well, and R100 uses the same head as an 880. if you carefully build the volumes and raid-groups such that you spread the I/O load across SCSI busses and ATA-SCSI bridges, you can make the R100 go pretty fast.

in my testing, the sustained seauential read performance is 120 Mbyte/sec. for mixed file sizes, I suspect it to be somewhat less. writes into the R100 sustain 60Mbyte/sec, with gusts up to 65 Mbyte/sec.

I rarely move whole volumes between filers, so I don't know the best way to do that. suggestions welcome.

-skottie

Phil Hill wrote:

Hi all,

does anybody know, how fast is a R100 ? We want to build an environment, which reduce the downtime in case of a disaster. Following in mind, some Netapp Filers do a SnapMirror over a WAN-connection to a R100. Beside the R100 is a spare-system which could replace any production-filer. In case of a disaster we are able to copy the volumes to the spare-system and replace it with the broken filer. This should be much faster then a full restore from a local tape. I am talking about 0.5TB - 1.5TB per remote filer. We also would do only a tape-backup from the R100, no local tape drives in the remote offices.

Questions:

• What is the real read-performance of a R100?
• What is the fastest way to duplicate the broken volumes from the R100 to the spare-system? volcopy ? ndmpcopy ? something else ?
• How long does it take to copy a 1TB volume to another filer.
• Does anybody have something like above described ?

Thanks in advance Phil

The R100 can be very performant, if you build you volumes correct. We find almost the same speed as local attached sun T3 disks, when we do large writes and reads (dumps of our sybase).

We use the R100 for our primary storage of us PACS-system (digital X-rays). We produce more than 20 GB / day. 30 workstations read the pictures and do the diagnostics. It works perfect.

We do also snapmirror some filer volumes to the R100. When there is a disaster, I will serve the data directly from the R100. I'm convinced that he (or she?) can do that. I'm just talking about "fileserver" stuff. No databases.

So Phil, what kind of data do you have. When it are just "files", why copy the data to your backup-system? When it is a database or very write/read intensive application, ok, I think you must copy your data.

I would use the (qtree) snapmirror. But it takes time, but while you are waiting, you can try to serve the data from the R100.

I hope this will help,

Reinoud Reynders

University Hospital Leuven Belgium

----- Original Message ----- From: "Phil Hill" phill@ultra.de To: <> Sent: Tuesday, October 15, 2002 4:58 PM Subject: R100-Filer disaster scenario

Hi all,

does anybody know, how fast is a R100 ? We want to build an environment, which reduce the downtime in case of a disaster. Following in mind, some Netapp Filers do a SnapMirror over a WAN-connection to a R100. Beside the R100 is a spare-system which could replace any production-filer. In case of a disaster we are able to copy the volumes to the spare-system and replace it with the broken filer. This should be much faster then a full restore from a local tape. I am talking about 0.5TB - 1.5TB per remote filer. We also would do only a tape-backup from the R100, no local tape drives in the remote offices.

Questions:

• What is the real read-performance of a R100?
• What is the fastest way to duplicate the broken volumes from the R100 to the spare-system? volcopy ? ndmpcopy ? something else ?
• How long does it take to copy a 1TB volume to another filer.
• Does anybody have something like above described ?

Thanks in advance Phil