toasters October 1999

toasters@lists.teaparty.net

81 participants
89 discussions

Re: Autosupport, 5.2.3 upgrade, diskscrub and wackz
by sirbruce＠ix.netcom.com 12 Oct '99

12 Oct '99

On 10/11/99 07:41:30 you wrote: >The volume could be offline, that's for sure, but why the machine ? This is the result of a less-than-thorough multivolume implementation plan. Originally, there only *was* one volume, so taking the whole filer down wasn't an issue. Presumably when mutlivolume was to be implemented, Netapp decided it was more important to get that out the door than to spend more time and resources modifying a better wack interface to run on an offline volume while the … [View More]

2 1

Client pack fo NetApp - implementation ???
by Itzik (Itzhak) Meirson DSc 11 Oct '99

11 Oct '99

I wonder how is the backup performed by the new client for NetApp... 1. Is the backup done from a special snapshot or from the "live" files? 2. When defining the NetApp client what directive should be used? I might have missed this information from the docs I have seen. Thanks in advance, Itzik

1 0

Re: Autosupport, 5.2.3 upgrade, diskscrub and wackz
by sirbruce＠ix.netcom.com 11 Oct '99

11 Oct '99

On 10/10/99 12:12:52 you wrote: > > "sirbruce" == sirbruce <sirbruce(a)ix.netcom.com> writes: > > sirbruce> The problem is that with a changing filesystem, such > sirbruce> programs could easily report a problem when in fact > sirbruce> there is none. There are some ways around this. > >Huh? If the filesystem is made immutable, it isn't a changing >filesystem. e.g, on a Unix host, this _should_ be safe: > >unmount filesystem. >mount … [View More]

4 3

Re: Autosupport, 5.2.3 upgrade, diskscrub and wackz
by sirbruce＠ix.netcom.com 11 Oct '99

11 Oct '99

On 10/10/99 02:59:52 you wrote: > > "alexei" == alexei <alexei(a)mindspring.net> writes: > >> this rather distressing. The filer really needs a way to perform a >> filesystem health check w/o downtime. > > alexei> Like running fsck on a mounted filesystem? Some things are > alexei> better done in a quiesced state... > >The filer is not a Unix host serving NFS. I expect more out of it. I >didn't say it needed to correct errors while … [View More]

3 2

Releasing file locks on the Netapp
by Brian Tao 10 Oct '99

10 Oct '99

Is there a way to force the Netapp to forget about specific locks? I know how to get the Netapp to forget about *all* locks from a particular client, but I don't always want that. My specific problem is with the FrontPage extensions on Solaris (using Apache as the web server). Once in a while, the extensions think there is another instance running. It determines this by attempting to lock a file called vti_pvt/service.lck . I can run lock_dump on the Netapp and see the inode and … [View More]

1 0

Re: Autosupport, 5.2.3 upgrade, diskscrub and wackz
by alexei＠mindspring.net 10 Oct '99

10 Oct '99

Jay Soffian <jay(a)cimedia.com> writes: > Do parity errors during a disk scrub necessarily indicate something is > wrong with the filesystem? Not neccessarily. > this rather distressing. The filer really needs a way to perform a > filesystem health check w/o downtime. Like running fsck on a mounted filesystem? Some things are better done in a quiesced state... >NA also needs to publish > accurate timing data on wack via NOW. The only document I can find has > … [View More]

3 2

Re: nfs.tcp.enable option
by alexei＠mindspring.net 10 Oct '99

10 Oct '99

"Eyal Traitel" <r55789(a)email.sps.mot.com> writes: > It created a complete havoc for our site when we were with tcp (apps hangups > etc.) There were also some pretty substantial bugs with NFS over TCP. For a while NetApp shipped the filers with the option set to on, but after a while they set it to off by default. The problems I had experienced (a while ago; I have not needed to look into the tcp option again) was that after a while the client would not be able to talk to … [View More]

1 0

Re: downgrading from 5.3.1 to 5.2.3
by Mike Smith 10 Oct '99

10 Oct '99

> > "Puneet" == Puneet Anand <puneet(a)netapp.com> writes: > > > > Puneet> Jay, This might help > > > > Puneet> http://now.netapp.com/NOW/knowledge/contents/TIP/TIP_502.shtml > > > > Excellent. FYI - A search on "Downgrading" from NOW with all options > > checked didn't return that document. > > > > j. > > Hi Jay, > downgrading would not return the document but "revert" > would. … [View More]

2 1

nfs.tcp.enable option
by Graham Knight 09 Oct '99

09 Oct '99

All our filers do NFS using UDP. If i turn the nfs.tcp.enable option to on, does it *add* that capability, or does it do it one way or the other? Thanks, Graham

3 2

Re: open bugs / closed bugs
by sirbruce＠ix.netcom.com 09 Oct '99

09 Oct '99

On 10/08/99 10:59:26 you wrote: >In searching for a bug on NOW, I've noticed that a majority of bugs >are still in the open state. Does this mean these bugs have not been >fixed? I always assumed open bugs were the ones that have not been fixed in a current release, yes. Note that NOW doesn't list all bugs, either, so there are probably a lot of bugs that are fixed that never make it on there. Customers probably want to know more about known bugs with workarounds than those without … [View More]

1 0

← Newer
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
Older →

2025

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 October 1999