toasters

toasters@lists.teaparty.net

3 participants
13514 discussions

Start a nNew thread

Recall:
by Kissel, Rich 09 Nov '00

09 Nov '00

Kissel, Rich would like to recall the message, "".

1 0

(no subject)
by Kissel, Rich 09 Nov '00

09 Nov '00

rkissel(a)netapp.com unsubscribe Rich -------------------------------------- Rich Kissel-----------Account Manager Network Appliance 100 N. El Segundo Blvd. Suite 1802, 18th Floor El Segundo, CA 90245 310-426-1717 Office 310-426-1701 Fax 310-739-6577 Mobile 877-5-NETAPP Pager rich.kissel(a)netapp.com www.netapp.com "NTAP could be next Cisco" CBS MarketWatch http://cbs.marketwatch.com/archive/19991207/news/current/smith.htx?source=ht

1 0

(no subject)
by Kissel, Rich 09 Nov '00

09 Nov '00

rich.kissel(a)netapp.com unsubscribe

1 0

SUMMARY: Finding who is pounding your NetApp
by John Stoffel 09 Nov '00

09 Nov '00

Hi all, I'd like to give a big thanks to all who showed me the option for turning on NFS stats on a per-client basis. The NetApp 5.2 SysAdmin manual doesn't mention this at all in the trouble shooting section. They should update their docs better. I'd also like to thank Darren for the hint on using 'prex' on solaris to get more info on processes and which are doing what. And another big thanks to Mike Horwath <drechsau(a)tiny.net> for sending the 'netapp-top' script. I haven't used it yet, but it looks like just the thing to help us out in the future. The script is at the end of this message. John John Stoffel - Senior Unix Systems Administrator - Lucent Technologies stoffel(a)lucent.com - http://www.lucent.com - 978-952-7548 --------------------------snip here--------------------------------- #!/usr/local/bin/perl # netapp-top - display current top NFS clients for a NetApp # Copyright (C) 1998 Daniel Quinlan # # This program is free software; you can redistribute it and/or modify # it under the terms of the GNU General Public License as published by # the Free Software Foundation; either version 2 of the License, or # (at your option) any later version. # # This program is distributed in the hope that it will be useful, # but WITHOUT ANY WARRANTY; without even the implied warranty of # MERCHANTABILITY or FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE. See the # GNU General Public License for more details. # # You should have received a copy of the GNU General Public License # along with this program; if not, write to the Free Software # Foundation, Inc., 675 Mass Ave, Cambridge, MA 02139, USA. $default_interval = 60; $prog = $0; $prog =~ s@.*/@@; require "getopts.pl"; &Getopts("hi:"); if (defined $ENV{"LINES"} && $ENV{"LINES"} ne "") { $lines = $ENV{"LINES"}; } else { $lines = 24; } if ($opt_h) { &usage; exit 0; } if ($opt_i && $opt_i > 0) { $interval = $opt_i; } else { $interval = $default_interval; } if ($ARGV[0]) { $host = $ARGV[0]; } else { &usage; exit 1; } sub usage { print <<EOF; usage: $prog [options] filer -h print this help -i n report filer statistics every n seconds ($default_interval is default) The NetApp must have the "nfs.per_client_stats.enable" option "on" for this to work at all. This program must be run this from an admin host as root. EOF } sub print_top { my $total = 0; my $diff; my %recent; foreach $key (keys %nfs_ops_last) { $diff = $nfs_ops{$key} - $nfs_ops_last{$key}; $recent{$key} = $diff; $total += $diff; } $total = int ($total / $interval); system("clear"); printf "%6s\t%s\n", "NFS/s", "total NFS/s = $total | interval = $interval"; printf "%6s\t%s\n", "------", "----------------------------------------"; $i = 0; foreach $key (sort {$recent{$b} <=> $recent{$a} } keys %recent) { printf "%6d\t%s\n", int ($recent{$key} / $interval + 0.5), $ip_name{$key}; last if ($i++ > ($lines - 5)); } } $first = 1; for (;;) { $time_0 = time(); open(NFSSTAT, "rsh $host nfsstat -l|"); while (<NFSSTAT>) { @tmp = split; # ip_address = tmp[0] # ip_name = tmp[1] # nfs_ops = tmp[4] $ip_name{$tmp[0]} = $tmp[1]; $nfs_ops{$tmp[0]} = $tmp[4]; } close(NFSSTAT); if (! $first) { &print_top; } else { $first = 0; } %nfs_ops_last = %nfs_ops; $time_1 = time(); sleep ($interval - ($time_1 - $time_0)); }

