toasters May 1998

toasters@lists.teaparty.net

43 participants
53 discussions

Y2K Testing & compliance
by Thomson, Michael 25 Sep '98

25 Sep '98

Hi there! I've been asked some questions by our Y2K project team, specifically related to NetApp, and I'm unsure how to respond. >From the web page (http://www.netapp.com/y2k_table.html) it seems that the only thing that is 'preliminarily evaluated' is DOT 4.1. Can anyone give the authorative answer to: 1) Are there any plans to use a hardware clock that stores 4-digit years? 2) What Y2K tests were performed on DOT 4.1 3) Have later releases (4.1.3, 5.0, etc.) had the same tests run on them before release? 4) Can customers get access to NetApp test plans and results, directly or via a non-disclosure agreement? More generally, are people inclined to believe that, once certified by NetApp, the appliances can be treated as 'any other' NFS server by client machines, or would you advocate specific interoperational testing with NetApp kit? Cheers, Mike Thomson -- \\|||// Minds are like parachutes; (@ @) They only work when open. *---oOO-(_)-OOo------------------------------------* * Michael Thomson Email: mt53590(a)ggr.co.uk * * Unix Specialist Internal: 782 4393 * * Glaxo Wellcome External: 01438 764 393 * * Fax: 01438 763 204 * * .oooO Oooo. Mobile: 0498 725 047 * *--( )---( )-----------------------------------* \ ( ) / (Quote: Sir James Dewar) \_) (_/

4 6

Re: Support for Network Time Protocol?
by Daniel Quinlan 04 Sep '98

04 Sep '98

Daniel Quinlan <quinlan(a)transmeta.com> writes: > I'm also interesting in NTP support, but I think I'd like to see the > current software become a lot more reliable (and complete) before > adding another new feature. All I need is more NetApp crashes because > of NTP bugs. I should add that this happened to us just a few days ago: - xntpd died on our adminhost (that ran the cron job to set the NetApp dates) - time drifted by 8 minutes on the adminhost and the filers over the course over a few days - someone started having problems, managed to figure out that it was because of the time drift, and we fixed it. (Other people probably had problems, but didn't report them.) To prevent it from happening again, we're remotely monitoring the system time of the adminhost (using "mon") to make sure it doesn't drift off again. Incidentally, there seems to be no way to remotely query the system time from a NetApp (except by creating a new file and running stat() on it, or by using unsupported/hidden commands). However, I'm still saying that I don't want NTP until other supported protocols (such as NDMP) start working reliably. Dan

1 1

Replication
by vance＠corp.theglobe.com 29 May '98

29 May '98

We would like to use some form of replication to mirror our NetApp 230 to another NetApp in a remote location. Has anyone on the list tried to do this before? Any suggestions on how to tackle this problem? Thanks in advance for any help you can provide- Vance BTW - If it matters at all, we are looking to replicate ~2M files totaling about 50GB. The WAN link would be fairly fast (> 45Mb). ......................... ........... Vance Huntley .. Director of Technology ............ TheGlobe.com . vance(a)corp.theglobe.com . http://www.theglobe.com .........................

3 4

subscribe
by David B. Ritch 28 May '98

28 May '98

subscribe toasters

1 0

User Quota Checking
by Mike Mueller 25 May '98

25 May '98

We've just turned on user quotas and I am trying to figure out a way to allow users to check their current disk usage and quota limit. Since the filer is running rquotad, this would seem to be the way to go. But alas, the filer rquotad apparently wants quota [path] instead of quota [uid], just like its command line quota report. It returns "NO QUOTA" when queried via a client's quota command. Has anyone figured out a way to allow a general user to check their disk usage and quota limits? It looks like there may be a way through the MIB, but how could this be easily made into a command line script that a user could run? Better yet, is there a way to allow the user to interact with the rquotad deamon that is already running on the filer to get their quota report? If not, why is it running? Thanks for your insight! -- Mike

