toasters

toasters@lists.teaparty.net

13523 discussions

RE: vol copy from 5.3.6R2 to 6.0.1R1
by Fox, Adam 20 Feb '01

20 Feb '01

You can still do the transfer. It just has to revert the target (F760) to the 5.3 filesystems first. After that revert is complete, you can do the vol copy. Then when all the 5.3 snapshots are gone, the volume will automatically upgrade the volume back to 6.0. -- Adam Fox NetApp Professional Services, NC adamfox(a)netapp.com > -----Original Message----- > From: Brian L. Brush [mailto:brian@paradyne.com] > Sent: Tuesday, February 20, 2001 1:22 PM > To: toasters(a)mathworks.com > Subject: vol copy from 5.3.6R2 to 6.0.1R1 > > > > I want to vol copy from an F230 running ONTAP 5.3.6R2 to an > F760 running > 6.0.1R1, but I encounter the following error: > > Filesystem version mismatch for destination volume vol1, reverting the > version and aborting transfer. A console message will be > displayed when > this revert is complete. > > I can't upgrade the 230 to 6.0, and it's impractical for me > to revert to > 5.x on the 760. Is there any way for me to vol copy directly from the > 230 to the 760? > > --Brian L. Brush > Senior Systems Administrator > Paradyne Corporation >

2 1

FW: F85 series
by Gregg Anderson 20 Feb '01

20 Feb '01

My local NetApp sales rep was at my office this morning and from what I understand, there is no upgrade path for this product. It is intended to be an entry level filer w/limited growth (648gb max storage). -Gregg Anderson -----Original Message----- From: Jordan Share [mailto:iso9@phantasticant.com] Sent: Tuesday, February 20, 2001 1:12 PM To: toasters(a)mathworks.com Subject: Re: F85 series So, is there an upgrade path for this box? We (my work) are an ASP, and we are looking at using a NetApp for our colocation cage. Right now, we are pretty much going back and forth between the F720 and the F760. We really only need the 720 for the near future, but if the "upgrade" to the 760 turns out to be more like a replacement of the 720 (i.e. we get very little back from trading it in), then we might go that route. But this F85 piques my interest. Roughly, what is its price point, and can the head be swapped out when it is time to upgrade? I would guess (after a brief survey of the website) that there isn't an intended upgrade path from this model. Thanks, Jordan ----- Original Message ----- From: "White, Lance" <Lance.White(a)netapp.com> To: "'Clawson, Simon'" <simon_clawson(a)mentorg.com>; <toasters(a)mathworks.com> Sent: Tuesday, February 20, 2001 8:16 AM Subject: RE: F85 series > No, it uses FW Ultra SCSI-3 disks, not FC. Yes, NDMP backup is supported. > Limitations? Well, as it's positioned to be the NEW entry level Netapp (at > 3300 NFS ops/sec, it actually about 30% faster than the old low end F720, > and about 30% less expensive), it IS limited to 648GB MAX storage (6 > internal plus 12 external in 18GB & 36GB flavors), as opposed to the F720's > limit of ~500GB. Still doin' hot swap, RAID4, snapshots, OnTap, WAFL, > everything that's cool about a Filer and more! :-D > > -----Original Message----- > From: Clawson, Simon [mailto:simon_clawson@mentorg.com] > Sent: Tuesday, February 20, 2001 7:30 AM > To: 'toasters(a)mathworks.com' > Subject: F85 series > > > Has anyone had any experince with the F85? Does it use the same disks as the > 700 & 800's? Is it possible to back it up via NDMP? What are its > limitations? > > Simon

1 0

RE: vol copy from 5.3.6R2 to 6.0.1R1
by Knight, Jason 20 Feb '01

20 Feb '01

If you are licensed for SnapMirror that should work for you. I believe you can mirror systems upstream (up to higher OS levels) but not downstream (Higher OS level to lower - at least involving 6.x). SnapMirror is pretty good for things like this. Jason Knight -----Original Message----- From: Brian L. Brush [mailto:brian@paradyne.com] Sent: Tuesday, February 20, 2001 12:22 PM To: toasters(a)mathworks.com Subject: vol copy from 5.3.6R2 to 6.0.1R1 I want to vol copy from an F230 running ONTAP 5.3.6R2 to an F760 running 6.0.1R1, but I encounter the following error: Filesystem version mismatch for destination volume vol1, reverting the version and aborting transfer. A console message will be displayed when this revert is complete. I can't upgrade the 230 to 6.0, and it's impractical for me to revert to 5.x on the 760. Is there any way for me to vol copy directly from the 230 to the 760? --Brian L. Brush Senior Systems Administrator Paradyne Corporation

