toasters

toasters@lists.teaparty.net

13531 discussions

Block checksum and Zone checksum drive
by max chan 06 Apr '01

06 Apr '01

Dear all, Is there any different for Block checksum and Zone checksum drive? in term of preformance, reliability, limitation etc.. If i use ontap 6x, which one should i chose? Max __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Get email at your own domain with Yahoo! Mail. http://personal.mail.yahoo.com/

1 0

RE: NDMP question
by Francett, Robert D (SAIC) 06 Apr '01

06 Apr '01

Michael, We noticed the same problem and reported it to Veritas just a few days ago. Our example was an obvious path iteration, so we identified the offending file, removed it & its snapshot to avoid continued failures & resnapped. Latest word, today, is that Veritas is submitting a RFE - Request For Enhancement - so that such a circumstance, whether accidental or malicious, will not abort the entire backup. Regards, Bob Francett BP Exploration Alaska -----Original Message----- From: Michael Scala [mailto:mikes@about-inc.com] Sent: Thursday, April 05, 2001 11:22 AM To: 'Toasters Subject: NDMP question Does anyone know of any limitations of NDMP? Primarily I am looking at a path limit of 1023 characters that would cause NDMP to abort a backup job if it encountered a path greater than 1023 characters. I am using Netbackup to backup our filers via NDMP, someone mentioned that this problem may be a limitation of Ontap rather than a Netbackup limitation. Michael Scala About the Human Internet 1440 Broadway, 20th Floor Office:212-204-2668 Cell: 917-207-2573 Data Center: 212-367-8560

1 0

NDMP question
by Michael Scala 05 Apr '01

05 Apr '01

Does anyone know of any limitations of NDMP? Primarily I am looking at a path limit of 1023 characters that would cause NDMP to abort a backup job if it encountered a path greater than 1023 characters. I am using Netbackup to backup our filers via NDMP, someone mentioned that this problem may be a limitation of Ontap rather than a Netbackup limitation. Michael Scala About the Human Internet 1440 Broadway, 20th Floor Office:212-204-2668 Cell: 917-207-2573 Data Center: 212-367-8560

1 0

RE: FC9 & FC8 drives?
by Caley, Grant 05 Apr '01

05 Apr '01

Hi Simon, Yes it is, make sure the FC9 shelves are the last in the loop though. regards, -----Original Message----- From: Clawson, Simon [mailto:simon_clawson@mentorg.com] Sent: 05 April 2001 16:33 To: 'toasters(a)mathworks.com' Subject: FC9 & FC8 drives? Hi! Is it possible to mix FC8 & FC9 disks? We have two shelves of 18GB disks and would like to add another shelf of 36GB disks. Simon Simon Clawson HDS Team Systems Administrator Mentor Graphics Uk Rivergate London Road Newbury Berkshire RG14 2QB <<Clawson, Simon.vcf>>

1 0

FC9 & FC8 drives?
by Clawson, Simon 05 Apr '01

05 Apr '01

Hi! Is it possible to mix FC8 & FC9 disks? We have two shelves of 18GB disks and would like to add another shelf of 36GB disks. Simon Simon Clawson HDS Team Systems Administrator Mentor Graphics Uk Rivergate London Road Newbury Berkshire RG14 2QB <<Clawson, Simon.vcf>>

2 1

RE: FC9 & FC8 drives?
by Loux, Linda 05 Apr '01

05 Apr '01

Mixing shelves is no problem. We have 3 FC8 and 7 FC9 shelves on our system now. Linda Loux Systems Administrator Rosetta Inpharmatics -----Original Message----- From: Clawson, Simon [mailto:simon_clawson@mentorg.com] Sent: Thursday, April 05, 2001 8:33 AM To: 'toasters(a)mathworks.com' Subject: FC9 & FC8 drives? Hi! Is it possible to mix FC8 & FC9 disks? We have two shelves of 18GB disks and would like to add another shelf of 36GB disks. Simon Simon Clawson HDS Team Systems Administrator Mentor Graphics Uk Rivergate London Road Newbury Berkshire RG14 2QB <<Clawson, Simon.vcf>> **************************************************************************** This e-mail message is the property of Rosetta Inpharmatics and may contain information that is confidential and/or privileged. If you are not the intended recipient, any use, disclosure, copying, or communication of the contents of this message is prohibited. If this message was received in error, please forward a copy to mail_admin(a)rii.com and delete the message and any attachments from your computer. Thank you. ****************************************************************************

1 0

RE: performance question ablout oracle on F840 filer
by Yarmas, Tom 05 Apr '01

05 Apr '01

Several people have made some good suggestions, and I would advise you look at the white papers on the Netapp site as well. One thing that will improve things for Solaris in particular is to specify DISK_ASYNC_IO=false in the Oracle parameter file (init.ora). Solaris will not do async i/o correctly, and each async i/o request will take extra time. When you do this, you may want to use multiple DB writer processes. Finally, how are you loading the data? If you are using SQL*Loader, it may be that the SQL is slowing you down. Direct path loading should show a dramatic change if you are not using it already. Just an FYI, it is generally going to be counter productive to have table and index data on different volumes oin the Filer. Because of the way the Filer does I/O to the disks, it generally does not help to seperate things that way. By having more drives in a volume, performance will improve. Although it sounds like your problem is just getting the data out of the Oracle engine and to the Filer (hence the direct path loading should help that). -tom

1 0

RE: performance question ablout oracle on F840 filer
by Cormier, Darleen 04 Apr '01

04 Apr '01

Hi Brynay, Would this new white paper, ( just published ), on how to setup a filer and Oracle, for best performance, be of any help? http://www.netapp.com/tech_library/3105.html <http://www.netapp.com/tech_library/3105.html> -----Original Message----- From: brynay_cradle [mailto:bryany@cradle.com.tw] Sent: Tuesday, April 03, 2001 11:30 PM 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>

1 0

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

Jump to page:

2026

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