem. One of the clients seemed to be fixed when I moved it from the switch > that it was on to a hub (which doesn't make any sense, and may be coincidental) > > Also, I never noticed these problems before we converted to a fully switched > network > > The clients are win98 and nt4. I am running NetApp Release 5.3.6R2. > > I am now running with oplocks disabled, but it seems like a poor solution to me. > > Any help appreciated, > Matt

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