toasters

toasters@lists.teaparty.net

13520 discussions

Recent Field Alerts invisible at NOW?
by Chris Thompson 05 Mar '01

05 Mar '01

The last two Field Alerts (#78, 26 Feb and #79, 28 Feb) are visible in the full list <http://now.netapp.com/NOW/products/field/>, but in the "Field Alerts" section of my "customised home page" <http://now.netapp.com/Self-Service/Personal/usrPage.asp> only #77 and earlier are visible. At first I thought this might be some sort of local caching problem, but I think I have eliminated that possibility. Do you all see the thing? 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

Backups on F630 filers
by svawter＠c-cube.com 05 Mar '01

05 Mar '01

I have four (4) F630 filers (yeah, yeah, yeah, I know, upgrade!) and an additional two (2) F740 filers. I want to direct attach at least 1 drive from a library to each filer and I want to use Ultrium LTO libraries. Failing LTO support, I would like to use AIT-2 libraries. The problem that I have is that neither of these is officially support on the F630 platform! (AIT-2 is on the F740) Does anyone have AIT-2 running on F630? I don't want to run Mammoth, as I have heard too many horror stories (yes, I know that M2 beats AIT-2 by 2:1 for speed and by 10GB capacity, but that's irrelevant if the drive is down for maintenance much more often). Better yet, does anyone have LTO running on a Filer of any model, preferably a F630? (since they are barely shipping LTO, I doubt it). If you don't know what LTO is, go looking at HP, Seagate or IBM. Seagate seems to have the best drive at 16mb/sec with 100gb capacity and I think that this is due to a variable speed motor (which should also allow it to kick HP & IBM's butt when you can't keep data streaming in at 15mb/sec or better!) Steve Vawter voice: 408-490-5310 fax: 408-490-8615 Staff UNIX Systems Administrator Steve.Vawter(a)C-Cube.COM

2 1

RE: Backups on F630 filers
by Stringer, Douglas 05 Mar '01

05 Mar '01

Your choice for AIT-2 is solid (2 generations, backward read/write compatible, investment in media usable in later generations, less than 2% AFFR (raw field failure rate over the past 4 years)NDMP compliant, etc.etc. By the way, what have you heard about LTO's field reliability, cross-compatibility format compliance,(multiple manufacturers of LTO on the same format should be able to read data written by other mfgs. LTO units), media availability, and any actual backup/restore stories. I'd like to hear from anyone out there why they are looking at this format vs. sticking with DLT or transitioning from formats at the end of their cycles (DAT, Travan,etc.) 'Backup is worthless if you can't restore it.' Doug Stringer Secondary Storage Marketing Manager Network Appliance 495 East Java Drive Sunnyvale, CA 94089 stringer(a)netapp.com 408-822-6764 telephone 408-822-4611 fax -----Original Message----- From: svawter(a)c-cube.com [mailto:svawter@c-cube.com] Sent: Monday, March 05, 2001 1:01 PM To: toasters(a)mathworks.com Subject: Backups on F630 filers I have four (4) F630 filers (yeah, yeah, yeah, I know, upgrade!) and an additional two (2) F740 filers. I want to direct attach at least 1 drive from a library to each filer and I want to use Ultrium LTO libraries. Failing LTO support, I would like to use AIT-2 libraries. The problem that I have is that neither of these is officially support on the F630 platform! (AIT-2 is on the F740) Does anyone have AIT-2 running on F630? I don't want to run Mammoth, as I have heard too many horror stories (yes, I know that M2 beats AIT-2 by 2:1 for speed and by 10GB capacity, but that's irrelevant if the drive is down for maintenance much more often). Better yet, does anyone have LTO running on a Filer of any model, preferably a F630? (since they are barely shipping LTO, I doubt it). If you don't know what LTO is, go looking at HP, Seagate or IBM. Seagate seems to have the best drive at 16mb/sec with 100gb capacity and I think that this is due to a variable speed motor (which should also allow it to kick HP & IBM's butt when you can't keep data streaming in at 15mb/sec or better!) Steve Vawter voice: 408-490-5310 fax: 408-490-8615 Staff UNIX Systems Administrator Steve.Vawter(a)C-Cube.COM

