----- Original Message ----- From: Y. Hiro Kaneiso ykaneiso@netapp.com To: Bruce Sterling Woodcock sirbruce@ix.netcom.com; Eyal Traitel eyal.traitel@motorola.com Cc: Eyal Traitel (r55789) eyal.traitel@motorola.com; Karl Swartz kls@netapp.com; Jay Orr orrjl@stl.nexen.com; lrazo@netapp.com; toasters@mathworks.com; beepy@netapp.com Sent: Saturday, February 19, 2000 11:20 PM Subject: RE: NVRAM memory
You should also pay attention to cp_from_cp. If you see non-zero numbers there, it means a cp could not be made in the background (even forced) and responces to clients' requests were made waited until a cp is finished.
The system is obviusly short of NVRAM.
I did, and noted that cp_from_cp was a little high. But it is going to be non-zero in almost any filer; what matters is how often it is happening. The number is less than 1% of all cps, so I don't see the system is obviously short on NVRAM.
The NVRAM is definitely heavily utilized, but I think it's "just right." If he is going to expand the filer at all and add more storage and more users accessing it, I would upgrade NVRAM. (Or get more in the next model.)
Bruce