3 3

command reference guide discontinued in 5.x
by Tom Yates 21 May '98

21 May '98

here's a little someting to take our minds off how nice NTP support would be... would anyone from netapp care to comment on the suggestion that the command reference guide has been discontinued in 5.x? would anyone else care to comment on whether they use the command reference guide? perhaps some might care to say that it's about twice as useful as the system administrators' guide, despite weighing half as much? i certainly think so. i'd even pay for it. i'd think it was a bit rich, given the price of the toaster, but i'd shell out folding money for it. it's just too useful. any chance we could have it back? Tom Yates - Unix Chap - The Mathworks, Inc. - +1 (508) 647 7561 MAG#65061 DoD#0135 AMA#461546 1024/CFDFDE39 0C E7 46 60 BB 96 87 05 04 BD FB F8 BB 20 C1 8C

2 1

Re: don't run an F630 with the case open
by Mark D Simmons 21 May '98

21 May '98

Credit to our SE's for pointing this one out to us when they installed our F630's. I can see why this would drive you up the wall trying to diagnose a fail-to-boot when no-one's pointed out the change.

2 1

Re: don't run an F630 with the case open
by Guy Lauterbach 21 May '98

21 May '98

At 08:28 AM 5/21/98 -0700, Christina Sanfilippo wrote: >Ouch! That's got to hurt. I am sure Rich was glad he could fix your problem. > >For the F200/F300 and F500 series filers these filers can run with the case >open. >As you found out the F630 can't. Although some NetApp filers *can* be operated with the case open, it is not a good idea to run any of these machines with the box open. This is because an open cabinet changes the airflow within the filer and often results in reduced airflow to some devices within the box, allowing them to overheat. And that means increased failures. Please, close them up! rgl

1 0

Re: don't run an F630 with the case open
by Christina Sanfilippo 21 May '98

21 May '98

Ouch! That's got to hurt. I am sure Rich was glad he could fix your problem. For the F200/F300 and F500 series filers these filers can run with the case open. As you found out the F630 can't. Cheers, Christina At 08:27 AM 5/21/98 -0400, Tom Yates wrote: >d'oh of the day contest entry, just fyi: > >you can run an F330 with the case open, or at least ajar. i often do >after i've done work, before i seal the case down tight, to make sure that >it boots and i'm not going to have to undo everything to fix it. well, >don't try the same trick with an F630; it doesn't work. thanks to rich >ciammaichella at netapp for not roasting me when we discovered that this >was a major part of my F630 booting problem. > >for those who haven't looked closely inside an F630, there are no longer >cables going from the board to the front-of-case displays; there are now >fixed connectors that seat when the board tray is slid fully home. this >may be true for other high-end models, too - i don't know. > > Tom Yates - Unix Chap - The Mathworks, Inc. - +1 (508) 647 7561 > MAG#65061 DoD#0135 AMA#461546 > 1024/CFDFDE39 0C E7 46 60 BB 96 87 05 04 BD FB F8 BB 20 C1 8C > > > > > ++++++++++++++++++++****************** Christina Sanfilippo Customer Support Representative Network Appliance 2730 (Shipping:2820) San Tomas Expressway Santa Clara, CA 95051 (408) 367-3747 chrissan(a)netapp.com ============>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Tech Support Hotline:1-888-4-NETAPP (Remember to reference your log # if you have one.) _____________________________________________________ VISIT Netapp On the Web http://now.netapp.com

1 0

don't run an F630 with the case open
by Tom Yates 21 May '98

21 May '98

d'oh of the day contest entry, just fyi: you can run an F330 with the case open, or at least ajar. i often do after i've done work, before i seal the case down tight, to make sure that it boots and i'm not going to have to undo everything to fix it. well, don't try the same trick with an F630; it doesn't work. thanks to rich ciammaichella at netapp for not roasting me when we discovered that this was a major part of my F630 booting problem. for those who haven't looked closely inside an F630, there are no longer cables going from the board to the front-of-case displays; there are now fixed connectors that seat when the board tray is slid fully home. this may be true for other high-end models, too - i don't know. Tom Yates - Unix Chap - The Mathworks, Inc. - +1 (508) 647 7561 MAG#65061 DoD#0135 AMA#461546 1024/CFDFDE39 0C E7 46 60 BB 96 87 05 04 BD FB F8 BB 20 C1 8C

1 0

2024

2023

2022

2021

2020

2019

2018

2017

2016

2015

2014

2013

2012

2011

2010

2009

2008

2007

2006

2005

2004

2003

2002

2001

2000

1999

1998

1997

toasters May 1998