Unix Technical Forum

SEO

vBulletin Search Engine Optimization


Go Back   Unix Technical Forum > Database Server Software > Informix

Register FAQ Members List Calendar Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read
  #1 (permalink)  
Old 04-19-2008, 08:37 PM
Rajasekaran, Rajesh
 
Posts: n/a
Default ONBAR-VERITAS DB restore performance issue...


This message is in MIME format. Since your mail reader does not understand
this format, some or all of this message may not be legible.

------_=_NextPart_001_01C40068.E7163E90
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset="iso-8859-1"


Hi,

I apologize for the MIME earlier. I hope this email is ok now.



-----Original Message-----
From: Rajasekaran, Rajesh
Sent: Monday, March 01, 2004 2:35 PM
To: 'informix-list@iiug.org'
Cc: 'Andrew J. Dibbins'
Subject: RE: ONBAR-VERITAS DB restore performance issue... [293]


Hi,
I would like to post some updates on this performance issue topic to get
some more suggestions. From the bptm logs. it shows that the delay is on the
client side. But, we are yet to isolate the issue btw the DB server, Solaris
9 and the storage array Sun storedge A5200 on this host client. We put all
the latest patches for Solaris 9, Volume manager 3.5 mp2, Veritas Netbackup
4.5 MP5. In fact, we actually applied all the firmware revision for the
storedge array.

We defined our DB volumes layout on RAID-5 with 8 columns and 32 k stripe
size. I see the I/O is utilized to 35 % only at the max. We did perform the
alternate client restore with RAID 5 h/w on the Sun storedge T3 Array. But
this one is with the VERITAS volume manager 3.5 MP2 - RAID5 software level.
Iam not sure whether that is causing the performance issue. From the
Informix side, there is nothing much to tune for ONBAR except the
BAR_NB_XPORT_COUNT since iam doing the serial whole system restore. I even
bumped up that parameter to 10000 from 100. I found that there is a KAIO
bug fixed in Solaris 9 but thats for Oracle. So, we even tried disabling the
KAIO and ran the restore with AIO threads and still didnt improve the
performance at all.
We still didnt get the 10000 KB/SEC and we get only 500 KB/SEC.
Please post your comments/suggestions on this topic. I would like to clarify
one more thing here.
My question:
During the whole system restore, since i had the performance issues, Every
time i troubleshoot and fix something, i got to re-start the restore using
"onbar -RESTART" since i enabled the Restartable restore in the Onconfig
file. Since the troubleshooting has gone for few days and there are times
before i start the restartable restore, i changed the ixbar file to include
the latest incremental backups to restore.
Now today, it just completed the whole system restore and for some reasons,
it didnt restore the incremental backup at all. Hence I'm performing the log
restores for all logs since the last level-0 restore that is just completed.
In the past, i changed the ixbar files during the restartable restore to
include the latest logs from PRD. That used to restore upto the last logs
that i just included in the ixbar file. Iam not sure why it didnt restore
the level-1 the same way in this instance.
1) Can't the ixbar file be changed during the restartable restore to
purposely include the latest level-1's ?
Thanks
RAJ

-----Original Message-----
From: Andrew J. Dibbins [mailto:andy_d@rapier.demon.co.uk]
Sent: Friday, February 27, 2004 4:08 PM
To: Rajasekaran, Rajesh
Subject: RE: ONBAR-VERITAS DB restore performance issue... [293]


Hi Rajesh,

Just to confirm:

SIZE_DATA_BUFFERS = 16
NUMBER_DATA_BUFFERS = 1048576

Surely, you mean the other way round

SIZE_DATA_BUFFERS = 1048576
NUMBER = 16

Anyway, the size figure is way too high, it should be 65536 for dlt 7k, and
should never be bigger.

I don't think its a fix for the problems your experiencing, but it will
surely improve overal backup performance.

Andy
-----Original Message-----
From: Rajasekaran, Rajesh [mailto:RRajasekaran@forestpharm.com]
Sent: Friday, February 27, 2004 1:40 PM
To: 'Andrew J. Dibbins'; Rajasekaran, Rajesh
Subject: RE: ONBAR-VERITAS DB restore performance issue... [293]




Andy,
We have the SUN L40 DLT 7000 tape drives. There are 2 such drives in the
robotic library. Our SIZE_DATA_BUFFERS,NUMBER_DATA_BUFFERS are set to
16,1048576 respectively.
Thanks
RAJ
-----Original Message-----
From: Andrew J. Dibbins [mailto:andy_d@rapier.demon.co.uk]
Sent: Thursday, February 26, 2004 3:12 PM
To: Rajasekaran....
Subject: RE: ONBAR-VERITAS DB restore performance issue... [293]


Hi Rajash,
This probably won't matter, because of your bptm logging, but check
/usr/openv/netbackup/db/config/SIZE_DATA_BUFFERS and NUMBER_DATA_BUFFERS
Your don't mention the tape drives in use, but consider SIZE_DATA_BUFFERS
set to:
64k for dlt
256k for lto's and stk9940B
and our best results for the number of buffers is around 16, but although
I've never used this there is a extra parameter RESTORE_DATA_BUFFERS (check
manual).


