toasters May 2000

toasters@lists.teaparty.net

122 participants
148 discussions

RE: Samba Vs CIFFS
by John.Davis＠netapp.com 31 May '00

31 May '00

Many enterprises have tried employing "free" software like Samba and even some vendors like SGI have tried to incorporate it into a "product"; hopefully some of these folks on this list will respond to your request but from working with "some" of these enterprises I can tell you from experience that Samba neither "scales" in the enterprise nor does it perform beyond about 75 clients doing useful work in a medium to large domain structure..it also is not an easy beast to administer( as explained to me be by several admins); it is "free" , however... Netapp glues the MS smb(cifs) code into our microkernel at the protocol level; Samba and other bolt-ons sit above kernel space as any other user app would and is subject to the context switching and shufflings that go on in a general purpose server; this (primarily) is why the Netapp CIFS solution both scales well and performs well as we add hundreds of users(see our Netbench results, for example); this is why the solution is not "free" -----Original Message----- From: Philip Thomas [mailto:thomas@act.sps.mot.com] Sent: Friday, May 26, 2000 11:03 PM To: toasters(a)mathworks.com Subject: Samba Vs CIFFS Hi, Why should some one pay good money to buy CIFFS license from NetApp when apparently the similar functionality is available "free", Samba? I am hoping folks out there, with experience in both products would be willing to share their knowledge as much their internal policy allows. I am specifically looking for pros and cons with respect to (a) performance (what ever than means) (b) scalibility (500+ users) (c) reliability (d) functionality (e) coexistence with Windows Terminal Server (f) 'cost' (not just dollars) (g) administration (h) interaction or lack of it with commercial apps ...any thing else ?? Perhaps this list is biased to CIFFS, by definition of the mailing list. But I have seen folks willing to speak out in the past. [BTW, please don't shoot the messenger:-)] Thanks. Philip Thomas Motorola - DDL-ITG, M/S M360 2200 W. Broadway Rd Mesa, AZ 85202 rxjs80(a)email.sps.mot.com (480) 655-3678 (480) 655-3881 (fax)

2 1

RE: F740 and subnet problems
by Adam.Fox＠netapp.com 31 May '00

31 May '00

If ICMP (ping) traffic can cross subnets, but CIFS traffic can't, I might suspect an access list on a router between those subnets is blocking TCP traffic (or specific TCP ports). You may want to check with your networking folks to make sure that they don't have access lists that are blocking your traffic. Also check your subnet mask and your default gateways to make sure they are working as well. As a last resort, you could try to run a packet trace on the network to see if packets are reaching the filer. Hope this helps. -- Adam Fox NetApp Professional Services, NC adamfox(a)netapp.com -----Original Message----- From: Uros Lampret [mailto:uros.lampret@ourspace.si] Sent: Wednesday, May 31, 2000 1:58 AM To: toasters(a)mathworks.com Subject: F740 and subnet problems Hi! I'm relatively new to this business and I have some problems. I recently installed F740 and everything works joust great. BUT I have some access problems. Filer is installed in subnet 10.0.1.XXX and everybody can see it and use it. But from subnet 10.0.2.XXX or 10.0.10.XXX the filer is not accessible. If I PING form Filer someone to 10.0.10.XXX everything is OK and also if I PING Filer from 10.0.10.XXX - OK. We use CIFS and this is single Domain. Any suggestions? Uros Lampret Our Space d.o.o. Malnarjeva 47 1000 Ljubljana EU - Slovenia

1 0

CIFS Woes
by Gunn, Billy 31 May '00

31 May '00

Is there a file similar to LMHOSTS for the filer. In attempting to implement CIFS after running an initial setup the filer is able to find a domain controller. After stopping and restarting CIFS or after some period of time it becomes unable to find a domain controller in which case the shares are unavailable. NT systems on the same subnet however are able to find a DC with the help of LMHOSTS. There are no DC's on the subnet in question however broadcasts are forwarded. I assume the filer is simply broadcasting for a DC and timing out rather rapidly. TIA, Billy Gunn Interadnet, Inc