1 0

vol copy from 5.3.6R2 to 6.0.1R1
by Brian L. Brush 20 Feb '01

20 Feb '01

I want to vol copy from an F230 running ONTAP 5.3.6R2 to an F760 running 6.0.1R1, but I encounter the following error: Filesystem version mismatch for destination volume vol1, reverting the version and aborting transfer. A console message will be displayed when this revert is complete. I can't upgrade the 230 to 6.0, and it's impractical for me to revert to 5.x on the 760. Is there any way for me to vol copy directly from the 230 to the 760? --Brian L. Brush Senior Systems Administrator Paradyne Corporation

1 0

RE: F85 series
by Lentz, Tim 20 Feb '01

20 Feb '01

Great info, thanks. Can I ask what the rough price point for the F85 (~400GB usable) is? We have a 230 that we need to upgrade and it sounds like the F85 would be a good fit. Thank you, Tim A. Lentz Staff Software Systems Engineer/Unix System Administrator for MCAD Ext. 8-3859 Direct: 303-702-3859 MS: 2120-1 -----Original Message----- From: Luke Mewburn [mailto:lukem@wasabisystems.com] Sent: Tuesday, February 20, 2001 10:29 AM To: White, Lance Cc: 'toasters(a)mathworks.com' Subject: Re: F85 series On Tue, Feb 20, 2001 at 08:16:55AM -0800, White, Lance wrote: > No, it uses FW Ultra SCSI-3 disks, not FC. Yes, NDMP backup is supported. > Limitations? Well, as it's positioned to be the NEW entry level Netapp (at > 3300 NFS ops/sec, it actually about 30% faster than the old low end F720, > and about 30% less expensive), it IS limited to 648GB MAX storage (6 > internal plus 12 external in 18GB & 36GB flavors), as opposed to the F720's > limit of ~500GB. Still doin' hot swap, RAID4, snapshots, OnTap, WAFL, > everything that's cool about a Filer and more! :-D The box sounds cool. It's about time a box of this price point was available again :) I have a (long-time) gripe in the way it's advertised. It's a gripe I have with every vendor. I wish NetApp would advertise the *usable* diskspace of the machine (as seen by a client OS or df, for example), not the raw diskspace calculated by taking the disk vendor size and multiplying by the number of disks. I know this makes the boxes appear more expensive per usable megabyte, but it's being more honest to the client, and once you explain to the client to take into account all the overheads, and how to do the same math on competing options (e.g, h/w raid + vxfs on Solaris, EMC, etc), then you (NetApp) appear to be delivering accurate technical information. For example, there's no WAY an F720 has 500 GB of usable space. Out of the box, with default snap reserve, it barely has 300 GB, where GB == 2^30, which is what client based tools (such as df and the `Properties' box in Windows) use, not 10^9, which is what (overzealous) disk vendors use. The usuable capacity of an F720 is trivial to calculate: 14 x 36 GB disks, utilised as: 1 hot spare, 1 parity, 12 data disks Each data disk has 24840 MB usable, calculated as: 34500 megabytes (rightsized by OnTAP) - 10% wafl overhead (is this 8% in OnTAP 6.x?) - 20% snap reserve (default; but often reduced to 10%) = 24840 megabytes So, 12 x 24840 = 298080 MB = ~ 291 GB Tweaking the numbers to 8% wafl overhead (from OnTAP 6) and 10% snap reserve gives an F720 approximately 334 GB of space (from 500 GB `raw'). Based on the info Lance White gives above, an F85 with 36 GB drives, consisting of 15 data disks, 1 hot spare, 2 parity, 8% wafl overhead, 10% snap reserve would have a usuable capacity at the client of: 15 x (34500 - 8% - 10%) = 15 x 28556 = 428490 MB = 418 GB 418 GB is a bit less than the ``648 GB MAX storage'' that Lance quotes above. In general, take away approximately one third of the raw capacity that NetApp quote and that will give you an guestimate on the usuable capacity that will suit most client's needs. Luke. PS: I'm sure some people have seen or heard this rant before :) Disclaimer: I like NetApp. I worked at NetApp for a while as an SE. I just believe in being honest to the technical people you're selling to, especially those who have to justify to their management why the (not cheap) 500 GB box they bought ran out of space at 300 GB. -- Luke Mewburn <lukem(a)wasabisystems.com> http://www.wasabisystems.com Luke Mewburn <lukem(a)netbsd.org> http://www.netbsd.org Wasabi Systems - providing NetBSD sales, support and services.