Also, make sure shared memory paramters are in /etc/system on the NBU
master, as its this
that gets the used when the above gets allocated.
Clearly the raid 5 isn't clever, you could consider changing the strip size
to 64K, some benefit, perhaps.
Keep us posted.
Andy
Home: andrew.dibbins@rapier.demon.co.uk
Work: andrew.dibbins@sun.com
-----Original Message-----
From: forum.subscriber@iiug.org [mailto:forum.subscriber@iiug.org]On
Behalf Of Rajasekaran....
Sent: Thursday, February 26, 2004 2:00 PM
To: sapmix@iiug.org
Subject: ONBAR-VERITAS DB restore performance issue... [293]


Hi,
We have a performance issue with ONBAR restore for our IDS 7.31UD2XG. We
use the Veritas Netbackup 4.5GA under Solaris 8. The backup (whole system
serial) that we are trying to restore is the whole system restore. The
restore throughput used to be 10 mb/sec and now its around 3 mb/sec. The
restore is going over the network.
The resore client has 100 MBPS network and the master server is 1000
Mbps/sec (gigabit network). I dont see much usage on the CPU,memory on both
the box. Our network ppl say that the load between the two host is normal.
We somehow identified that the slow down could be very specific to the
restore client and it may be due to disk writes. But, we also have the view

that the storage array is only 25% used during the restore. The storage
array is Sun storedge A5200 array on Sun Fire V880 host. The DB volume
layouts are RAID5 with 8 cols and 32k stripe size. I know RAID5 is going to
slow down writes due to parity writing but i dont think it should degrade to

the extent of more than 75%.
Our VERITAS bptm logs from the master server shows that the delay is after
it sends the data to the client. For an object, 6.5 hrs out of 10 hrs was
the delay for one object. This used to complete in 4.5 hrs. But on this
instance, the disk is not heavily loaded and hence more data can be pumped
up.
Considering the storage array is not utilized much, Should the
BAR_NB_XPORT_COUNT and the BAR_NB_XFER_SIZE be increased ? I just left the
values to 100 & 31 respectively. I am assuming that increasing this
parameter will only have effect on parallel backups/restores. Also,
BAR_NB_XFER_SIZE is set to 31 by default on 2k pagesize system. But it says

xbsa has 64kb limit. At the same time, it can have values upto 1
million.Will it help if i increase beyond 32 k ?
Will tuning both these parameters for a serial whole system restore help ?
Please pass on your suggestions/comments.
Regards
Rajesh Rajasekaran
Informix Database Administrator
Forest Pharmaceuticals Inc.
(314) 493-7073





__________________________________________________ __________________
This e-mail and its attachments may contain Forest Laboratories, Inc.
proprietary information that is privileged, confidential or subject to
copyright belonging to Forest Laboratories, Inc. This e-mail is intended
solely for the use of the individual or entity to which it is addressed. If
you are not the intended recipient of this e-mail, or the employee or agent
responsible for delivering this e-mail to the intended recipient, you are
hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution, copying or action
taken in relation to the contents of and attachments to this e-mail is
strictly prohibited and may be unlawful. If you have received this e-mail in

error, please notify the sender immediately and permanently delete the
original and any copy of this e-mail and any printout.




__________________________________________________ __________________
This e-mail and its attachments may contain Forest Laboratories, Inc.
proprietary information that is privileged, confidential or subject to
copyright belonging to Forest Laboratories, Inc. This e-mail is intended
solely for the use of the individual or entity to which it is addressed. If
you are not the intended recipient of this e-mail, or the employee or agent
responsible for delivering this e-mail to the intended recipient, you are
hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution, copying or action
taken in relation to the contents of and attachments to this e-mail is
strictly prohibited and may be unlawful. If you have received this e-mail in
error, please notify the sender immediately and permanently delete the
original and any copy of this e-mail and any printout.