1 0

Finding who is pounding your NetApp
by John Stoffel 09 Nov '00

09 Nov '00

Hi all, Just to drag this conversation back to a purely NetApp, purely NFS scenario, I'd like to get some help and pointers on how I can solve a problem I had this morning in a more general and useful way. Let me give you the background details here. We have a bunch of toasters here, various old F330s, an F520 (soon to be retired) and some F740s. This morning a bunch of people were complaining that their workstations were slow, that home directories were timing out, etc. These people all had their home directories on an F330 running OnTap 5.2.1. It has 192Mb of RAM, four shelves, each with 7 x 4gb disks. The poor system was simply pinned to the wall by a client. The CPU was hovering between 85% and 100%, it was reading and writing around 2.3Mb/s to the disks constantly. The nfsstats told me that about 23% of the traffic was writes, the rest was attr lookups and reads. The usual mix of NFS traffic. The cache age was down around 4-5 (it's normally much higher), so I knew it was getting hit hard with writes. But since the system was on a direct link back to a switch, and since I don't run the network at all and don't have access to it, I couldn't tell which system(s) were beating it up. We ended up putting in a PC on a repeater to sniff the link between the switch and the NetApp to try and figure out which host(s) was the bad boy. Once we figured that out, it still didn't help since the two hosts didn't look loaded at all, nor were there any runaway processes sucking up IO that I could find. The clients were both quad processor Suns running Solaris 2.5.1 or 2.6. I use the following tools to try and figure out what was going on here, and failed. We had to reboot the two systems to solve the problem. Now as a Unix admin, this really pained me, since I should have been able to find the culprits and just kill them off. We used these on the solaris side: snoop tcpdump lsof top ps (in all kinds of variations). ethereal (found after the fact, will be used in the future). And on the NetApp side I used: nfsstat netstat -n netstat -r sysstat 4 And while they all showed me something, none of them could show me what I needed. On the NetApp side I needed something to show me the top 10 NFS hosts but IP address, but I couldn't get it to work. The output of 'netstat -r' wasn't a help at all. On the Solaris side, tcpdump showed me the traffic, but didn't give me a way to relate it back to a specific process. And while lsof showed me processes, it didn't show me which one was writing data and at what rate. Does anyone have any hints? I'm thinking of upgrading to 5.3.6 at some point, just to bring the F330s upto date with the F740s, but I'm not in a rush really. Ideally, something on the NetApp side to show me the top NFS clients in terms of Data Rate, or anything would be a god-send. Then something on the Client side to figure out which process(es) were the NFS hogs would also be good. Thanks, John John Stoffel - Senior Unix Systems Administrator - Lucent Technologies stoffel(a)lucent.com - http://www.lucent.com - 978-952-7548

7 6

Re: Finding who is pounding your NetApp
by Ketil Kirkerud Elgethun 08 Nov '00

08 Nov '00

John Stoffel <stoffel(a)casc.com> writes: > On the NetApp side I needed something to show me the top 10 NFS hosts > but IP address, but I couldn't get it to work. The output of 'netstat > -r' wasn't a help at all. nfsstat -l will give you (almost) what you need. For 'nfsstat -l' to work you'll have to enable it first, though. (options nfs.per_client_stats.enable on) nfsstat -l will give you nfs ops per host. A small script to do something like #!/bin/sh rsh filer nfsstat -z sleep 60 rsh filer nfsstat -l (or -h) will give you the traffic (in nfs ops) for all clients active during the last 60 seconds. You might want to sort the output, though. Have a look at the manpage (available in /etc/man on your filer) for na_nfsstat for more info. (running with nfs.per_client_stats.enable on will possibly impair performance slightly, you might want to enable it just for this purpose, then disable it when you don't need it. Does anyone know how much of a performance hit this could generate ?) regards, -- ---Ketil Kirkerud Elgethun, Infostream ASP Marcus Thranesgate 6, N-0473 Oslo Phone: +47 22 70 45 00, Direct: +47 22 70 47 16, Mobile: +47 934 11 394

2 1

250K NFS ops/sec, eh?
by Brian Tao 08 Nov '00

08 Nov '00

http://www.spec.org/osg/sfs97/results/res2000q3/sfs97-20000905-00200.html What's special about a "scalable storage cluster", or is that just a new marketing name given to a bunch of independent F840's? A quarter million ops per second... sweet. :) -- Brian Tao (BT300, taob(a)risc.org) "Though this be madness, yet there is method in't"

