|
netapp bug report posted:NetApp recommends that customers discontinue using OnCommand System Manager immediately to:
|
| # ? Aug 1, 2012 01:29 |
|
|
|
| # ? May 25, 2013 05:23 |
|
|
evil_bunnY posted:Enterprise grade management tools, ladies and gents. CLI is the only proper way to manage a filer.
|
| # ? Aug 1, 2012 02:47 |
|
|
NippleFloss posted:
And this is why Equallogic is destroying EMC and NetApp in the SMB market. Not everyone has someone on staff who can babysit the SAN day in and day out. Although I did want to ask you for more details on the Unified NetApp approach. But it is late and I am posting from my phone.
|
| # ? Aug 1, 2012 03:48 |
|
|
NippleFloss posted:Don't use system manager to do anything, ever, and you'll be happier for it. This is just one in a string of stupid bugs starting with 2.0 that almost all revolve around it occasionally just trashing config files.
|
| # ? Aug 1, 2012 04:38 |
|
|
Hey where did the other guy with a Starboard go? I want to hear how he's doing and if he's applied the new update yet? We haven't.
|
| # ? Aug 1, 2012 06:46 |
|
|
NippleFloss posted:Don't use system manager to do anything, ever, and you'll be happier for it. This is just one in a string of stupid bugs starting with 2.0 that almost all revolve around it occasionally just trashing config files. Stop lying, 2.0 could cause unprompted data loss without trashing the configs 
|
| # ? Aug 1, 2012 10:38 |
|
|
Internet Explorer posted:And this is why Equallogic is destroying EMC and NetApp in the SMB market. Not everyone has someone on staff who can babysit the SAN day in and day out. Although I did want to ask you for more details on the Unified NetApp approach. But it is late and I am posting from my phone. I like Equallogic, but the recent firmware change that prevents LUN deletion without a support call for authorization is a bit too dumb.
|
| # ? Aug 1, 2012 12:58 |
|
|
EoRaptor posted:I like Equallogic, but the recent firmware change that prevents LUN deletion without a support call for authorization is a bit too dumb. This just sounds so ridiculous I can't believe it. Is this true?
|
| # ? Aug 1, 2012 13:54 |
|
|
Number19 posted:Oh hey look it all worked like it's supposed to and not like the other times where the nodes refused to fail over and everything went offline. Internet Explorer posted:And this is why Equallogic is destroying EMC and NetApp in the SMB market. Not everyone has someone on staff who can babysit the SAN day in and day out.
|
| # ? Aug 1, 2012 14:20 |
|
|
EoRaptor posted:I like Equallogic, but the recent firmware change that prevents LUN deletion without a support call for authorization is a bit too dumb. Wow. Really? I'll have to check the latest release notes. Do you know what version introduced this? I've stopped following Equallogic releases now that all my time is spent wrangling our VNX.