__________________________________________________ __________________
This e-mail and its attachments may contain Forest Laboratories, Inc.
proprietary information that is privileged, confidential or subject to
copyright belonging to Forest Laboratories, Inc. This e-mail is intended
solely for the use of the individual or entity to which it is addressed. If
you are not the intended recipient of this e-mail, or the employee or agent
responsible for delivering this e-mail to the intended recipient, you are
hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution, copying or action
taken in relation to the contents of and attachments to this e-mail is
strictly prohibited and may be unlawful. If you have received this e-mail in
error, please notify the sender immediately and permanently delete the
original and any copy of this e-mail and any printout.

------_=_NextPart_001_01C40068.E7163E90
Content-Type: text/html;
charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 3.2//EN">
<HTML>
<HEAD>
<META HTTP-EQUIV=3D"Content-Type" CONTENT=3D"text/html; =
charset=3Diso-8859-1">
<META NAME=3D"Generator" CONTENT=3D"MS Exchange Server version =
5.5.2653.12">
<TITLE>ONBAR-VERITAS DB restore performance issue...</TITLE>
</HEAD>
<BODY>
<BR>

<P><FONT SIZE=3D2>Hi, </FONT>
</P>

<P><FONT SIZE=3D2>I apologize for the MIME earlier.&nbsp; I hope this =
email is ok now.</FONT>
</P>

<P><FONT SIZE=3D2>&nbsp; </FONT>
</P>

<P><FONT SIZE=3D2>-----Original Message-----</FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>From: Rajasekaran, Rajesh </FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>Sent: Monday, March 01, 2004 2:35 PM</FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>To: 'informix-list@iiug.org'</FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>Cc: 'Andrew J. Dibbins'</FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>Subject: RE: ONBAR-VERITAS DB restore performance =
issue... [293] </FONT>
</P>
<BR>

<P><FONT SIZE=3D2>Hi,</FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>I would like to post some updates on this =
performance issue topic to get some more suggestions. From the bptm =
logs. it shows that the delay is on the client side. But, we are yet to =
isolate the issue btw the DB server, Solaris 9 and the storage array =
Sun storedge A5200 on this host client. We put all the latest patches =
for Solaris 9, Volume manager 3.5 mp2, Veritas Netbackup 4.5 MP5.&nbsp; =
In fact, we actually applied all the firmware revision for the storedge =
array. </FONT></P>

<P><FONT SIZE=3D2>&nbsp;&nbsp; We defined our DB volumes layout on =
RAID-5 with 8 columns and 32 k stripe size. I see the I/O is utilized =
to 35 % only at the max. We did perform the alternate client restore =
with RAID 5 h/w on the Sun storedge T3 Array. But this one is with the =
VERITAS volume manager 3.5 MP2 - RAID5 software level. Iam not sure =
whether that is causing the performance issue. From the Informix side, =
there is nothing much to tune for ONBAR except the BAR_NB_XPORT_COUNT =
since iam doing the serial whole system restore. I even bumped up that =
parameter to 10000 from 100.&nbsp; I found that there is a KAIO bug =
fixed in Solaris 9 but thats for Oracle. So, we even tried disabling =
the KAIO and ran the restore with AIO threads and still didnt improve =
the performance at all.&nbsp; </FONT></P>

<P><FONT SIZE=3D2>We still didnt get the 10000 KB/SEC and we get only =
500 KB/SEC.</FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>Please post your comments/suggestions on this topic. =
I would like to clarify one more thing here.</FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>My question:</FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>During the whole system restore, since i had the =
performance issues, Every time i troubleshoot and fix something, i got =
to re-start the restore using &quot;onbar -RESTART&quot; since i =
enabled the Restartable restore in the Onconfig file. Since the =
troubleshooting has gone for few days and there are times before i =
start the restartable restore, i changed the ixbar file to include the =
latest incremental backups to restore.</FONT></P>

<P><FONT SIZE=3D2>Now today, it just completed the whole system restore =
and for some reasons, it didnt restore the incremental backup at all. =
Hence I'm performing the log restores for all logs since the last =
level-0 restore that is just completed. In the past, i changed the =
ixbar files during the restartable restore to include the latest logs =
from PRD. That used to restore upto the last logs that i just included =
in the ixbar file. Iam not sure why it didnt restore the level-1 the =
same way in this instance.</FONT></P>

<P><FONT SIZE=3D2>1) Can't the ixbar file be changed during the =
restartable restore to purposely include the latest level-1's ?</FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>Thanks</FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>RAJ</FONT>
</P>

