Dont get me wrong regarding being little disappointed. Most, if not everything, missing from the 8.0.x release seems to be in this release. Probably the most prominent missing feature missing is the inplace 64bit conversion if you have no free disks, like in my case. but i'm looking hard at finding anything that would excite me in the 7mode like global filesystem, parallel nfs etc. Right now it's more like cathing up with the homework instead of being a leader with visions.
... View more
netapp answered the question on scsi unmap thru a blog today: http://communities.netapp.com/community/netapp-blogs/msenviro/blog/2011/09/22/getting-ready-for-windows-server-8-part-i
... View more
Yes, unless i missunderstand something. I'm a little dissapointed in the number of changes after reading the release notes. Probably had too high expectations. Sniplet from the release notes Data ONTAP 8.1 7-Mode RC1 Release Notes These Release Notes describe new features, enhancements, and known issues for Data ONTAP 8.1 7-Mode RC1, as well as additional information related to running this release on specific storage systems.
... View more
I see that Now has the documentation and release notes released for 8.1 RC1 So now we can get most of the technical questions answered there and find out all about the new features!
... View more
Thanks. That explains a lot. I know that scsi t10 and vaai should be considered different beast. But as vaai is a fallback when t10 is not available, in my mind it isa replacement. Maybe more like VAAI 2.0 or somethink lime that. Its not clear if it will do a complete fallback to vaai if a subset of the needed T10 is not implemented but we will see in time.
... View more
No, it doesn't. First part of the instruction says : "Install vendor-distributed hardware acceleration NAS plug-ins", so it is not a part of the Vmware suite, unlike VAAI code. So I would need something from Netapp to get it to work. From what I have found on Vmwars site later on there is to be release something called "OnCommand Plug-in for VMware 3.0" that will replace the VSC 2.1 I should be able to download it from NOW, but I can't find it there. Se: Vmware KB 2004087 : http://kb.vmware.com/kb/2004087 Neither of these talks about the other part of the question of T10 support in Ontap
... View more
Hi. Now that vSphere 5 is available we are of course eager to implement all it's features. Among them it is mentionend that NAS acceleration, and we use NFS of course. The thing is that a plug-in is required and the question is where it can be found. Will it be a part of any future VCS update or just downloadable somewhere else, maybe already now? For NAS acceleration see: http://pubs.vmware.com/vsphere-50/index.jsp?topic=/com.vmware.vsphere.storage.doc_50/GUID-F0FA0117-D48F-4F6F-BE3F-A06BF26F742C.html On the other hand we have SCSI T10 mentioned as a replacement for VMFS VAAI which is now a fallback and disabled accelerations is a last resort. This seems would probably require a certain version of Ontap. Do any of the current versions support it or do we have to upgrade?
... View more
We had it set to "local" on our metrocluster (about 100m fibre distance between the nodes). The mirror disks hardly had any "action" while the primary disks were constanty working. Changing to "alternate" helped especially my SATA disks that were working full time, essentialy doubling the number of read-spindles. I suppose that the gain of changing to alternate would depend on the latency factor of the distance to the mirror disks. I think you can change the setting on-the-fly and measure the effect on your system to get a clear picture if if you win or loose with this setting.
... View more
The rumors were true and Vmware just announced vSphere 5 including the new VMFS5 with SCSI UNMAP support, exactly the feature I'm asking about. For some insight check out this blog : http://virtualgeek.typepad.com/virtual_geek/2011/07/vstorage-apis-for-array-integration-vaai-vsphere-5-edition.html Now, as Vmware is a big player, and Netapp added Vmware VAAI support just a few months after if was announced I would guess that any new coderelease will include support for the new vSphere features. I would find it quite unfortunate if the same technology (scsi unmap) wouldn't be presented to LUNs connected to Windows 2008 R2/Linux/etc physical servers as it is exactly the same SCSI command being sent down the pipe. One thing still missing in the new vSphere is the abillity to pass thru any "scsi unmap" from within the virtual machines. This would ultimately make LUNs as dynamic as I would like them to be. TW – there’s one important thing that TODAY vSphere 5 doesn’t do – thin provisioning commands are not “punched through” the virtual disk layer. This means that if a guest issued a SCSI UNMAP command to a virtual SCSI device, it wouldn’t result in a space reclaim at the array level – only vmkernel level space reclaim works. This is something you can count on in the future (and there may be interesting ways to do it before then, hint hint).