|
| # ? Aug 1, 2012 15:04 |
|
|
Noghri_ViR posted:it's the year 2012. I should be able to click to do what I want. My grandfather used a computer with a CLI....I could go on I didn't say it was right, I just said it was true. System Manager does not have the same level of functionality or the same level of assurance as the CLI does. It will eventually get there, but it's not there yet. Internet Explorer posted:And this is why Equallogic is destroying EMC and NetApp in the SMB market. Not everyone has someone on staff who can babysit the SAN day in and day out. Although I did want to ask you for more details on the Unified NetApp approach. But it is late and I am posting from my phone. I mean, they just started offering 0% financing on EQL storage. That's the same poo poo that Hyundai does when they want to get rid of last year's Accent's. That's not something you do when you're crushing the competition. Equallogic does pretty well in some segments because they sell at a discount relative to the fuller featured boxes from NetApp and EMC and because they have a good product. They're hardly crushing anyone in any markets. They only own 30% of the iSCSI-only market, with EMC at 20%. http://www.marketwatch.com/story/wo...-idc-2012-06-08 Dell doesn't even get named, it just makes it into "Others" in External Disk systems market share, and that includes EQL, Compellant and PowerVault. They were at something like 7% market share middle of last year. And they're probably around the same now. EMC is crushing everyone in the storage market. They have nearly a third of the total market now, and they have been increasing market share year over year. Consider that the next time you want to make a "quality = market share" argument. Nomex posted:Stop lying, 2.0 could cause unprompted data loss without trashing the configs Well, technically it *WAS* prompted, the prompt just implied that System Manager would, you know, properly check that a volume was REALLY empty before deleting it. The good news is they've had a bug for basically every major configuration file now so there aren't really any left to break, unless they have regressions. ozmunkeh posted:Well, that and $$$. We finally got a NetApp quote on the day we installed the Equallogic and it was more than double what we paid for EQL for around half the capacity. We could have brought it down to a comparable price by opting for a single controller, something the VAR recommended.. Don't ever let a VAR talk you into buy a single controller NetApp for anything other than scratch storage or backups. Production storage should be fault tolerant and a single controller has a myriad of ways it can fail. If that's the only way to get NetApp price competitive then you should just go with the competitor or look for a NetApp VAR who will try to work with you without crippling the device.
|
| # ? Aug 1, 2012 15:52 |
|
|
Internet Explorer posted:Wow. Really? I'll have to check the latest release notes. Do you know what version introduced this? I've stopped following Equallogic releases now that all my time is spent wrangling our VNX. Maybe it's in the 6.0.0 beta release? I can't see anything in the 5.x release notes. NippleFloss posted:Don't ever let a VAR talk you into buy a single controller NetApp for anything other than scratch storage or backups. Production storage should be fault tolerant and a single controller has a myriad of ways it can fail. If that's the only way to get NetApp price competitive then you should just go with the competitor or look for a NetApp VAR who will try to work with you without crippling the device. Oh, agreed. We had already written off NetApp mostly because both NetApp VARs we spoke with were fantastically shady - like Devious Dave's used car lot "We Finance" levels of shady. No thanks. The eventual quote (that was 2 months in the making), with tax, was a few dollars under $60K for 12x2TB SATA disks.
|
| # ? Aug 1, 2012 16:17 |
|
|
ozmunkeh posted:Oh, agreed. We had already written off NetApp mostly because both NetApp VARs we spoke with were fantastically shady - like Devious Dave's used car lot "We Finance" levels of shady. No thanks. The eventual quote (that was 2 months in the making), with tax, was a few dollars under $60K for 12x2TB SATA disks. That price is way way too high. I don't know what the procedure is for vetting VARs to make sure they aren't completely horrible but NetApp needs to do something about it. That's at least a 200% markup over list and you should never even be paying list for any IT gear.
|
| # ? Aug 1, 2012 16:26 |
|
|
ozmunkeh posted:The eventual quote (that was 2 months in the making), with tax, was a few dollars under $60K for 12x2TB SATA disks.
|
| # ? Aug 1, 2012 16:32 |
|
|
NippleFloss posted:
So what? We got 2 VNX 5300 SANs with 0% financing. You act like that is somehow unheard of. And you think Hyundai is the only car company that pulls something like that? Those numbers are overall. I specifically said in the SMB market. I spent a few minutes looking for anything broken down for the SMB market but was unable to find anything. But even your link said they were beating out EMC (the 800 lb gorilla) in the iSCSI market (which is heavily slanted toward SMB) by 10%. For a small business, the difference in administering an Equallogic SAN or an EMC/NetApp SAN is like night and day. The only time I ever had to go into command line on our Equallogic boxes was for one of the very first firmware upgrades and the single and only time I had to call in for support. In over 5 years I went into command line twice and called in for support once. On the EMC side, I never even started counting the support calls or times I had to use the command line because that would make me a crazy person. And from some of the stuff I have seen you discuss about NetApp configs in this thread I know NetApp isn't much different. Hell, the biggest reason we never went with NetApp was because the UI was so terrible. Well, that and the fact that it was twice the cost.