<P><FONT SIZE=3D2>-----Original Message-----</FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>From: Andrew J. Dibbins [<A =
HREF=3D"mailto:andy_d@rapier.demon.co.uk">mailto:a ndy_d@rapier.demon.co.=
uk</A>]</FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>Sent: Friday, February 27, 2004 4:08 PM</FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>To: Rajasekaran, Rajesh</FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>Subject: RE: ONBAR-VERITAS DB restore performance =
issue... [293] </FONT>
</P>
<BR>

<P><FONT SIZE=3D2>Hi Rajesh,</FONT>
</P>

<P><FONT SIZE=3D2>Just to confirm:</FONT>
</P>

<P><FONT SIZE=3D2>SIZE_DATA_BUFFERS =3D 16</FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>NUMBER_DATA_BUFFERS =3D 1048576</FONT>
</P>

<P><FONT SIZE=3D2>Surely, you mean the other way round</FONT>
</P>

<P><FONT SIZE=3D2>SIZE_DATA_BUFFERS =3D 1048576</FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>NUMBER =3D 16</FONT>
</P>

<P><FONT SIZE=3D2>Anyway, the size figure is way too high, it should be =
65536 for dlt 7k, and should never be bigger.</FONT>
</P>

<P><FONT SIZE=3D2>I don't think its a fix for the problems your =
experiencing, but it will surely improve overal backup =
performance.</FONT>
</P>

<P><FONT SIZE=3D2>Andy</FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>-----Original Message-----</FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>From: Rajasekaran, Rajesh [<A =
HREF=3D"mailto:RRajasekaran@forestpharm.com">mailt o:RRajasekaran@forestp=
harm.com</A>]</FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>Sent: Friday, February 27, 2004 1:40 PM</FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>To: 'Andrew J. Dibbins'; Rajasekaran, Rajesh</FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>Subject: RE: ONBAR-VERITAS DB restore performance =
issue... [293] </FONT>
</P>
<BR>
<BR>
<BR>

<P><FONT SIZE=3D2>Andy, </FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>&nbsp;&nbsp; We have the SUN L40 DLT 7000 tape =
drives. There are 2 such drives in the robotic library.&nbsp; Our =
SIZE_DATA_BUFFERS,NUMBER_DATA_BUFFERS are set to 16,1048576 =
respectively.</FONT></P>

<P><FONT SIZE=3D2>Thanks </FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>RAJ </FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>-----Original Message----- </FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>From: Andrew J. Dibbins [<A =
HREF=3D"mailto:andy_d@rapier.demon.co.uk">mailto:a ndy_d@rapier.demon.co.=
uk</A>] </FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>Sent: Thursday, February 26, 2004 3:12 PM </FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>To: Rajasekaran.... </FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>Subject: RE: ONBAR-VERITAS DB restore performance =
issue... [293] </FONT>
</P>
<BR>

<P><FONT SIZE=3D2>Hi Rajash, </FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>This probably won't matter, because of your bptm =
logging, but check </FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>/usr/openv/netbackup/db/config/SIZE_DATA_BUFFERS and =
NUMBER_DATA_BUFFERS </FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>Your don't mention the tape drives in use, but =
consider SIZE_DATA_BUFFERS </FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>set to: </FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>64k for dlt </FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>256k for lto's and stk9940B </FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>and our best results for the number of buffers is =
around 16, but although </FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>I've never used this there is a extra parameter =
RESTORE_DATA_BUFFERS (check </FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>manual). </FONT>
</P>
<BR>

<P><FONT SIZE=3D2>Also, make sure shared memory paramters are in =
/etc/system on the NBU </FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>master, as its this </FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>that gets the used when the above gets allocated. =
</FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>Clearly the raid 5 isn't clever, you could consider =
changing the strip size </FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>to 64K, some benefit, perhaps. </FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>Keep us posted. </FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>Andy </FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>Home: andrew.dibbins@rapier.demon.co.uk </FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>Work: andrew.dibbins@sun.com </FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>-----Original Message----- </FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>From: forum.subscriber@iiug.org [<A =
HREF=3D"mailto:forum.subscriber@iiug.org">mailto:f orum.subscriber@iiug.o=
rg</A>]On </FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>Behalf Of Rajasekaran.... </FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>Sent: Thursday, February 26, 2004 2:00 PM </FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>To: sapmix@iiug.org </FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>Subject: ONBAR-VERITAS DB restore performance =
issue... [293] </FONT>
</P>
<BR>

