toasters April 1999

toasters@lists.teaparty.net

117 participants
153 discussions

Re: Y2K: Any one rolled a filer forward & backwards?
by sirbruce＠ix.netcom.com 21 Apr '99

21 Apr '99

On 04/21/99 15:47:37 you wrote: > >In message <199904211921.PAA30871(a)trail.cimedia.com>, Ozzie Sabina writes: >>(and you don't really physically need a floppy to do a >>'floppy boot'), > ^^^^^^^^^^^ > > Didn't know that. I'll file it under "emergency things I hope I > never need to know". :) Presumably he means "for the purposes of getting at that interactive menu before the filer boots up all the way." But that wasn't really the goal of the floppy boot; it was for things like installs and boting up a previous OS when the current one is crashing your filer and so on. Bruce

1 0

Re: Y2K: Any one rolled a filer forward & backwards?
by Jason D. Kelleher 21 Apr '99

21 Apr '99

In message <017701be8c36$ac160740$f710fbce(a)pericles.yahoo.com>, "Jim McCoy" writes: >Jason Kelleher writes: >>mwalters(a)netapp.com: >>>ONTAP 5.3 has an optional (license required !) "snaprestore" feature [... >] >> >> And if you don't have the license can you still call support and >> have them walk you through the undocumented procedures to do this >> from a boot floppy > >You really don't even need to boot floppy (search for the the "floppy-boot? >" >setting in the boot system) if you are in a hurry. The prev_cp works for >5.x as well but it is a bit of a hack to do this sort of a restore (OTOH I >doubt that the "snaprestore" is anything more than a wrapper over prev_cp >which masks out the checkpoints stored in the NVRAM log.) > >> they should've spent more money on books and less on leather jackets > >Come on, those were pretty sweet jackets! :) (and the logo was rather The jacket was nice. Have you seen the nice black polo shirts? My sales rep still owes me a couple, but I'm pretty sure he's avoiding me. I left him voice mail asking how much trouble it would be to return our cluster and he had our StorNet VAR call me. Very disappointing. Guess I can't really blame him. He made the mistake of showing up at my office last Feb after a couple of NetApp delivery mix ups (involving said cluster) which cost me several hours on a Friday night and another couple on a Monday afternoon (they knew about the mix up Thursday - didn't tell me 'til Monday). I had our VAR warn him I didn't want to talk to him, but... >subdued for a corporate freebie.) Last I heard they decided to pocket the >money they were spending on the jackets and the class docs are still very >weak. They should also put the class docs onto the web somewhere because Very weak. I'd have settled for a Table of Contents -- an Index would've been great. The instructors were good. Too bad I don't have a phonographic memory. They did do a good job of answering any odd questions I could come up with. >there are times when the docs aren't handy and I need to remember if it is >26/7 or 28/7 that fries my disks... Not sure about putting the docs on the web. I think that's asking for somebody to trash their filer and blame NetApp for showing them how. Even after taking the class I doubt I'd play with the special commands without tech support on the phone... at least not on a production filer. jason

1 0

Re: Y2K: Any one rolled a filer forward & backwards?
by Jason D. Kelleher 21 Apr '99

21 Apr '99

In message <000101be8c1d$ce64b800$4323a8c0(a)mwalters.netapp.europe.com>, "mwa lters" writes: >Just an aside (almost certainly way beyond what you require, which I think >has already been answered !) - > >ONTAP 5.3 has an optional (license required !) "snaprestore" feature. This >basically allows you to restore an entire volume back to any chosen >snapshot, over a filer reboot. This gives the additional benefit of >allowing you to take a snapshot, perform whatever tests you like (eg >application changes, full Y2K testing, etc), then to rollback the entire >volume within a couple of minutes to exactly how it was at the point of the >snapshot. > >Just thought I'd mention it ! > >Cheers >Mike And if you don't have the license can you still call support and have them walk you through the undocumented procedures to do this from a boot floppy? It used to be covered in the NTAP 202 class (if you took the class hunt around in the binder full of PowerPoint slides they called a book for "prev_cp - boot from prior consistency point" -- they should've spent more money on books and less on leather jackets) in the Special Commands Section. This worked with a 4.1.x boot floppy in class, not sure about the 5.x boot floppies. As I recall it was for recovering from a severely fubar'd filesystem. As for the date flipping, I have two F740s which aren't doing anything until I get patches to 5.3D2 (maybe Friday last I heard) to make cluster failover stable, so I'll mess around with it and get back to the list. The only issue I can imagine would be some NFS clients getting upset when time "goes backwards" on the server. jason >-----Original Message----- >From: owner-dl-toasters(a)netapp.com >[mailto:owner-dl-toasters@netapp.com]On Behalf Of Garrett Burke >Sent: 21 April 1999 12:17 >To: 'toasters(a)mathworks.com' >Subject: Y2K: Any one rolled a filer forward & backwards? > > >Hi All, > >As part of my Y2K testing I intend rolling the date forward on my filer >(F230, currently 5.2.1, NFS & CIFS) to just before midnight on the 31st and >then watch it as it ticks over midnight. So far, so good. The issue I hav >e >(assuming the filer is Y2K compliant!) is rolling it back again. > >Has anyone rolled their filer forward and then back again to put it back >into production? Were there any glitches? There will be files that will >have modified dates in the future, but these can be a copy of some >production data which can be deleted after the test. > >GB

