Many thanks to all who replied.
Mike Horwath Fox, Adam Lance R. Mehle Leonard, Roger Geoff Hardin
options nis.server nis_master,nis_slave,* This will check the master, the slave, then broadcast.
Thanks very much,
Regards /dev/null
devnull@adc.idt.com
I am trying to decide on the number of volumes for our F810 which has a DS14 shelf(FC-AL), with 14 36G drives.
By default Ontap puts 8 disks in a RAID group.
I guess i am trying to figure out if
* I should have 2 volumes vol0 and vol1, one with 8 disks and one with 5 disks and i have ONE spare for both the volumes (Is this safe in terms of ratio of disks used to spares ? )
* Have 2 volumes(6 + 6) and 2 spares
* Have 1 volume with 13 disks and 1 spare. (reconstruction time on failed disk would be high, and i dont know if there will be performance issues esp in calculating parity etc)
Other suggestions are welcome too.
Many Thanks,
Regards,
/dev/null
After learning about how our data grows....
We are going to 2 disk Vol 0 (mirrored disk)
Just so that we don't have to jeopardize any data volumes when we upgrade the DATAONTAP OS. Also, I am not remembering why at the time, there is a condition when the reboot time is related to the size of vol0.
I keep a spare for each volume as a policy. I wouldn't have a volume of less than 7 disk (except for vol0).
Have fun,
Joe
At 11:24 AM 8/7/2002 -0400, devnull@adc.idt.com wrote:
I am trying to decide on the number of volumes for our F810 which has a DS14 shelf(FC-AL), with 14 36G drives.
By default Ontap puts 8 disks in a RAID group.
I guess i am trying to figure out if
I should have 2 volumes vol0 and vol1, one with 8 disks and one with 5 disks and i have ONE spare for both the volumes (Is this safe in terms of ratio of disks used to spares ? )
Have 2 volumes(6 + 6) and 2 spares
Have 1 volume with 13 disks and 1 spare. (reconstruction time on failed disk would be high, and i dont know if there will be performance issues esp in calculating parity etc)
Other suggestions are welcome too.
Many Thanks,
Regards,
/dev/null
If it was me I would use 2 disks as vol0 and not keep any business critical data on it, and use the remaining disks in vol1 (with 9 disks per RAID group) with 1 disk as spare. You would be very unlucky to need 2 spares! I have 1 spare for my 28 disks. Reconstruction time shouldn't be much of an issue should it?
Matt
devnull@adc.idt.com wrote:
I am trying to decide on the number of volumes for our F810 which has a DS14 shelf(FC-AL), with 14 36G drives.
By default Ontap puts 8 disks in a RAID group.
I guess i am trying to figure out if
I should have 2 volumes vol0 and vol1, one with 8 disks and one with 5 disks and i have ONE spare for both the volumes (Is this safe in terms of ratio of disks used to spares ? )
Have 2 volumes(6 + 6) and 2 spares
Have 1 volume with 13 disks and 1 spare. (reconstruction time on failed disk would be high, and i dont know if there will be performance issues esp in calculating parity etc)
Other suggestions are welcome too.
Many Thanks,
Regards,
/dev/null
devnull@adc.idt.com wrote:
I am trying to decide on the number of volumes for our F810 which has a DS14 shelf(FC-AL), with 14 36G drives.
By default Ontap puts 8 disks in a RAID group.
I guess i am trying to figure out if
I should have 2 volumes vol0 and vol1, one with 8 disks and one with 5 disks and i have ONE spare for both the volumes (Is this safe in terms of ratio of disks used to spares ? )
Have 2 volumes(6 + 6) and 2 spares
Have 1 volume with 13 disks and 1 spare. (reconstruction time on failed disk would be high, and i dont know if there will be performance issues esp in calculating parity etc)
hi,
all 3 configs are ok ! u have to choose which will meet u best.
1. the more volumes the more space u give away for the parity disk of each raidgroup 2. u have a service contract ? when u will get new parts ? no contract = 2 spares 3. R/W performance is better on bigger volumes with more spindles... 4. reconstrution is normal no performance issue, but in this time while reconstructing, the disks have more work to do and the chance to get a second disk break increases
why dont u build 1 volume with 8 (for better performance), 1 with 4 (expandable for future) and 2 spares ?
hope this helps
/dev/zero
Other suggestions are welcome too.
Many Thanks,
Regards,
/dev/null
On Wed, Aug 07, 2002 at 11:24:19AM -0400, devnull@adc.idt.com wrote:
I am trying to decide on the number of volumes for our F810 which has a DS14 shelf(FC-AL), with 14 36G drives.
By default Ontap puts 8 disks in a RAID group.
I guess i am trying to figure out if
I should have 2 volumes vol0 and vol1, one with 8 disks and one with 5 disks and i have ONE spare for both the volumes (Is this safe in terms of ratio of disks used to spares ? )
Have 2 volumes(6 + 6) and 2 spares
Have 1 volume with 13 disks and 1 spare. (reconstruction time on failed disk would be high, and i dont know if there will be performance issues esp in calculating parity etc)
Personally, I only put archive data on vol0. This gives me a small bit of online archival space without worry of a rouge script killing me. The raid set size on 36G drives is suggested to be 10 (by NetApp) so if you did a 2 disk raids set on vol0 (1d+1p) and then vol2 with remaining - spares this would probably meet your needs. I like what someone else said about your support contract dictating the number of spares you keep. Also, if you have data that doesn't change frequently you could consider reducing the snap reserve from the 20% that comes with DOT to something more reasonable for your environment. C-
Other suggestions are welcome too.
Many Thanks,
Regards,
/dev/null
-
Chris Blackmor -
devnull＠adc.idt.com -
Hannes Herret -
Joseph Bishop -
Matt Musgrove