<P><FONT SIZE=3D2>Hi, </FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>&nbsp;&nbsp; We have a performance issue with ONBAR =
restore for our IDS 7.31UD2XG. We </FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>use the Veritas Netbackup 4.5GA under Solaris 8. The =
backup (whole system </FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>serial) that we are trying to restore is the whole =
system restore. The </FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>restore throughput used to be 10 mb/sec and now its =
around 3 mb/sec. The </FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>restore is going over the network. </FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>The resore client has 100 MBPS network and the =
master server is 1000 </FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>Mbps/sec (gigabit network). I dont see much usage on =
the CPU,memory on both </FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>the box. Our network ppl say that the load between =
the two host is normal. </FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>&nbsp;&nbsp; We somehow identified that the slow =
down could be very specific to the </FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>restore client&nbsp; and it may be due to disk =
writes. But, we also have the view </FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>that the storage array is only 25% used during the =
restore. The storage </FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>array is Sun storedge A5200 array on Sun Fire V880 =
host. The DB volume </FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>layouts are RAID5 with 8 cols and 32k stripe size. I =
know RAID5 is going to </FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>slow down writes due to parity writing but i dont =
think it should degrade to </FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>the extent of more than 75%. </FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>Our VERITAS bptm logs from the master server shows =
that the delay is after </FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>it sends the data to the client. For an object, 6.5 =
hrs out of 10 hrs was </FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>the delay for one object. This used to complete in =
4.5 hrs. But on this </FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>instance, the disk is not heavily loaded and hence =
more data can be pumped </FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>up. </FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>Considering the storage array is not utilized much, =
Should the </FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>BAR_NB_XPORT_COUNT and the BAR_NB_XFER_SIZE be =
increased ? I just left the </FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>values to 100 &amp; 31 respectively. I am assuming =
that increasing this </FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>parameter will only have effect on parallel =
backups/restores.&nbsp; Also, </FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>BAR_NB_XFER_SIZE&nbsp; is set to 31 by default on 2k =
pagesize system. But it says </FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>xbsa has 64kb limit. At the same time, it can have =
values upto 1 </FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>million.Will it help if i increase beyond 32 k ? =
</FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>Will tuning both these parameters for a serial whole =
system restore help ? </FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>Please pass on your suggestions/comments. </FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>Regards </FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>Rajesh Rajasekaran </FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>Informix Database Administrator </FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>Forest Pharmaceuticals Inc. </FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>(314) 493-7073 </FONT>
</P>
<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
<BR>

<P><FONT =
SIZE=3D2>_________________________________________ ______________________=
_____ </FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>This e-mail and its attachments may contain Forest =
Laboratories, Inc. </FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>proprietary information that is privileged, =
confidential or subject to </FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>copyright belonging to Forest Laboratories, Inc. =
This e-mail is intended </FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>solely for the use of the individual or entity to =
which it is addressed. If </FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>you are not the intended recipient of this e-mail, =
or the employee or agent </FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>responsible for delivering this e-mail to the =
intended recipient, you are </FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>hereby notified that any dissemination, =
distribution, copying or action </FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>taken in relation to the contents of and attachments =
to this e-mail is </FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>strictly prohibited and may be unlawful. If you have =
received this e-mail in </FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>error, please notify the sender immediately and =
permanently delete the </FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>original and any copy of this e-mail and any =
printout. </FONT>
</P>
<BR>
<BR>
<BR>

<P><FONT =
SIZE=3D2>_________________________________________ ______________________=
_____&nbsp; </FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>This e-mail and its attachments may contain Forest =
Laboratories, Inc. proprietary information that is privileged, =
confidential or subject to copyright belonging to Forest Laboratories, =
Inc. This e-mail is intended solely for the use of the individual or =
entity to which it is addressed. If you are not the intended recipient =
of this e-mail, or the employee or agent responsible for delivering =
this e-mail to the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any =
dissemination, distribution, copying or action taken in relation to the =
contents of and attachments to this e-mail is strictly prohibited and =
may be unlawful. If you have received this e-mail in error, please =
notify the sender immediately and permanently delete the original and =
any copy of this e-mail and any printout.</FONT></P>
<BR>
<BR>