|
| # ? Aug 1, 2012 16:34 |
|
|
complex posted:This just sounds so ridiculous I can't believe it. Is this true? Internet Explorer posted:Wow. Really? I'll have to check the latest release notes. Do you know what version introduced this? I've stopped following Equallogic releases now that all my time is spent wrangling our VNX. Yeah, I was a bit off: Firmware 5.2.3: To protect access to available data, a member delete operation can now only be performed with customer support assistance. I remembered that as LUN delete. Member delete is much rarer, and can do things like remove data on still active members if you don't prep it right, so I see why this was changed.
|
| # ? Aug 1, 2012 16:51 |
|
|
Internet Explorer posted:So what? We got 2 VNX 5300 SANs with 0% financing. You act like that is somehow unheard of. And you think Hyundai is the only car company that pulls something like that? Those numbers are overall. I specifically said in the SMB market. I spent a few minutes looking for anything broken down for the SMB market but was unable to find anything. But even your link said they were beating out EMC (the 800 lb gorilla) in the iSCSI market (which is heavily slanted toward SMB) by 10%. So you're saying you don't actually have any numbers on the SMB market but you're just sure that they're crushing the competition, even though in overall metrics they're well behind? And you think it's a good thing that they only have a 30% market share in a market they are supposed to own and where EMC barely even tries? I've said a bunch of times that I think EQL is a very good product but it's not a demonstrably, unarguably better product that what a lot of other vendors offer. NetApp isn't particularly hard to work with. My first job working with NetApp was also as a VMWare, Email, Network and Unix admin and I had plenty of time to get all of that done. I can't speak to EMC as I haven't used any of the VNX stuff but if you're an SMB you can get away with about 10 minutes a day of NetApp admin work. It's all incredibly easy, as is most modern storage that isn't using bleeding edge features or working in a very large environment. NetApp certainly isn't perfect and a lot of their problems come down to QA but saying that it's time consuming or difficult isn't really a knock that I've heard against them. You'll also hear me bitching about things like bugs more often than your average customer because the environment I support is large and complex enough that we will end up hitting just about every one of them. Your average small office isn't going to run into most of that stuff. edit: This may have come off as more confrontational than intended. The upshot is that EQL is easy to work with and that is a strong point of theirs, but it's not the only important factor and they've still got a lot to do if they want to really compete with NetApp, EMC and IBM. NippleFloss fucked around with this message at Aug 1, 2012 around 17:36 |
| # ? Aug 1, 2012 17:06 |
|
|
I'm gonna bump my question about Nimble Storage from a couple of pages ago. They're being pretty aggressive and we're near the point where we'd consider changing directions on storage. They make a good pitch with some pretty nice looking performance numbers and I've read some good stuff on VMware's forums and such but I'd like to know if anyone here has had it running in production and how it's been working out.
|
| # ? Aug 1, 2012 17:25 |
|
|
NippleFloss posted:I mean, they just started offering 0% financing on EQL storage. That's the same poo poo that Hyundai does when they want to get rid of last year's Accent's. That's not something you do when you're crushing the competition.
|
| # ? Aug 2, 2012 00:10 |
|
|
Internet Explorer posted:For a small business, the difference in administering an Equallogic SAN or an EMC/NetApp SAN is like night and day. The only time I ever had to go into command line on our Equallogic boxes was for one of the very first firmware upgrades and the single and only time I had to call in for support. In over 5 years I went into command line twice and called in for support once. One of my old clients is a small/medium sized business running Exchange on a NetApp and I don't think they've ever touched the CLI once. They however do love Snap Manager for Exchange and Single Mailbox Restore for Exchange. NetApp has been fairly easy to manage for even non-storage people for at least since OnTap 7. If you can figure out how to run a windows server you can figure out how to manage a NetApp filer. The other plus with NetApp is I find that its harder for companies without dedicated storage people to back themselves into a corner with their configuration. Also FlexClone is awesome. Not being confrontational either I just thought I'd share my experiences. NetApp 3rd party tie-in tools are fantastic things to have and usually worth the extra cost.