1 0

F85 series
by Clawson, Simon 20 Feb '01

20 Feb '01

Has anyone had any experince with the F85? Does it use the same disks as the 700 & 800's? Is it possible to back it up via NDMP? What are its limitations? Simon Simon Clawson HDS Team Systems Administrator Mentor Graphics Uk Rivergate London Road Newbury Berkshire RG14 2QB <<Clawson, Simon.vcf>>

1 0

Budtool 4.6.1Cannot Create File History
by Kenny Henderson 19 Feb '01

19 Feb '01

I have two Netapp 760s for which I use Budtool 4.6.1 to backup the filer's data. We have been running into a problem in which Budtool does not create a file history associated with a backup of the filers volumes. The backup reports that it completed successfully with the exception of not having created a file history. Without the backup file history the backup is more or less useless. Budtool reports the following error message after a scheduled backup of the filer has completed: "Error writing to file history command: Error code = -1" I have attempted to correct this problem by increasing the file history timeout as suggested by Legato's TechDialog support web site but the problem still exists. While examining the goserver diag log I found the following error message which is repeated throughout the diag log until the backup finishes: "L01 (:logfilter.c:310) 01/17/01 02:22:48> Unknown type 4d2 in dump image " The following associated error message was found throughout the goserver filer log: ****************************************************************** filter~header 2fh 2540 ------ E R R O R ------- filter~header 2fh 2541 Unknown type 4d2 in dump image filter~header 2fh 2542 ****************************************************************** It looks as though budtool receives a data type that it does not recognize and goes south as far as creating a file history log. I attempted to pull the file history off of one of the backup tapes put received the same "unknown type 4d2" error message. Any assistance with this problem would be greatly appreciated. Kenny Henderson henderka(a)risc.sps.mot.com

1 0

Budtool 4.6.1 Cannot Create File History
by Kenny Henderson 19 Feb '01

19 Feb '01

1 0

What backup products to use?
by Schepers, Jan 19 Feb '01

19 Feb '01

Hello gang, what exact backup products do I need to use to backup a NetApp filer. I'm interested in either : - Veritas's netbackup - Workstation Solutions Quick Restore - Legato's Netbackup rgds, Yann

1 0

RE: F720 vs. F520?
by White, Lance 19 Feb '01

19 Feb '01

To add to this, the F520 has single-ended disks, while the current supported SCSI adapters (for disk) is differential. The F520's SE card is not officially supported in an F720. Might work, but not supported. Lance -----Original Message----- From: Bond, Andrew [mailto:abond@netapp.com] Sent: Sunday, February 18, 2001 4:10 AM To: Jim Davis Cc: toasters(a)mathworks.com Subject: RE: F720 vs. F520? Jim, The numbers are available on the SPEC website www.spec.org. However, there are no directly comparable figures since the F520 was tested using SFS93 and the F720 using SFS97. I did some analysis of the relationship for another customer, and concluded that the F720 should have about 50% faster response time, and slightly higher maximum throughput. It also supports more storage capacity, at 500GB versus 250GB (raw capacity). You should talk to your local NetApp Sales Engineer regarding carrying the shelves over; it is possible, but has some restrictions. Regards, Andrew > -----Original Message----- > From: Jim Davis [mailto:jdavis@cs.arizona.edu] > Sent: 12 February 2001 22:06 > To: toasters(a)mathworks.com > Subject: F720 vs. F520? > > > We're looking to replace a couple of F520s with something newer (ie, > something we can get a support contract with). Neither F520 > system seems > stressed for CPU or NVRAM or physical memory, and we'd like > to have the > option of carrying over the current disk shelves if at all > possible. The > F700 spec sheet lists a "Relative Performance" number ("NFS > Ops per sec. > under 10 msec.) for the F720; is there a figure for the F520 somewhere > too? >

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