1 0

F740 and subnet problems
by Uros Lampret 31 May '00

31 May '00

Hi! I'm relatively new to this business and I have some problems. I recently installed F740 and everything works joust great. BUT I have some access problems. Filer is installed in subnet 10.0.1.XXX and everybody can see it and use it. But from subnet 10.0.2.XXX or 10.0.10.XXX the filer is not accessible. If I PING form Filer someone to 10.0.10.XXX everything is OK and also if I PING Filer from 10.0.10.XXX - OK. We use CIFS and this is single Domain. Any suggestions? Uros Lampret Our Space d.o.o. Malnarjeva 47 1000 Ljubljana EU - Slovenia

2 1

RE: SQL Server 7 with data files on toaster?
by chris.hackett＠netapp.com 31 May '00

31 May '00

Colm, I was in charge of our Vantive database for the Sales department when we switched it over to a Filer for storage. Our internal sales group uses Vantive to track their contacts and leads. This application runs in an NT environment on a Dell Poweredge 6350 with four processors. Vantive itself runs on top of a MS SQL database. We connect all of the data files from this database out to a pair of clustered F760s. This has been in place since last December, and has been working great since. The system has only been down twice since we went to this configuration - both planned. Once to move the equipment to a different subnet, and a second time when we installed the CFO hardware. The Cluster Failover setup provides us with additional security and flexibility. Though, due to the stateful nature of CIFS, a successful failover requires some manual SQL Server intervention, we feel the overall configuration saves us time when we need to run scheduled maintenance on the Vantive Filer and provides us with availability should we experience unscheduled downtime of this Filer. As for the performance, it's great. In fact, I would say that if anything we have seen a slight performance increase due to the fact that many of the searches are repeated across many diffferent users (such as a search for all of the new leads from a particular tradeshow), in addition to all of the other normal reasons. Additionally, we have installed the SnapRestore software onto these machines and have snapshots running every hour. If something were to happen, we can recover from the snapshot taken at the top of the hour, instead of relying on the more manual process (where it has taken multiple hours to restore in the past). As you probably know, when we perform the SnapRestore, it's a simple reboot of the Filer, then we are working again. The value this provides to the Sales team is difficult to measure. If you have any other questions, please let me know. chris > > -----Original Message----- > From: Colm Buckley [mailto:colm@tuatha.org] > Sent: Friday, May 19, 2000 9:38 AM > To: toasters(a)mathworks.com > Subject: SQL Server 7 with data files on toaster? > > > > Hi - > > Another request for success or horror stories; does anyone on the list > have experience with running MS SQL Server 7 using a toaster to store > the data (as described in http://www.netapp.com/tech_library/3042.html > and http://www.netapp.com/tech_library/3044.html)? One possibility > being looked at here is to run a database from something like a Dell > PowerEdge 8450 with the data files on an F720 or F740. I'm > aware of the > advantages the toaster will bring in relation to backup, > snapshots etc, > but I'm interested in how the performance of such a setup > would compare > to, say, attaching a big LVD or Fibre RAID5 directly to the server. > > Any comments? > > Colm > > -- > Colm Buckley BA BF | NewWorld Commerce, 44 Westland Row, > Dublin 2, Ireland > colm(a)tuatha.org (personal) | colm.buckley(a)nwcgroup.com (business) > +353 87 2469146 | whois cb3765 | http://www.tuatha.org/~colm/ > No, my powers can only be used for good. > >

1 0

RE: CIFS permissions
by rob.hawley＠netapp.com 30 May '00

30 May '00

The information below would imply that the user would get by the share permissions. It would still have to also get by the file permissions. You should also confirm the permissions assigned to your user by doing a cifs sessions -s. Here are two articles that will allow you to diagnose security problems: http://now.netapp.com/NOW/knowledge/docs/olio/guides/53_troubleshooting/ts2… l http://now.netapp.com/NOW/knowledge/docs/olio/guides/53_troubleshooting/ts1… l This is a more detailed article on the security model http://now.netapp.com/NOW/knowledge/docs/olio/guides/53_troubleshooting/con… .shtml If the answer does not fall out of the above troubleshooters (or you need access to NOW), please contact customer support. I would suggest having the qtree type, the output of cifs sessions -s, and the reported ACL for the directory you are trying to write to available when you call. You should also report the version of the filer and the version of the client. They should be able to solve this very quickly. -----Original Message----- From: Gunn, Billy [mailto:bgunn@InterAdNet.com] Sent: Tuesday, May 30, 2000 2:20 PM To: 'toasters(a)mathworks.com' Subject: CIFS permissions Hi. I have setup an CIFS share called htdocs. issuing the command 'cifs shares' on the filer returns: htdocs /vol/vol0/media/htdocs INTERADNET\bgunn / Full Control I set up the privaleges so that bgunn would have full control. I can browse the share with no problems however, when attempting to write to the share I get an Access denied error. This share has been mapped to a dirve letter. When viewing the NTFS permissions for the drive it indicates rwx across th board. Is there some other location where permissions are set? Thanks, Billy Gunn Interadnet, Inc.