|
| # ? Aug 2, 2012 00:38 |
|
|
adorai posted:Cisco gives us the option to finance all of our gear at zero percent. They aren't exactly Hyundai clearing out last years model.
|
| # ? Aug 2, 2012 01:55 |
|
|
My comment was stupid in the first place. I was tired and made it as I was going to bed. The comment from 1000101 about NetApp being easier after OnTap 7 is interesting. I really have never had the chance to play with NetApp gear, so I was only going off what I had seen. I guess my frustration stems from EMC / NetApp / IBM and the "right" way to manage a SAN. In my day to day, ease of use is just as important as all the other features, and unfortunately I think there is a lot of hand-waving coming from the "big boys" when it comes to that. It is really hard for me to recommend a SAN that is a pain in the rear end to implement / manage to a business that does not have a dedicated storage admin.
|
| # ? Aug 2, 2012 02:12 |
|
|
Internet Explorer posted:I guess my frustration stems from EMC / NetApp / IBM and the "right" way to manage a SAN. In my day to day, ease of use is just as important as all the other features, and unfortunately I think there is a lot of hand-waving coming from the "big boys" when it comes to that. It is really hard for me to recommend a SAN that is a pain in the rear end to implement / manage to a business that does not have a dedicated storage admin. Our NLSAS disk failure rates on V7000 are another story.
|
| # ? Aug 2, 2012 11:20 |
|
|
Internet Explorer posted:My comment was stupid in the first place. I was tired and made it as I was going to bed. The comment from 1000101 about NetApp being easier after OnTap 7 is interesting. I really have never had the chance to play with NetApp gear, so I was only going off what I had seen. I was being kind of a dick. No worries. When I was starting out I found NetApp gear to be very easy to use. If you're not trying to do anything too fancy with it then it's really tough to make it take up too much of your time. I've actually never had a single day of formal NetApp training. Everything I learned was just poking around and reading documentation. A lot of the appeal of NetApp to me was that it wasn't hopelessly obfuscated and there was a TON of information about how the devices actually worked out there. I think some of the confusion comes from the idea that because NetApp/EMC/IBM/HDS, whoever CAN be complicated that they must be complicated. If you're running a Tier 1 frame in a very large, complex environment then yes, it will probably take a lot more time, but it's going to be time you NEED to spend making sure everything works just so. And you'll have a dedicated admin. All of those vendors also make gear (in theory, anyway) that can be dropped into a small office and managed in a minimal amount of time by a busy admin. Because the requirements aren't as demanding the time spent is much less. There's really no right or wrong way to manage a SAN. There is a huge amount of variety in customer skills and requirements and some vendors serve specific markets better than others. But there's no "best", just "arguably better for this situation". Except EMC. They are objectively the worst. Misogynist posted:What issues have you had with IBM? I've never administered DS8000 or XIV, but the LSI/Engenio (DS) and V7000 equipment I've worked with was always (too) simple to administer. The only IBM gear I've ever worked on was an old FastT and I though it was dead simple to use. I learned FC on it with nothing more than a little googling to learn terminology. Granted it was a no-frills FC SAN, but the UI was still very straight-forward and it was very obvious what you were doing when you were doing it. That should be taken for granted but after using Storage Navigator on HDS I understand that it is very possible to make an incredibly convoluted and useless UI for a very simple thing.