1 0

RE: Strange mounting problem
by Jenkinson, John P (SAIC) 05 Mar '01

05 Mar '01

sounds like a filer routing problem on the problem filer netstat -r look for the problem Linux system this the correct interface and gateway? -----Original Message----- From: Stephen C. Woods [mailto:scw@seas.ucla.edu] Sent: Monday, March 05, 2001 10:03 AM To: toasters(a)mathworks.com Subject: Strange mounting problem We have a Dell Linux 7.0 system that can't mount from a 740 (5.3.4R2). However it can mount from a 540 (5.1.2R3), and also from a AIX (4.2) and Sun (2.6) machine with no problems. Packet sniffer indicates that packets are sent to the filer but never return. Does anybody reconize these symptoms? ----- Stephen C. Woods; UCLA SEASnet; 2567 Boelter hall; LA CA 90095; (310)-825-8614 Unless otherwise noted these statements are my own, Not those of the University of California. Internet mail:scw@seas.ucla.edu

2 1

Re: Strange mounting problem
by Paul Wiltsey 05 Mar '01

05 Mar '01

what can you verify through rpcinfo command? what can you verify with showmount? ----- Original Message ----- From: "Stephen C. Woods" <scw(a)seas.ucla.edu> Date: Monday, March 5, 2001 2:03 pm Subject: Strange mounting problem > We have a Dell Linux 7.0 system that can't mount from a 740 > (5.3.4R2).However it can mount from a 540 (5.1.2R3), and also from > a AIX (4.2) and > Sun (2.6) machine with no problems. Packet sniffer indicates that > packets are sent to the filer but never return. > > Does anybody reconize these symptoms? > > > ----- > Stephen C. Woods; UCLA SEASnet; 2567 Boelter hall; LA CA 90095; > (310)-825-8614 > Unless otherwise noted these statements are my own, Not those of > the > University of California. Internet > mail:scw@seas.ucla.edu

1 0

Strange mounting problem
by Stephen C. Woods 05 Mar '01

05 Mar '01

We have a Dell Linux 7.0 system that can't mount from a 740 (5.3.4R2). However it can mount from a 540 (5.1.2R3), and also from a AIX (4.2) and Sun (2.6) machine with no problems. Packet sniffer indicates that packets are sent to the filer but never return. Does anybody reconize these symptoms? ----- Stephen C. Woods; UCLA SEASnet; 2567 Boelter hall; LA CA 90095; (310)-825-8614 Unless otherwise noted these statements are my own, Not those of the University of California. Internet mail:scw@seas.ucla.edu

1 0

RE: ait2 jukeboxes
by Sundquist, Richard 03 Mar '01

03 Mar '01

Neil - I am one month into a Qualstar 4440 with 2 AIT2 drives. So far, no problems :) Using Veritas NetBackup with one AIT2 drive direct attached to the NetApp. The other drive is connected to a Ultra10 and does the rest of the network. The Qualstar is rack mounted, though the footprint is not small. - Rich -----Original Message----- From: Michael Carter [mailto:michael@worksta.com] Sent: Friday, March 02, 2001 4:49 PM To: 'toasters' Subject: RE: ait2 jukeboxes Neil, Qualstar and Overland Data are pretty good ones. Overland you can add on in a small rack area. Mike -----Original Message----- From: owner-toasters(a)mathworks.com [mailto:owner-toasters@mathworks.com]On Behalf Of neil lehrer Sent: Friday, March 02, 2001 6:58 PM To: toasters Subject: ait2 jukeboxes i am testing spectralogic now. does anyone have another ait2 jukebox mfg they like? -- regards

1 0

ait2 jukeboxes
by neil lehrer 03 Mar '01

03 Mar '01

i am testing spectralogic now. does anyone have another ait2 jukebox mfg they like? -- regards

2 1

Filer and redundant mail-solution
by SSV Steven Sinnaeve 02 Mar '01

02 Mar '01

Hi, Is anybody using the Netapp Filer with a redundant mail solution (pop/webbased e-mail). If so, can you tell me what kind of OS and software you are using. I'm looking for a Linux based solution that supports multiple domains. tnx! Steven Sinnaeve Technical Support Customer Care Steven Sinnaeve Technical Support Customer Care ITinera Services - A VersaTel Company Dam 71 B-8500 Kortrijk Belgium T. +32 (0)56 269 100 M. +32 (0)496 57 39 32 F. +32 (0)56 269 109 E. steven.sinnaeve(a)ITinera.net www.versatel.be www.ITinera.be Legal statement: This message and any attachment are confidential and may be privileged or otherwise protected from disclosure. If you are not the intended recipient, please telephone or email the sender and delete this message and any attachment from your system. If you are not the intended recipient you must not copy this message or attachment or disclose the contents to any other person and destroy all copies of the original message and attachment.