2 1

ramping performance
by Graham Knight 21 Apr '99

21 Apr '99

While doing some transfers to an F760 (5.1.2P2) the perfomance seems to ramp from good to lousy. I can find nothing wrong with the network - this is data coming from a system on the same subnet (100tx-fd). Data transfers between other systems on the same segment do not show these types of performance problems - here's a typical output from a sysstat 1: ( i am reading from one place on the filer and writing to another) CPU NFS CIFS HTTP Net kB/s Disk kB/s Tape kB/s Cache in out read write read write age 12% 232 1 0 949 947 640 0 0 0 12 34% 644 0 0 2425 2445 2336 0 0 0 12 12% 233 2 0 1020 1015 1049 0 0 0 12 4% 0 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 12 4% 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 12 19% 488 4 0 1970 1984 1724 0 0 0 12 49% 448 0 0 1700 1656 2226 7075 0 0 12 15% 139 0 0 128 158 148 3976 0 0 12 4% 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 12 19% 139 8 0 601 613 708 0 0 0 12 25% 621 0 0 2702 2719 2342 0 0 0 12 19% 467 0 0 2049 2027 1888 0 0 0 12 4% 16 1 0 20 3 0 0 0 0 12 4% 91 1 0 15 16 0 0 0 0 12 Anybody have any insights into what might be causing this? Thanks, Graham

1 0

FW: Y2K: Any one rolled a filer forward & backwards?
by Mike Ball 21 Apr '99

21 Apr '99

Garrett, I have a F210 which I use as my test machine. It is currently running 5.3. I changed the date to April 21 2000 via Filerview, ran it for a half an hour then changed it back without any issues. Mike > -----Original Message----- > From: owner-toasters(a)mathworks.com > [mailto:owner-toasters@mathworks.com]On Behalf Of Garrett Burke > Sent: Wednesday, April 21, 1999 7:17 AM > To: 'toasters(a)mathworks.com' > Subject: Y2K: Any one rolled a filer forward & backwards? > > > Hi All, > > As part of my Y2K testing I intend rolling the date forward on my filer > (F230, currently 5.2.1, NFS & CIFS) to just before midnight on > the 31st and > then watch it as it ticks over midnight. So far, so good. The > issue I have > (assuming the filer is Y2K compliant!) is rolling it back again. > > Has anyone rolled their filer forward and then back again to put it back > into production? Were there any glitches? There will be files that will > have modified dates in the future, but these can be a copy of some > production data which can be deleted after the test. > > GB >