|
| # ? Aug 2, 2012 17:44 |
|
|
Misogynist posted:What issues have you had with IBM? I've never administered DS8000 or XIV, but the LSI/Engenio (DS) and V7000 equipment I've worked with was always (too) simple to administer. Sorry I did not reply to this. I just won't do business with IBM, really has nothing to do with their SANs in particular. They are the very definition of bloated, bureaucratic bullshit. I know at least for a while they were mostly just rebranded NetApp, but I really don't know enough about it to say anything.
|
| # ? Aug 2, 2012 17:54 |
|
|
I do literally everything in our environment from time to time, so I am not a specialized storage guy, and I think our NetApps have been very easy to work with. They are well documented and their features and functionality just make sense.
|
| # ? Aug 2, 2012 21:56 |
|
|
Internet Explorer posted:They are the very definition of bloated, bureaucratic bullshit.
|
| # ? Aug 2, 2012 22:46 |
|
|
I am trying to rebuild a RAID array that is managed by Linux using 'fdisk' and 'mdadm' and I am having problems. I am a grad student who I guess is now the IT guy for our research group, so I have little to no experience with this kind of thing. I am very nervous and google isn't helping much. Is this a good place to ask questions? If not, where should I go?
|
| # ? Aug 3, 2012 16:24 |
|
|
Rusty Kettle posted:I am trying to rebuild a RAID array that is managed by Linux using 'fdisk' and 'mdadm' and I am having problems. I am a grad student who I guess is now the IT guy for our research group, so I have little to no experience with this kind of thing. I am very nervous and google isn't helping much. Probably the Linux Questions thread would be a better choice; is it degraded but accessible or completely offline? Also, do whatever you can to not be your research group's IT guy.
|
| # ? Aug 3, 2012 16:29 |
|
|
PCjr sidecar posted:Probably the Linux Questions thread would be a better choice; is it degraded but accessible or completely offline? It's accessible. On boot, I get a message that the array is hosed and I can attempt to fix it manually. I used fdisk to find the failed disk, replaced it, and created a partition that is identical to the partition of a disk of identical size on the array. I assume this new disk is supposed to mirror this other disk as they are the only disks of this size. I think I want to do something like code:
|
| # ? Aug 3, 2012 16:39 |
|
|
The Linux Questions thread would be a better choice, so either here or there, please post the output of 'cat /proc/mdstat', and we'll go from there. Don't make assumptions about what it's supposed to do. If you're really sure it's supposed to be there, you need to fail the old /dev/sdd1 first with "mdadm --manage /dev/md3 --fail /dev/sdd1 && mdadm --manage /dev/md3 --remove /dev/sdd1" then "mdadm --manage /dev/md3 --add /dev/sdd1".
|
| # ? Aug 3, 2012 17:06 |
|
|
evol262 posted:The Linux Questions thread would be a better choice, so either here or there, please post the output of 'cat /proc/mdstat', and we'll go from there. Don't make assumptions about what it's supposed to do. I moved to the Linux Questions thread. I posted mdstat there so feel free to answer the next couple of questions there. Should I have failed the old drive first? Would it be possible to replace the new drive with the older one and then follow your instructions?
|
| # ? Aug 3, 2012 17:46 |
|
|
FISHMANPET posted:Can anyone link to some specific criticisms of Drobo, or tell me what I should be looking for? Normally "I read it on the Internet" would be good enough but in this case, because of ~~PoLiTiCs~~ I really have to beat them over the head with why this would be bad. Slow as gently caress. Prone to causing disk failure. There's your specific criticism of Drobo. (gently caress drobo I've got two of them)
|
| # ? Aug 3, 2012 19:27 |
|
|
I don't know where my boss keeps finding these supermicro/nexenta vendors but it's like playing Bingo asking them about their short commings and they are like, "How do you know all of this???"
|
| # ? Aug 9, 2012 12:35 |
|
|
ghostinmyshell posted:I don't know where my boss keeps finding these supermicro/nexenta vendors but it's like playing Bingo asking them about their short commings and they are like, "How do you know all of this???" I'd be interested in hearing about some of these, if you wouldn't mind. Unrelated tip of the day: always have well-defined required performance numbers in your RFP and make sure they pass before you pay the vendor.
