Wow another person using Macs! I will have to start looking at DFS more closely.

We are stuck at 10.2.8 until we get rid of Outlook 2001:Mac which bombs all the time under 10.3

When you say 10.3 is better...is that the native smb support gets better or is there something else. I know that 10.2.6 and 10.2.8 built-in SMB performance was significantly less than with Dave ...something like 20-30% less. We are run 10.2.8 on Dual G5's with the Dave 5.0 client and we are getting an average of 55MB/s over GigE

We will probably be moving to First Class at beginning of the July which will eliminate our last non OSX native application!

-----Original Message----- From: jeff.mery@ni.com [mailto:jeff.mery@ni.com] Sent: Wednesday, May 12, 2004 3:08 PM To: toasters@mathworks.com Subject: RE: QTree Size limits

IIRC...Dave and SMB handle DFS just fine. DFS virtualizes the location of the data, but still presents it the same way as a regular share. In fact, if you look at the disk location of the DFS root on your DFS server, you'll see folders in the same organization as the DFS tree itself.

A better solution for your Mac guys and gals would be to get them on OS 10.3 if their hardware will support it =)

Jeff Mery, MCP National Instruments

------------------------------------------------------------------------- "Allow me to extol the virtues of the Net Fairy, and of all the fantastic dorks that make the nice packets go from here to there. Amen." TB - Penny Arcade -------------------------------------------------------------------------

Jack Lyons jack.lyons@martinagency.com Sent by: owner-toasters@mathworks.com

05/12/2004 12:09 PM

To

"'Skottie Miller'" skottie@anim.dreamworks.com, Jack Lyons jack.lyons@martinagency.com

cc

"'toasters@mathworks.com'" toasters@mathworks.com

Subject

RE: QTree Size limits

The 14 hours window is from filer to tape - a single LTO1 drive via NDMP which I think equates to about 24 MB/s which I think is pretty good?!?

We are not using DFS currently, the big question is regards to how does DAVE and/or OSX native SMB handle DFS - I haven't look at it yet.

Jack

-----Original Message----- From: Skottie Miller [mailto:skottie@anim.dreamworks.com] Sent: Wednesday, May 12, 2004 12:51 PM To: Jack Lyons Cc: 'toasters@mathworks.com' Subject: Re: QTree Size limits

Jack Lyons wrote:

I have a 1.31 TB volume that is 90% full. There are two solutions I have available to me. One is to try to reduce the amount of space on the volume (but meeting resistance by users). The other is to add space. I am trying to get approval for another TB of disk space, but I don't think the best solution is to add it to the existing QTree. My backup window for this volume is 14 -15 hours currently and would only get bigger if I add space and that is not acceptable. I know I can another qtree / cifs share but I was hoping I could do it in such a way that I would still have another Qtree but make it available to the user via a single CIFS Share.

seems you may want to investigate backup system changes; a 14 hour window for a 1.3 TB volume is terrible. what backup product(s) are you using?

For reference, we churn 800 - 1.2 TB per night, out of 40 TB online, and the first-phase backup window (filer to stage pools) is 4 - 6 hours long. Then the data moves from staging pool to tape, outside the backup window. We use Tivoli storage manager off three Linux backup servers, doing file-at-a-time differential backups over NFS.

I was hoping I could add another volume, probably /vol/vol2 with a qtree called /vol/vol2/active clients and some how make it appear to the user as a subdirectory under \server\creative file:///\\server\creative

Do you use DFS to mount shares ? My windows guys think DFS supports nesting shares as you describe.

-skottie