toasters April 2000

toasters@lists.teaparty.net

121 participants
139 discussions

RE: Filer WINS registrations
by Muhlestein, Mark 27 Apr '00

27 Apr '00

This sounds like bug 7836. It's fixed in 5.3.4 and later releases. It isn't currently available on NOW, but I'll take care of that. Mark Muhlestein -- mmm(a)netapp.com > -----Original Message----- > From: Walsh, Warren (MN65) [mailto:warren.walsh@honeywell.com] > Sent: Wednesday, April 26, 2000 12:23 PM > To: toasters(a)mathworks.com > Subject: Filer WINS registrations > > > Hi all - > > We've got two filers, a 330 and 540 both running 5.1.2P2, in > a Windows NT > domain. The filers are configured to register with WINS. > However, we've > noticed some unusual WINS entries in the last few days. The filer is > correctly registering a 00h workstation entry, a 03h > messenger entry, and a > 20h file server entry into the WINS server. > > The big problem is that the filer is also creating 00h, 03h, > and 20h WINS > records for the domain it is in. It then appears that there is a > workstation with the same name as the domain. This causes > numerous problems > for Windows clients on the different subnets in the different > buildings. > Most of the problems are the inability to find the domain > controller, or a > duplicate name error. (We've noticed a weird bug with > Windows 2000 and WINS > where the computer doesn't release the workstation record > when it shuts > down, but we're not sure if they're related.) > > I called NetApp, and they referenced a duplicate WINS name > problem in bug # > 16355. I can't find that bug number on the NOW web site. > NetApp support > suggested upgrading to 5.3.4R3, or even 5.3.5R2. Anyone seen > this bug, or > similar behavior? Can someone take a look at their WINS > server, and let me > know what's in there from the filer? Or what is the output of a cifs > testdc? That's how we first noticed the unusual WINS entries. > > Thanks in advance for your time and help, > > -warren > > Warren M. Walsh > Honeywell Technology Center > warren.walsh(a)honeywell.com >

2 1

Filer WINS registrations
by Walsh, Warren (MN65) 26 Apr '00

26 Apr '00

Hi all - We've got two filers, a 330 and 540 both running 5.1.2P2, in a Windows NT domain. The filers are configured to register with WINS. However, we've noticed some unusual WINS entries in the last few days. The filer is correctly registering a 00h workstation entry, a 03h messenger entry, and a 20h file server entry into the WINS server. The big problem is that the filer is also creating 00h, 03h, and 20h WINS records for the domain it is in. It then appears that there is a workstation with the same name as the domain. This causes numerous problems for Windows clients on the different subnets in the different buildings. Most of the problems are the inability to find the domain controller, or a duplicate name error. (We've noticed a weird bug with Windows 2000 and WINS where the computer doesn't release the workstation record when it shuts down, but we're not sure if they're related.) I called NetApp, and they referenced a duplicate WINS name problem in bug # 16355. I can't find that bug number on the NOW web site. NetApp support suggested upgrading to 5.3.4R3, or even 5.3.5R2. Anyone seen this bug, or similar behavior? Can someone take a look at their WINS server, and let me know what's in there from the filer? Or what is the output of a cifs testdc? That's how we first noticed the unusual WINS entries. Thanks in advance for your time and help, -warren Warren M. Walsh Honeywell Technology Center warren.walsh(a)honeywell.com

2 1

RE: Sybase ASE & NetApp Filer [My Experiences].....
by Anders Ljungberg S (QDT) 26 Apr '00