|
| # ? Aug 9, 2012 15:18 |
|
|
PCjr sidecar posted:I'd be interested in hearing about some of these, if you wouldn't mind.
|
| # ? Aug 9, 2012 17:42 |
|
|
We are looking to buy 3 Isilon 72NL nodes to start our cluster. The intent for this storage is for large digital objects for a Library. I am most excited about the prospect of the OneFS and the ability to just grow the file system as I add nodes. Anyone have recent experience with Isilon? Preferably since EMC has bought them? The support in our quote seems extraordinarily expensive, and it is their lowest level apparently (Gold?) My only experience has been with a set of Dell 3200i 1200i and they had 5 years of next business day support, which has been great. Isilon wants to offer 3 or 5 years of next business day support, but looks to cost an extra 20k to 30k per node. Any experience with their support? Is it worth the premium? Thanks for your help.
|
| # ? Aug 11, 2012 08:02 |
|
|
Timdogg posted:We are looking to buy 3 Isilon 72NL nodes to start our cluster. The intent for this storage is for large digital objects for a Library. I am most excited about the prospect of the OneFS and the ability to just grow the file system as I add nodes. We had really bad experiences with Isilon's support wherein they botched a firmware upgrade on the 36NLs and the nodes kept kernel panicking and rebooting randomly for about a month. Support proceeded to first not give a poo poo for weeks and then start blaming our NFS clients (RHEL) for the crashes. It took us months to get the situation sorted out. In order to get the issue addressed, it literally required our CIO and IT Director to get Isilon's sales people into a room for a sales discussion where they then started screaming about the support. A few minutes later there was a conf call open with a VP and suddenly we had their attention. Since then, though, everything's been pretty good. The system has been far less problematic than our BlueArc, which pretty much requires daily babysitting for something or other, and if it was a one-off problem and we never again see an issue of that magnitude, I wouldn't be completely averse to buying Isilon again. I'm largely blaming EMC's handling of the takeover for the sequence of events that transpired (they dumped way too much money into sales and marketing way too fast and overtaxed all their competent support people for a long time). But again, everything else is working pretty well for us now. If you do ever run into an issue where support is being utterly unhelpful, drop me a line. We've got all the right contacts in field support now to actually get things done.
|
| # ? Aug 11, 2012 15:19 |
|
|
Misogynist posted:It really depends. With storage vendors that support an easy upgrade path, in general you probably won't want to pay for support past the 3-year mark. For most vendors, years 3-5 represent a pretty significant uptick in support costs, and after year 5 they're astronomical. We replaced our 36NL cluster with 108NLs early this year because EMC/Isilon offered a trade-in that was more compelling than renewing our support and buying equivalent differential capacity in new 108NL kit. Rather than buying the support up-front, you might want to ask what kind of trade-in programs they'll have available at the 3-year mark, because available drive capacities will probably be much, much larger at the end of your warranty agreement. Again, it depends on exactly what kind of offers you're getting through your reseller. Thank you so much! This is really helpful. I work for a state university and we have some weird policies about utilizing trade-in programs, so I usually don't even think about them, but your points are extremely valid and I will check with our sales folks as well as our campus contacts to see if equipment trade in is even possible. Agreed that it would make much more sense to get the new equipment in 3 years than extending the support. Glad to hear they haven't been hell to manage, I like the Dell MDs, but having only iSCSI and their limited scale out is what has me looking to change. Thanks again.
|
| # ? Aug 11, 2012 22:33 |
|
|
|
| # ? May 25, 2013 05:23 |
|
|
$30k per node for support.. gently caress!!
Bitch Stewie fucked around with this message at Aug 12, 2012 around 08:38 |
| # ? Aug 12, 2012 08:34 |
|