3 5

RE: Exchange 2k (long)
by Whitfield, Charlie 08 Nov '00

08 Nov '00

Best be honest Peter why don't you use your usual email address. ;-) FYI, Peter can be contacted at work on bodifee_peter(a)emc.com (if I'm not mistaken). Cheers, your old friend from a previous life, CAW Charlie Whitfield Network Appliance UK email: caw(a)netapp.com voice: +44 20 8756 6762 mobile: +44 7718 160954 -----Original Message----- From: Peter Bodifee [mailto:bodif36772@yahoo.com] Sent: 08 November 2000 14:50 To: 'Bercovici, Val'; supak.lailert(a)yipintsoi.com Cc: toasters(a)mathworks.com; 'Martin Hannigan'; rdobbins(a)netmore.net Subject: RE: Exchange 2k (long) Dear Val, Please be honest and open to the user community and add " and has no plans to do so in the future" to the second sentence. See http://support.microsoft.com/support/kb/articles/q250/3/48.asp Peter -----Original Message----- From: owner-toasters(a)mathworks.com [mailto:owner-toasters@mathworks.com]On Behalf Of Bercovici, Val Sent: dinsdag 7 november 2000 21:14 To: 'supak.lailert(a)yipintsoi.com' Cc: toasters(a)mathworks.com; Martin Hannigan; rdobbins(a)netmore.net Subject: RE: Exchange 2k (long) Hi Supak et al, Please let me clarify your support statement below. Microsoft does not currently support NAS for Exchange Server 5.5 or 2000. Network Appliance fully supports Exchange 5.5 on filers via our SnapManager 1.x for Exchange software. We have engaged IBM Global Services' highly-regarded Enterprise Services for Microsoft Technologies Practice for our escalation path regarding Exchange-specific issues that we cannot resolve. [ ... marketing stuff removed for clarity ...] Thanks, -Val. Manager, Collaborative Strategy Network Appliance Inc. WHO STORES MORE THAN HALF THE WORLD'S E-MAILBOXES? FIND OUT AT: www.netapp.com 613.724.8674 - Phone 847.589.6510 - Fax 800.489.6924 - Pager E-Mail: valb(a)netapp.com -----Original Message----- From: Supak backup e-mail account [mailto:supaklailert@yahoo.com] Sent: Friday, November 03, 2000 10:31 PM To: Martin Hannigan; rdobbins(a)netmore.net Cc: toasters(a)mathworks.com Subject: Re: Exchange 2k NetApp filer is fully supported for use with MS Exchange. I don't see how this could lead to a problem more than any direct-attaced storage. NetApp choking on lots of small files? I don't think so. WAFL handles small files far better than most file systems notably UFS. Waste of space? Maybe. NetApp uses 4K blocks so if you have lots of really small files <4K then you'll waste quite a bit of space. Supak --- Martin Hannigan <hannigan(a)world.std.com> wrote: > > > > > > For both performance and supportability reasons, > it is extremely inadvisable > > to put Exchange mailboxes/private stores/public > stores on anything other > > than a filesystem which is directly-connected to > the NT server in question. > > > > People do all sorts of odd things with NetApps > just because they can - and > > don't get me wrong, I love my F740 - but this is > just plain crazy. For your > > own peace of mind, don't do it. > > > So the netapp still chokes on lots of active small > files i.e. like > usenet news, etc? We were thinking about turning > ours into a hardcore > news spool..but I remember a few years ago there was > some issue with the > millions of < 64KB file sizes.. > > -M > __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Thousands of Stores. Millions of Products. All in one Place. http://shopping.yahoo.com/ _________________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com

1 0

RE: Exchange 2k (not very long)
by mds＠gbnet.net 08 Nov '00

08 Nov '00

*ding*ding* End of round two. Before we go much further, can anyone explain what DaFS or however it's spelt might change the situation, if at all? > Please be honest and introduce yourself to the others as an employee of EMC. Teehee. > Please be honest and open to the user community and add " and has no plans > to do so in the future" to the second sentence. Nothing dishonest in leaving out information - I mean we're deep into the mire of marketecture here as it is. Caveat Emptor all Ye Who Enter Here, or something. > See http://support.microsoft.com/support/kb/articles/q250/3/48.asp Very well justified though. I believe anyone who wants Exchange, and wants the advantages of NetApp or any other decently managed storage is not going down a dark and perilous alley. In fact they'll probably be getting better support from all the vendors involved than most Unix email system customers ever get from any vendors. But whether you or whether you don't want to use them together, well, gee, is it really worth the bruises arguing about it? -- -Mark ... an Englishman in Derby ...