1 0

RE: Legato with NT
by Robert Palermo 21 Apr '99

21 Apr '99

Mark, Thanks for the response. I will forward your comments to our customer. Hopefully others have been helped by this also. > From: "Muhlestein, Mark" <mark.muhlestein(a)netapp.com> > To: "'Robert Palermo'" <bob(a)opensystems.com>, toasters(a)mathworks.com, Michael.Salmon(a)uab.ericsson.se > Subject: RE: Legato with NT > Date: Tue, 20 Apr 1999 20:48:52 -0700 > MIME-Version: 1.0 > > Just FYI (nothing official), but I can say that in the limited testing I did > with Legato over CIFS to the filer everything seemed to work just fine. I was > able to back up and restore both UNIX- and NTFS-style files with no problems. > The security and other metadata were fully preserved. Make sure you are doing > the backups and restores from an NT admin account that maps to 'root' if you are > working with files that have UNIX-style security. > > The one problem I remember is the same one Michael Salmon mentioned: make sure > you are accessing the filer as a domain administrator, not the local > administrator (which is the default unless you specify > "domain-name\administrator"). > > Mark Muhlestein -- mmm(a)netapp.com > > -----Original Message----- > From: Robert Palermo [mailto:bob@opensystems.com] > Sent: Tuesday, April 20, 1999 12:40 PM > To: toasters(a)mathworks.com; Michael.Salmon(a)uab.ericsson.se > Subject: Re: Legato with NT > > > We are actually not having any problems. One of our prospective customers asked > us for references but most of our customers are in the same boat we're in. We've > never had to go to tape for recovery. Snapshot has always done the trick. > > Of our customers who are running CIFS only, none are using Legato right now. I > I was really looking for feedback as opposed the answer to a problem. > > Thanks to all who have replied. > > > To: toasters(a)mathworks.com > > Subject: Re: Legato with NT > > X-Reply-To: Michael.Salmon(a)uab.ericsson.se > > X-uri: http://www.elfi.adbkons.se/~mesa > > X-pgp-fingerprint: DD 6A DD AE 7D 37 C2 92 9D 2A 1D 26 0E 7D 25 86 > > X-Face: %"f^~cZ#`qgIYZ:xm95*9;YDUM)2,!]kETwVGx>1[h?{Y:MuarA9uj0j > `{avD3^1apqS7P~1Gib%0#tn"aqV;GfhXJ"1?ZPn|]xc[$:03Q%?k3"#PGh| > `^{^-LRX]UB^}+,TY~EETpLrQiG"4}I-gdj=l!c)W;_R:X;qO#dpL#Y77J:; > PTyjqj'/Nx*3&@@p]LISmtWlDIMprRgA%pMGy9M:NB>}e{0+)s(ZGM|PK}V" > 0XW:FQ)%L&o\E''v'RWg.fZ$_s1jLhE>;JzHR:Yb > > Mime-Version: 1.0 > > Date: Tue, 20 Apr 1999 15:08:15 +0200 > > From: Michael Salmon <Michael.Salmon(a)uab.ericsson.se> > > > > +----- On Fri, 16 Apr 1999 10:50:08 EDT, Robert Palermo writes: > > | Mike, > > | > > | Thanks for the response. I guess I should be a little more specific. Have > you > > | performed any restores and did the permissions come back as expected if so. > > > > I just checked the test report and no restores were tried, just backups. > > I guess from your query that you are having problems, care to share > > them? > > > > /Michael > >

1 0

RE: Legato with NT
by Muhlestein, Mark 21 Apr '99

21 Apr '99

Just FYI (nothing official), but I can say that in the limited testing I did with Legato over CIFS to the filer everything seemed to work just fine. I was able to back up and restore both UNIX- and NTFS-style files with no problems. The security and other metadata were fully preserved. Make sure you are doing the backups and restores from an NT admin account that maps to 'root' if you are working with files that have UNIX-style security. The one problem I remember is the same one Michael Salmon mentioned: make sure you are accessing the filer as a domain administrator, not the local administrator (which is the default unless you specify "domain-name\administrator"). Mark Muhlestein -- mmm(a)netapp.com -----Original Message----- From: Robert Palermo [mailto:bob@opensystems.com] Sent: Tuesday, April 20, 1999 12:40 PM To: toasters(a)mathworks.com; Michael.Salmon(a)uab.ericsson.se Subject: Re: Legato with NT We are actually not having any problems. One of our prospective customers asked us for references but most of our customers are in the same boat we're in. We've never had to go to tape for recovery. Snapshot has always done the trick. Of our customers who are running CIFS only, none are using Legato right now. I I was really looking for feedback as opposed the answer to a problem. Thanks to all who have replied. > To: toasters(a)mathworks.com > Subject: Re: Legato with NT > X-Reply-To: Michael.Salmon(a)uab.ericsson.se > X-uri: http://www.elfi.adbkons.se/~mesa > X-pgp-fingerprint: DD 6A DD AE 7D 37 C2 92 9D 2A 1D 26 0E 7D 25 86 > X-Face: %"f^~cZ#`qgIYZ:xm95*9;YDUM)2,!]kETwVGx>1[h?{Y:MuarA9uj0j `{avD3^1apqS7P~1Gib%0#tn"aqV;GfhXJ"1?ZPn|]xc[$:03Q%?k3"#PGh| `^{^-LRX]UB^}+,TY~EETpLrQiG"4}I-gdj=l!c)W;_R:X;qO#dpL#Y77J:; PTyjqj'/Nx*3&@@p]LISmtWlDIMprRgA%pMGy9M:NB>}e{0+)s(ZGM|PK}V" 0XW:FQ)%L&o\E''v'RWg.fZ$_s1jLhE>;JzHR:Yb > Mime-Version: 1.0 > Date: Tue, 20 Apr 1999 15:08:15 +0200 > From: Michael Salmon <Michael.Salmon(a)uab.ericsson.se> > > +----- On Fri, 16 Apr 1999 10:50:08 EDT, Robert Palermo writes: > | Mike, > | > | Thanks for the response. I guess I should be a little more specific. Have you > | performed any restores and did the permissions come back as expected if so. > > I just checked the test report and no restores were tried, just backups. > I guess from your query that you are having problems, care to share > them? > > /Michael >