... View more
I'm wondering if there is support for TRIM/Discard in Ontap with operating systems that has the abillity to use that feature. What I mean is OS like Win2K8 R2/newer Linux/ FreeBSD/ MacOS X etc being able to reclaim unused blocks in thin provisioned LUNs. Also, from what rumors claim Vmware will support the same when vSphere 5 is released (in a few days?) making LUNs storage almost as dynamic as NFS shares regarding allocation. I know Snapdrive for Windows can do this since a while, but last time I checked it this wasn't the same thing as TRIM/Discard and only scheduled instead of immediatly. I can't find other reference to the same feature on Netapp, an not on the disk side either thinking of it (for SSD disk support due to performance reasons).
... View more
Ontap 8.0.2 is out, yet the BURT doesn't indicate that the bug is fixed. Quite unfortunate for something that feels like a serious bug. But on the bright side, if I understand the BURT correctly it doesn't affect systems with a three way NDMP backup (as in our case) so I will doublecheck with our support if it is OK to go ahead anyway.
... View more
Nice, then it is definitly something to consider closer. Could you decribe your environment? Do you also use TSM or another backup software?
... View more
We are using TSM v6.2 with NDMP to backup our N-series 6040 metrocluster (Ontap 7.3.3p3). I'm starting to consider if we should move to SM2T instead, but I can't find any reference to license requirements on Ontap side. Is there any license requirement I should be aware of? We don't have any snapmirror/snapvault license today.
... View more
/* rant warning */ Sure, the may position themselfs as enablers and it might work for companies as Dropbox which develops their own solution on top of Netapp storage. But if we choose not to go to Cloud providers, but for various reasons wan't to keept it inhouse (legal or other reason), where does that leave us? We also have to follow the trends in the Real World and it might hurt to change, but thats the inevitable things of life. It if means that we have to look the other way for local storage, so might be it. Nothing personal agains Netapp, it applies to any vendor. Then again, its a matter of company strategy what part to develop first. Develop and Adapt or see youself being overrrun by younger, more eager and more agile. But for now we stick to Netapp storage... Radek Kubka wrote: Very valid point re Mobility - it is unstoppable IMHO. I wouldn't be that harsh though on NetApp: At the same time I feel that Old Vendors (Netapp included) is trailing behind in the development even now that they are talking about the Cloud. The thing is, they do position themselves as a 'Cloud Enabler', i.e. a supplier of a technology which may / should be used as a cornerstone for building Cloud-based services (like Dropbox). Other guys are more radical, like e.g. EMC Atmos project, which claims to be more 'Cloud-friendly' by its nature (serving data via http by leveraging API calls). The time will (eventually) show who's right & who's wrong, but probably there is no absolute answers in this matter. Regards, Radek
... View more
Actualy, the Next Thing I'm looking at beyond the Cloud is Mobility, meaning either user mobily physicaly and the user mobility among their devices (workstation to tablet/pad to phones). The Cloud might be important with the service model but it doesn't help me with the mobility problem. It might be a local problem (I work at a university) witha great freedom of both the actual workplace and what devices are used but I have to consider it when planning. The rapidly increased popularity of Tablet-devices just increased the pressure on us. Easily available Cloud services like Dropbox actualy makes our lives more difficult (ie "where is the deceased professors data located?" "Who's laws apply to reach the data without a password" etc). The reason the users use it is due to their need/wishes of mobility (sync among devices, always available wherever you are). At the same time I feel that Old Vendors (Netapp included) is trailing behind in the development even now that they are talking about the Cloud. Just try to use Netapp Filers to reach your private and shared folders from jour App in IPad/Android device and see how much more complicated it is compared to using the popular Cloud storage services. Hint: ie Webdav, already implemented in OnTap and fairly standard, would help a lot would it be able do share more than just the users homedir and (optionaly) over a SSL-protected connection.