1 0

RE: Exchange 2k (long)
by Traitel, Eyal 08 Nov '00

08 Nov '00

Dear Peter, Please be honest and introduce yourself to the others as an employee of EMC. Microsoft is making business on selling Windows NT/2000 as file serving as well, and in this case, it is a competitor to the NAS market, hence its running away from supporting it. It does not support also any specific driver a customer might use, which all of us use everyday, so support declaration are "touchy" issues always. This is also not a secret that Network Appliance filers are performing more than well on CIFS benchmarks, and it is a competition here too. It is interesting too to see that anyway EMC is trying to imitate our well regarded Exchange-related products as well, but no market presence yet... Eyal. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- eTraitel - I'm the new eBuzzword around !!! ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Eyal Traitel - Filer Escalation Engineer CNA, MCSE, CSA, NACA Network Appliance BV Holland Office Center Kruisweg 799b 2132 NG, Hoofddorp The Netherlands Office: +31 23 567 9685 Cellular: +31 6 5497 2568 Email: eyal(a)netapp.com ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Get answers NOW! - NetApp On the Web - http://now.netapp.com ---------------------------------------------------------------------- -----Original Message----- From: Peter Bodifee [mailto:bodif36772@yahoo.com] Sent: Wednesday, November 08, 2000 3:50 PM To: 'Bercovici, Val'; supak.lailert(a)yipintsoi.com Cc: toasters(a)mathworks.com; 'Martin Hannigan'; rdobbins(a)netmore.net Subject: RE: Exchange 2k (long) Dear Val, Please be honest and open to the user community and add " and has no plans to do so in the future" to the second sentence. See http://support.microsoft.com/support/kb/articles/q250/3/48.asp Peter -----Original Message----- From: owner-toasters(a)mathworks.com [mailto:owner-toasters@mathworks.com]On Behalf Of Bercovici, Val Sent: dinsdag 7 november 2000 21:14 To: 'supak.lailert(a)yipintsoi.com' Cc: toasters(a)mathworks.com; Martin Hannigan; rdobbins(a)netmore.net Subject: RE: Exchange 2k (long) Hi Supak et al, Please let me clarify your support statement below. Microsoft does not currently support NAS for Exchange Server 5.5 or 2000. Network Appliance fully supports Exchange 5.5 on filers via our SnapManager 1.x for Exchange software. We have engaged IBM Global Services' highly-regarded Enterprise Services for Microsoft Technologies Practice for our escalation path regarding Exchange-specific issues that we cannot resolve. [ ... marketing stuff removed for clarity ...] Thanks, -Val. Manager, Collaborative Strategy Network Appliance Inc. WHO STORES MORE THAN HALF THE WORLD'S E-MAILBOXES? FIND OUT AT: www.netapp.com 613.724.8674 - Phone 847.589.6510 - Fax 800.489.6924 - Pager E-Mail: valb(a)netapp.com -----Original Message----- From: Supak backup e-mail account [mailto:supaklailert@yahoo.com] Sent: Friday, November 03, 2000 10:31 PM To: Martin Hannigan; rdobbins(a)netmore.net Cc: toasters(a)mathworks.com Subject: Re: Exchange 2k NetApp filer is fully supported for use with MS Exchange. I don't see how this could lead to a problem more than any direct-attaced storage. NetApp choking on lots of small files? I don't think so. WAFL handles small files far better than most file systems notably UFS. Waste of space? Maybe. NetApp uses 4K blocks so if you have lots of really small files <4K then you'll waste quite a bit of space. Supak --- Martin Hannigan <hannigan(a)world.std.com> wrote: > > > > > > For both performance and supportability reasons, > it is extremely inadvisable > > to put Exchange mailboxes/private stores/public > stores on anything other > > than a filesystem which is directly-connected to > the NT server in question. > > > > People do all sorts of odd things with NetApps > just because they can - and > > don't get me wrong, I love my F740 - but this is > just plain crazy. For your > > own peace of mind, don't do it. > > > So the netapp still chokes on lots of active small > files i.e. like > usenet news, etc? We were thinking about turning > ours into a hardcore > news spool..but I remember a few years ago there was > some issue with the > millions of < 64KB file sizes.. > > -M > __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Thousands of Stores. Millions of Products. All in one Place. http://shopping.yahoo.com/ _________________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com

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