2 1

BakBone 6.03 has command line functions as well as the BEST NetApp and NDMP support
by Dale Sykes 02 Mar '01

02 Mar '01

This email was forwarded to me by an acquaintance, and I would like to give some feedback. First of all, I work for BakBone as the Northwest Regional Manager, and have been familiar with the NetVault product since 1995, when AT&T still owned the product. My last company, Andataco, was the original reseller of the product then, and since, the product has been acquired by BakBone, and world headquarters have been moved to San Diego, with other engineering and support facilities in Lanham, MD, England, and Japan. 6.03 gives you the command line interface capabilities that John Ross referred to. In 6.01, they were not available. With the product as modular as it is, we received numerous request for command line, and turned out the functionality within months. NDMP and NetApp support are also a feature set of 6.03, and the performance is quite spectacular there as well, as John found with the Exabyte M2 drives. We are seeing as much as 19MB/sec with a STK 9840 directly attached to a NetApp. It takes just minutes to hook up a NetApp box, and similar amount of time and effort to use Netvault to back up a SAN. We can dynamically shares drives between a NetApp and any other server or Client, UNIX, NT, or LINUX as well More information is available at www.bakbone.com, or anyone can call me at 503-892-3933. I hope this is of value to you. Thanks for your time, Dale Sykes Northwest Regional Manager BakBone >>From: John Ross >>Sent: Wednesday, February 28, 2001 6:36 PM >>To: Lichteveld, Edwin >>Cc: 'toasters(a)mathworks.com' >>Subject: Re: Dead or alive : References wanted for Netvault required >> >> >>We're just in the process of rolling out Netvault, so I don't have >>extensive experience with it but overall I like a lot. >> >>We're running version 6.0.1 here, and have to admit, the interface sucks. >>It's copied from the NT version, and has a very NT way of doing things. >>I'm sure if that's what your used to, then it's O.K, but for unix people, >>it can get frusterating. There is no command line interface, so if you >>want to setup lost of different backup jobs, then plan on putting a lot of >>miles on your mouse. I have similar complaints about logging - It logs in >>an 'event manager' style. Little support for logs outside of the GUI. I >>have ben told however that command line support is planed, and that 6.1 in >>fact has some of it alredy. >> >>Despite the interface, NetVault does seem to work well. It's fairly >>intuitive (just slow to setup) so learing it is fairly simple. Once it's >>setup, it seems to work quite well, and is as fast as anything else we've >>tried. (Although we havn't tried using NDMP yet) >> >>One feature it has that absolutely kicks (IMHO) is it's virtual library. >>We have our backup host connected to a whack of local disk. On the disks >>we have a virtual library. As fas as netvault is concerned, it looks, and >>acts just like a real tape library, except that its on disk, so we don't >>have the standard latency you have with tapes. Once the backup is on the >>local drives, Netvault automaticly copys everything over to tape. Right >>now we're using MammothII tapes, and can get all 4 drives going at >>~15MB/sec each (Whee!!!) What that means is that if you want to expand >>your backup cluster, all you need to do is create a few more virtual >>drives. No need to have more then a couple real tape drives since they're >>no longer the bottle necks. >> >>So far, the only problems I've had with NetVault is it's interface, but >>other then that, I really don't have anything bad to say about it. Once >>you get it setup it seems to run as advertized. >> >>On Tue, 27 Feb 2001, Lichteveld, Edwin wrote: >> >>> Hello list, >>> >>> As the last release of NetVault supports NDMP in order >>> to backup a Network Appliance filer, I am very much >>> interested in references wrt this product. Who is willing >>> to share experiences and their configurations? >>> >>> regards, >>> >>> Edwin >>> >> >>-- >>John Ross >>Systems Administrator >>AT&T Canada >> >>Tact, n.: >> The unsaid part of what you're thinking. >> >

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