<P>_______________________________________________ _____________________&=
nbsp;=20
<BR>This e-mail and its attachments may contain Forest Laboratories, =
Inc. proprietary information that is privileged, confidential or =
subject to copyright belonging to Forest Laboratories, Inc. This e-mail =
is intended solely for the use of the individual or entity to which it =
is addressed. If you are not the intended recipient of this e-mail, or =
the employee or agent responsible for delivering this e-mail to the =
intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any dissemination, =
distribution, copying or action taken in relation to the contents of =
and attachments to this e-mail is strictly prohibited and may be =
unlawful. If you have received this e-mail in error, please notify the =
sender immediately and permanently delete the original and any copy of =
this e-mail and any printout.</P>

</BODY>
</HTML>
------_=_NextPart_001_01C40068.E7163E90--
sending to informix-list
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!
Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On
Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 07:50 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.5
Copyright ©2000 - 2008, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
SEO by vBSEO 3.2.0
UnixAdminTalk.com

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 100 101 102 103 104 105 106 107 108 109 110 111 112 113 114 115 116 117 118 119 120 121 122 123 124 125 126 127 128 129 130 131 132 133 134 135 136 137 138 139 140 141 142 143 144 145 146 147 148 149 150 151 152 153 154 155 156 157 158 159 160 161 162 163 164 165 166 167 168 169 170 171 172 173 174 175 176 177 178 179 180 181 182 183 184 185 186 187 188 189 190 191 192 193 194 195 196 197 198 199 200 201 202 203 204 205 206 207 208 209 210 211 212 213 214 215 216 217 218 219 220 221 222 223 224 225 226 227 228 229 230 231 232 233 234 235 236 237 238 239 240 241 242 243 244 245 246 247 248 249 250 251 252 253 254 255 256 257 258 259 260 261 262 263 264 265 266 267 268 269 270 271 272 273 274 275 276 277 278 279 280 281 282 283 284 285 286 287 288 289 290 291 292 293 294 295 296 297 298 299 300 301 302 303 304 305 306 307 308 309 310 311 312 313 314 315 316 317 318 319 320 321 322 323 324 325 326 327 328 329 330 331 332 333 334 335 336 337 338 339 340 341 342 343 344 345 346 347 348 349 350 351 352 353 354 355 356 357 358 359 360 361 362 363 364 365 366 367 368 369 370 371 372 373 374 375 376 377 378 379 380 381 382 383 384 385 386 387 388 389 390 391 392 393 394 395 396 397 398 399 400 401 402 403 404 405 406 407 408 409 410 411 412 413 414 415 416 417 418 419 420 421 422 423 424 425 426 427 428 429 430 431 432 433 434 435 436 437 438 439 440 441 442 443 444 445 446 447 448 449 450 451 452 453 454 455 456 457 458 459 460 461 462 463 464 465 466 467 468 469 470 471 472 473 474 475 476 477 478 479 480 481 482 483 484 485 486 487 488 489 490 491 492 493 494 495 496 497 498 499 500 501 502 503 504 505 506 507 508 509 510 511 512 513 514 515 516 517 518 519 520 521 522 523 524 525 526 527 528 529 530 531 532 533 534 535 536 537 538 539 540 541 542 543 544 545 546 547 548 549 550 551 552 553 554 555 556 557 558 559 560 561 562 563 564 565 566 567 568 569 570 571 572 573 574 575 576 577 578 579 580 581 582 583 584 585 586 587 588 589 590 591 592 593 594 595 596 597 598 599 600 601 602 603 604 605 606 607 608 609 610 611 612 613 614 615 616 617 618 619 620 621 622 623 624 625 626 627 628 629 630 631 632 633 634 635 636 637 638 639 640 641 642 643 644 645 646 647 648 649 650 651 652 653 654 655 656 657 658 659 660 661 662 663 664 665 666 667 668 669 670 671 672 673 674 675 676 677 678 679 680 681 682 683 684 685 686 687 688 689 690 691 692 693 694 695 696 697 698 699 700 701 702 703 704 705 706 707 708 709 710 711 712 713 714 715 716 717 718 719 720 721 722 723 724 725 726 727 728 729 730 731 732 733 734 735 736 737 738 739 740 741 742 743 744 745 746 747 748 749 750 751 752 753 754 755 756 757 758 759 760 761 762 763 764 765 766 767 768 769 770 771 772 773 774 775 776 777 778 779 780 781 782 783 784 785 786 787 788 789 790 791 792 793 794 795 796 797 798 799 800 801 802 803 804 805 806 807 808 809 810 811 812 813 814 815 816 817 818 819 820 821 822 823 824 825 826 827 828 829 830 831 832 833 834 835 836 837 838 839 840 841 842 843 844 845 846 847 848 849 850 851 852 853 854 855 856 857 858 859 860 861 862 863