... View more
Yes, I can see that, but between drives of the same type (ie SAS not depending of size) there seem to be similar power draw, so the specs could be extended with just three more numbers (SAS, SATA, SSD) without the need to show the whole matrix.
... View more
aborzenkov wrote: Site requirements are available at http://now.netapp.com/public/knowledge/docs/hardware/NetApp/site/pdf/site.pdf Fieldportal does not have anything with filed-tech BTW ☺ You link worked and I could read out that in our case (2TB SATA drives) worst case is 470w. But why is 215v input measurement marked as "N/A". Is it just not tested or not supported? The reason why I thought I needed to field-tech rights is because with the other link cthe Netapp site omplained that my company doesn't exist so I thought you had to be a field-tech to be allowed to read the document.
... View more
As the first link doesn't work anymore and the other requires field-tech status, I would appreciate if you can tell us the data. Or even better if Netapp could provide it on the public specs pages if it is a subject of change.
... View more
Thanks for explaining the reason behind the PVR. Is there any thumb-rule when the CPU is enough? Ie our Filers CPU run at 20-40% during normal service hours and only during dedupe its up in 80-99% busy and we have data we think would gain a lot from compression (homedirectories with a lot of static data). The NDMP BURT is a showstopper as we do backups with TivoliStorageManager with NDMP. We will have to wait for a little while more to proceed with the project. Do you have any downloadable tool that we could use to check the vol/qtree/dir data compressability ourselfs? Or do we have to go thru the support organization with an official PVR? I would like to know for sure if compression is something we would gain from before starting the whole process of getting management clearance, finding a service window etc.
... View more
We were to upgrade to Ontap 8.0.1 to gain access to the compression feature to compress data on flexvols on our primary data storage. But the consultant (also netapp releller) calims that compression is not supported on primary storage without a PWR. If so, we would rather wait for later release where it is supported and at the same time hopefully to avoid the (unexisting) 32-64 bit WALF conversion as it has to be done today. This would be quite opposite to what I read out from the DOC-8170 where it claims that it is supported on primary, secondary and archival storage.flexvols Can anyone confirm or dispute their claim?
... View more
This is one major annoyance I have with Ontap. Can anyone explain why it isn't implementet in ontap just to "mark for removal" and "reallocate away"? It would be completly transparent to the client systems and withing the mantra for "write anywhere file system". This would also let customers upgrade disksizes inplace, maybe one disk at time, without downtime and need to purchase/install new shelfs, not just for situations of human mistake.
... View more
Actualy, it works as I wish it to do. I was wondering the other day if quota counts the logical "real" or deduped/compressed space. It's much more difficult do explain to the user "your files might take upp 10GB or maybe 7,5GB or if you are lucky just 2,5GB of your quota". This way the users can easily understand that 10GB of their data is going to take 10GB on the Filer. Any savings done in the background, either by dedupe or compression, is only going to be visible to the system manager/owner. You should rethink if you use the quota for what : as a safety limit or as a way of selling space. Also, for a group of users you could use simple volumes as a kind of space-limitation instead of quotas. That way they would see the available volume space all the time.
... View more
I would like hear som some more details regarding the limitations. You mention limit of 255 on Ontap7.3. Does that mean that it would be higher with Ontap 8.x? Is a 64bit aggregate a requirement then? Would a workaround be to have several golden images to clone from?
... View more
Whats your testing platform on the client? If it is Windows XP/2003 or older then you are running SMB1.0 protocol which is known to work terrible on WAN. If you are testing with Windows Vista/2008 or newer then check that SMB2.0 protocol is enabled on your FAS. Also, Vista/2008 and newer has a better TCP stack which might help get some more performance with SMB1 if you might need to stick to it.
... View more