26 Apr '00

And that the Intel card supports multiple ip stacks. I.e you can use trunks with clusters,use redundant network setups etc Anders Ljungberg Ericsson Business Consulting -----Original Message----- From: Mike Linett [mailto:mike@zerowait.com] Sent: Wednesday, April 26, 2000 3:57 PM To: toasters(a)mathworks.com Subject: Re: Sybase ASE & NetApp Filer [My Experiences]..... My understanding was that the Intel cards outperformed the Alteon cards and that was the reason for the switch by NetApp. Mike Linett ----- Original Message ----- From: "Steve Armijo" <armijo(a)cs.unm.edu> To: "Richard L. Rhodes" <rhodesr(a)firstenergycorp.com> Cc: <toasters(a)mathworks.com> Sent: Wednesday, April 26, 2000 2:40 AM Subject: Re: Sybase ASE & NetApp Filer [My Experiences]..... > On Tue, Apr 25, 2000 at 08:17:50AM +0000, Richard L. Rhodes wrote: > > > > I can't speak about Sybase, but I'm running Oracle across Gigabit. > > In terms of the pipes size, I've never come close to 100MB/s. My > > F740 filers seem to top out at around 20MB/s. I "think" it's > > helping, in that there is less latency on the connection. But the > > problem I see mostly is high biod utilization under high i/o load > > (I'm running across nfs). Expecially things like creating > > tablespaces. On a 4 processor system (rs/6k-f50) I've seen biod run > > as high as 30% of the system. My disappointment is that NetApp > > doesn't supported gigabit jumbo packets, even though they announced > > they would support them quite a while ago when they first announced > > support for gigabit. I notice that those announcement letters are no > > longer available on their web site. A search for "jumbo" turns up > > nothing, where it used to turn up an announcement letter for Alteon > > nics and jumbo packets. Every db block (4k) thats read from the db > > and you may also notice that the Alteon cards don't seem to be shipping by > default anymore. the last few clusters i've had come in I had to > specifically request the Alteon cards since we weren't ready to leave > 5.3.2R1 just quite yet. > > -s > > -- > Cue the music, fade to black, no such thing as no payback. -PWEI > > [ armijo(a)cs.unm.edu ] >

2 1

Re: Sybase ASE & NetApp Filer [My Experiences].....
by Richard L. Rhodes 26 Apr '00

26 Apr '00

On 24 Apr 2000, at 14:36, Derek kelly wrote: > > The question this raises with me is- I wonder if going to Gigabit > between > the devices negates the speed issue. > > I can't speak about Sybase, but I'm running Oracle across Gigabit. In terms of the pipes size, I've never come close to 100MB/s. My F740 filers seem to top out at around 20MB/s. I "think" it's helping, in that there is less latency on the connection. But the problem I see mostly is high biod utilization under high i/o load (I'm running across nfs). Expecially things like creating tablespaces. On a 4 processor system (rs/6k-f50) I've seen biod run as high as 30% of the system. My disappointment is that NetApp doesn't supported gigabit jumbo packets, even though they announced they would support them quite a while ago when they first announced support for gigabit. I notice that those announcement letters are no longer available on their web site. A search for "jumbo" turns up nothing, where it used to turn up an announcement letter for Alteon nics and jumbo packets. Every db block (4k) thats read from the db requires 2.x ethernet packets. Under low utilization I never see the nfs load, under high utilization it becomes a monster. If Netapp is serious about wanting to run databases on the NetApp they need to support jumbo packets. Rick

4 3

RE: Network Appliance Upgrade to ONTAP 5.3.4R3P2 and Backups
by Kelly Wyatt 26 Apr '00

26 Apr '00

We already do this. These failures are in the middle and at end of backups. This behavior of downing the drives at this point in the backups is new. Thanks, Kelly -- Kelly Wyatt, Kelly.Wyatt(a)SAS.com Systems Programmer Integrated Solutions Consulting SAS Institute Inc. / SAS Campus Drive / Cary, NC 27513 http://www.sas.com The power to know TM

1 0

Network Appliance Upgrade to ONTAP 5.3.4R3P2 and Backups
by Kelly Wyatt 26 Apr '00

26 Apr '00

We upgraded out filers to NetApp Release 5.3.4R3P2 this weekend. Since then, NBU 3.2 keeps downing the tape drives on several, but not all of the filers (3 of 9). This seems to happen before, during and after backups. Has anyone else seen this? Thanks!! Kelly -- Kelly Wyatt, Kelly.Wyatt(a)SAS.com Systems Programmer Integrated Solutions Consulting SAS Institute Inc. / SAS Campus Drive / Cary, NC 27513 http://www.sas.com The power to know

