Stan,
Are you doing the NDMP with DSA across the LAN or with tape drives
mounted on the mirapoint servers?
I assume you are doing it accross the lan. In that case, one of the
biggest CPU loads on the storage server is the processing of the
interrupts for data packets. This can be greatly reduced by setting up a
separate VLAN with dedicated LAN interfaces in the storage node and the
NDMP servers with all the NICs configured for Jumbo frames. Also it
helps to increase the tcp buffers, and high water buffers to increase
the size of the TCP window. Also make sure that tcp window scaling is
set to always on rather than application dependant (Legato doesn't set
the option on their tcp sockets)
For example, in solaris:
ndd -set /dev/tcp tcp_max_buf 4194304
ndd -set /dev/tcp tcp_cwnd_max 2097152
ndd -set /dev/tcp tcp_xmit_hiwat 1048576
ndd -set /dev/tcp tcp_recv_hiwat 1048576
ndd -set /dev/tcp tcp_tstamp_always 1
ndd -set /dev/tcp tcp_wscale_always 1
----
Matthew Huff | One Manhattanville Rd
Dir of Operations | Purchase, NY 10577
OTA LLC | Phone: 914-460-4039
www.otaotr.com | Fax: 914-460-4139
-----Original Message-----
From: EMC NetWorker discussion [mailto:NETWORKER AT LISTSERV.TEMPLE DOT EDU] On
Behalf Of Stan Horwitz
Sent: Friday, April 27, 2007 11:36 AM
To: NETWORKER AT LISTSERV.TEMPLE DOT EDU
Subject: [Networker] Inquiry about upgrading NetWorker server
We are poised to make some major improvements to our NetWorker
environment this spring. In addition to the changes for which I have
already received funding, I recently found out that I might also be
able to get funding to replace our aging NetWorker server.
Our NetWorker environment consists of one NetWorker 7.2.1 Power
Edition server running on a Sun Fire V480R with 8GB of RAM and two
dual core 1GHz processors with Solaris 9. We use this server across
our enterprise to back up several TB of data nightly (mostly email
and web content). We are backing up around 300 clients nightly and we
plans to add more servers onto the nightly backup schedule. This
V480R has one 1GB network line into it for most of our servers that
sits on our DMZ, but it also has a separate 1GB line going to it
that's on the same side as our firewall.
Our V480R is connected via fibre to a Sony PetaSite which has 14 S-
AIT tape drives.. Alll tape drives are attached via a Qlogic 5200 SAN
switch. One of my primary goals is to push data at our tape drives
much faster because we are significantly underutilizing our Sony tape
drives' throughput.
We also have a Sun Enterprise 450 with Solaris 9 doing duty as a
storage node. The E450 is connected to a Qualstar tape library, which
is in another building separate from our NetWorker server and our
Sony PetaSite. This storage node and tape library sit on the secure
side of our firewall and are used exclusively to back up confidential
medial and business data. The metadata for these confidential backups
gets sent to our V480R via its network drop within the firewall's
secure zone. Both the E450 and the Qualstar tape library are due to
be replaced in the next month or two. We will replace this storage
node with a Dell rack mount server running Red Hat Linux. The Dell
server has already been delivered; the tape library is still out to bid.
In another month or two, we'll also add a new Sun X4500 running Red
Hat Linux as a storage node, sharing our Sony PetaSite. The X4500 is
here already. We plan to use machine partially for file-level disk-to-
disk-to-tape backups and to take some of the load off our V480R. We
are also hoping to use our X4500 for disk-to-disk-to-tape NDMP
backups to four of the PetaSite's tape drives that are reserved only
for NDMP.
What I am finding is that our server is heavily overloaded a good
deal of the time and I believe its posing a significant bottleneck
for our NDMP backups. We use NDMP to back up Mirapoint email servers.
Although I am sure the X4500 will take some of the processor load and
free up some network bandwidth, off our NetWorker server, I am
unclear on how much relief we will get.
With that in mind, I want to replace it with a more powerful server,
although I am unclear on the availability of funds for this project.
Management offered to provide funds to replace our V480R last year,
but I declined. Now I am ready to move forward with that move. My
preferred option is to get a Sun Fire V490 to replace the V480R;
however, I am hesitant to request a V490 because of its high price
tag. For this reason, I am looking at a less expensive T2000 with
16GB of RAM and a 1.2GHz SPARC II processor. I figure that we could
replace our NetWorker server (V480R) with a T2000 and then demote the
V480R to a storage node. I have plenty of ports on my SAN switch to
do this.
What I am wondering is if this is a good idea or not or if anyone on
this list can suggest a better option to upgrade our V480R with a
more potent server.
After I finish all these server changes, I intend to upgrade to the
latest NetWorker version, but I figure I might as well concentrate my
effort on the hardware upgrades/additions first while waiting for EMC
to come out with NetWorker 7.3.3 or 4.
If anyone has any comments, please let me know.
To sign off this list, send email to listserv AT listserv.temple DOT edu and
type "signoff networker" in the body of the email. Please write to
networker-request AT listserv.temple DOT edu if you have any problems with this
list. You can access the archives at
http://listserv.temple.edu/archives/networker.html or
via RSS at http://listserv.temple.edu/cgi-bin/wa?RSS&L=NETWORKER
To sign off this list, send email to listserv AT listserv.temple DOT edu and
type "signoff networker" in the body of the email. Please write to
networker-request AT listserv.temple DOT edu if you have any problems with this
list. You can access the archives at
http://listserv.temple.edu/archives/networker.html or
via RSS at http://listserv.temple.edu/cgi-bin/wa?RSS&L=NETWORKER
|