On Tue, Nov 4, 2008 at 12:54 AM, Richard Chycoski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>wrote:
> If you have one NetApp, and can make it the 'centre of the data > universe', you can use snapshots to help your syncing without having > another NetApp or incurring a license fee, but you don't get 'live' > copies at all times (which can cause a significant overhead on a pair of > NetApps anyway). > Have you been able to measure that overheard in a useful way? i used Snapmirror years ago on low-end filers and that essentially killed the source filer's performance. At the time, i replaced the setup with much better filers, and a homegrown rsync scheduler for replication. That worked well for a while. Eventually, it was too slow and the requirements increased to having (much) less lag for the data on the replicated filer. Upgraded the filers again (although, going from a 920 cluster to a 3040 cluster _felt_ like a downgrade) and went back to SnapMirror. On the replication front, i'm much happier, but we see slowness on the filers that i haven't been able to track down yet.
_______________________________________________ Tech mailing list [email protected] http://lopsa.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tech This list provided by the League of Professional System Administrators http://lopsa.org/