2 1

RE: IIS and netapp in existing unix world
by Hawley, Rob 25 Apr '00

25 Apr '00

The filer needs an account in the domain just like a user has an account in the domain. Server Manager is used to create the account. Once the account is created you run cifs setup (not setup) to join the domain. Ontap will allow you to manage shares and local group accounts using Server Manager and User Manager. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ mailto: hawleyr(a)netapp.com US Mail: Network Appliance Inc. Phone: 408-822-6661 495 East Java Drive FAX: 408-822-4521 Sunnyvale, CA 94089 -----Original Message----- From: Mathew Anderson [mailto:mathew@nm.net] Sent: Tuesday, April 25, 2000 9:26 AM To: toasters(a)mathworks.com Subject: RE: IIS and netapp in existing unix world Thanks for the help on this. I have upgraded ontap (first for everything.. painless... really painless.. rather nice!) I set up a PDC for my NT machines. now the question that I have is, how to add in a windows domain, (without rerunning setup) and use the server manager to manger the netapp. I get "access denied" on the NT machine when trying to connect to the netapp (720, Ontap 5.3.5R) with the server manager. Reading the SAG it appears that you can EITHER have nfs or cifs client administration.. The IIS white paper (http://www.netapp.com/tech_library/3078.html) is rather helpful, for those that are trying to use the netapp as a backend data store, thanks Paul for pointing me to this!) Thanks!! Mathew Anderson Systems Administration NM Technet Oso Grande Technologies, Inc. mathew(a)nm.net mathew(a)osogrande.net

1 0

RE: Oopps! How do I get out of this?
by Sims, Aaron 25 Apr '00

25 Apr '00

One other thing to note is that if you follow the procedure below, the 4GB SCSI drive will become useless since DataONTAP marks the drive as bad. The system will not allow the drive to be reinserted into the filer. Aaron > -----Original Message----- > From: Bruce Sterling Woodcock [mailto:sirbruce@ix.netcom.com] > Sent: Tuesday, April 25, 2000 1:44 PM > To: Cliff Nadler; toasters(a)mathworks.com > Subject: Re: Oopps! How do I get out of this? > > > You could raid fail the SCSI drive, go into degraded mode, and > rebuild onto a new spare FCAL. It would be risky, though, since > there is a small chance of another disk failure during the rebuild > process. (Might be a good idea to do a raid scrub first.) You > will also take a performance hit during this process, of course. > > Bruce > >

3 2

Oopps! How do I get out of this?
by Cliff Nadler 25 Apr '00

25 Apr '00

I have a filer which has both SCSI 9G (4 shelves) and FCAL 36Gb (2 shelves). Unfortunately, I was in a rush to add some disk to a volume and added my last SCSI disk to a volume that was all FCAL. How can I get this disk out of the volume and restore it to hot spare capability? I have 4 space 36G FCAL drives, but it's not enough to do a volcopy and just delete the old volume. here's the sysconfig -r output for the volume: RAID group 0 RAID Disk HA.ID HA SHELF BAY CHAN Used (MB/blks) Phys (MB/blks) --------- ----- ------------ ---- -------------- -------------- parity 0a.10 0a 1 2 FC:A 34500/70656000 34732/71132960 data 0a.9 0a 1 1 FC:A 34500/70656000 34732/71132960 data 0a.11 0a 1 3 FC:A 34500/70656000 34732/71132960 data 0a.12 0a 1 4 FC:A 34500/70656000 34732/71132960 data 8a.4 8a 0 5 8600/17612800 8683/17783240 data 0a.5 0a 0 5 FC:A 34500/70656000 34732/71132960 Thanks, -- -------------------------------------------------------------------------- Cliff Nadler Collective Technologies, Inc. (a Pencom Company) cnadler(a)colltech.com (617)-443-1144 -------------------------------------------------------------------------- To win, you must treat a pressure situation as an opportunity to succeed, not an opportunity to fail Gardner Dickinson

4 4

RE: Oopps! How do I get out of this?
by Mohler, Jeff 25 Apr '00

25 Apr '00

> -----Original Message----- > From: Sims, Aaron [mailto:Aaron.Sims@netapp.com] > Sent: Tuesday, April 25, 2000 12:03 PM > To: toasters(a)mathworks.com > Subject: RE: Oopps! How do I get out of this? > > > One other thing to note is that if you follow the procedure > below, the 4GB SCSI > drive will become useless since DataONTAP marks the drive as > bad. The system > will not allow the drive to be reinserted into the filer. > > Aaron Aaron is 100% correct, but there is a way out. But they are steps that should _only_ be taken with a NetApp engineer either handy in person, or on the phone. Please contact technical support on this issue.

1 0

Jump to page:

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 April 2000