1 0

Re: Legato with NT
by Robert Palermo 20 Apr '99

20 Apr '99

We are actually not having any problems. One of our prospective customers asked us for references but most of our customers are in the same boat we're in. We've never had to go to tape for recovery. Snapshot has always done the trick. Of our customers who are running CIFS only, none are using Legato right now. I I was really looking for feedback as opposed the answer to a problem. Thanks to all who have replied. > To: toasters(a)mathworks.com > Subject: Re: Legato with NT > X-Reply-To: Michael.Salmon(a)uab.ericsson.se > X-uri: http://www.elfi.adbkons.se/~mesa > X-pgp-fingerprint: DD 6A DD AE 7D 37 C2 92 9D 2A 1D 26 0E 7D 25 86 > X-Face: %"f^~cZ#`qgIYZ:xm95*9;YDUM)2,!]kETwVGx>1[h?{Y:MuarA9uj0j `{avD3^1apqS7P~1Gib%0#tn"aqV;GfhXJ"1?ZPn|]xc[$:03Q%?k3"#PGh| `^{^-LRX]UB^}+,TY~EETpLrQiG"4}I-gdj=l!c)W;_R:X;qO#dpL#Y77J:; PTyjqj'/Nx*3&@@p]LISmtWlDIMprRgA%pMGy9M:NB>}e{0+)s(ZGM|PK}V" 0XW:FQ)%L&o\E''v'RWg.fZ$_s1jLhE>;JzHR:Yb > Mime-Version: 1.0 > Date: Tue, 20 Apr 1999 15:08:15 +0200 > From: Michael Salmon <Michael.Salmon(a)uab.ericsson.se> > > +----- On Fri, 16 Apr 1999 10:50:08 EDT, Robert Palermo writes: > | Mike, > | > | Thanks for the response. I guess I should be a little more specific. Have you > | performed any restores and did the permissions come back as expected if so. > > I just checked the test report and no restores were tried, just backups. > I guess from your query that you are having problems, care to share > them? > > /Michael >

1 0

Re: Legato with NT
by Robert Palermo 20 Apr '99

20 Apr '99

Mike, Thanks for the response. I guess I should be a little more specific. Have you performed any restores and did the permissions come back as expected if so. Thanks again. > To: toasters(a)mathworks.com > Subject: Re: Legato with NT > X-Reply-To: Michael.Salmon(a)uab.ericsson.se > X-uri: http://www.elfi.adbkons.se/~mesa > X-pgp-fingerprint: DD 6A DD AE 7D 37 C2 92 9D 2A 1D 26 0E 7D 25 86 > X-Face: %"f^~cZ#`qgIYZ:xm95*9;YDUM)2,!]kETwVGx>1[h?{Y:MuarA9uj0j `{avD3^1apqS7P~1Gib%0#tn"aqV;GfhXJ"1?ZPn|]xc[$:03Q%?k3"#PGh| `^{^-LRX]UB^}+,TY~EETpLrQiG"4}I-gdj=l!c)W;_R:X;qO#dpL#Y77J:; PTyjqj'/Nx*3&@@p]LISmtWlDIMprRgA%pMGy9M:NB>}e{0+)s(ZGM|PK}V" 0XW:FQ)%L&o\E''v'RWg.fZ$_s1jLhE>;JzHR:Yb > Mime-Version: 1.0 > Date: Thu, 15 Apr 1999 09:17:51 +0200 > From: Michael Salmon <Michael.Salmon(a)uab.ericsson.se> > > +----- On Wed, 14 Apr 1999 15:24:19 EDT, Robert Palermo writes: > | Is anyone using Legato to back up a filer in an NT only environment ? > > We've done it, the only problem we had was that Legato started as the > wrong administrator who didn't have access to the shares, once that was > solved it worked without problem. > > /Michael > Bob Palermo bob(a)opensystems.com Systems Engineer tel: 508-359-4248 Open System Solutions, Inc. fax: 508-359-5215 www.opensystems.com www.4privatei.com

2 1

Anybody using 3com switches with NetAPP?
by Jaye Mathisen 16 Apr '99

16 Apr '99

I have both my ports on a linkswitch 3000, at 100mb, full-duplex. Both ends are configured manually for 100mit, full duplex. I do not believe when i was running 4.3.4, that I got any errors. But now, with 5.3, I'm seeing occasional errors. (a few every 10-15 seconds). In this VLAN, there's only 1 other device talking to the netapp, and it's configure for 100mb, full-duplex as well, and it sees no errors either coming or going. As I said, I believe this is new behaviour. I have rebooted everything just to make sure, and double checked it all, and it's all full duplex 100mbit. Cabling is short, and tests fine on a Fluke 682 lan meter... Anybody else seeing something similar before I go knocking on Netapps door?

3 5

← Newer
1
...
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
...
16
Older →

Jump to page:

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 April 1999