1 0

CIFS permissions
by Gunn, Billy 30 May '00

30 May '00

Hi. I have setup an CIFS share called htdocs. issuing the command 'cifs shares' on the filer returns: htdocs /vol/vol0/media/htdocs INTERADNET\bgunn / Full Control I set up the privaleges so that bgunn would have full control. I can browse the share with no problems however, when attempting to write to the share I get an Access denied error. This share has been mapped to a dirve letter. When viewing the NTFS permissions for the drive it indicates rwx across th board. Is there some other location where permissions are set? Thanks, Billy Gunn Interadnet, Inc.

1 0

RE: Samba Vs CIFFS
by paul.benn＠netapp.com 30 May '00

30 May '00

> We use both together... > I think that for simplicity, you should get the NetApp > license and use it... > We use Samba as an helper application for handling > soft-links, which we own a > lot... > NetApp can handle soft-links also, but of course not to > outside machines.... Here's a repost of a message posted on this subject a month ago. Stay Tuned! paul@netapp -----Original Message----- From: Muhlestein, Mark Sent: Thursday, April 27, 2000 1:21 PM To: 'Timothy Demarest'; toasters(a)mathworks.com Subject: RE: Any way for CIFS to see symlinks across qtrees/shares? That restriction exists to enforce share level ACLs. However, we do have plans to allow such symlinks securely. Unfortunately, I can't give you info on when. I'll add you to the list of folks who have asked for this. Mark Muhlestein -- mmm(a)netapp.com > -----Original Message----- > From: Timothy Demarest [mailto:demarest@arraycomm.com] > Sent: Thursday, April 27, 2000 11:31 AM > To: toasters(a)mathworks.com > Subject: Any way for CIFS to see symlinks across qtrees/shares? > > > > Is there any way to set the Filer to allow symbolic links to > traverse other > qtrees? I have a symlink on one CIFS share, which is a qtree, > that points > to a directory on another CIFS share, which is another qtree. > Obviously, > this works fine for NFS clients, but the CIFS clients just > see the symlink > as a regular file, not as a directory. > > Thanks, > Tim > >

1 0

Linux 'disk sleep' process
by Henrique Pantarotto 30 May '00

30 May '00

Hello toaster friends, please forgive me if anyone finds this message to be off-topic. I have POP3 and SMTP daemons running on a Linux server, using a F760 filer with NFS. Often, our Linux server gets a couple of stuck processes, that won't go away. It's not possible to kill them. It has "disk sleep" status, and they cannot receive kill commands. Does anyone knows how can I kill this processes? I have a couple that are over a week old. Thanks a lot! [root@blabla /]# ls /proc/13797/fd -l total 0 lrwx------ 1 root root 64 May 30 16:31 0 -> socket:[17770653] lrwx------ 1 root root 64 May 30 16:31 1 -> socket:[17770653] lrwx------ 1 root root 64 May 30 16:31 2 -> socket:[17770653] lrwx------ 1 root root 64 May 30 16:31 3 -> /var/spool/pop/.nfs0015790300007a77 [root@blabla /]# cat /proc/13797/status Name: nnpopper State: D (disk sleep) Pid: 13797 PPid: 557 Uid: 520 520 520 520 Gid: 12 12 12 12 Groups: 0 VmSize: 2176 kB VmLck: 0 kB VmRSS: 856 kB VmData: 312 kB VmStk: 20 kB VmExe: 320 kB VmLib: 1436 kB SigPnd: 0000000000000000 SigBlk: fffffffffffffeff SigIgn: 0000000000000000 SigCgt: 0000000000001001 CapInh: 00000000fffffeff CapPrm: 0000000000000000 CapEff: 0000000000000000 _______________________________________________ Henrique Pantarotto SysOp Site São Paulo Terra Networks Brasil S/A A Internet mais sua do que nunca Tel: (11) 5505-5728 r.316/238 ICQ: 6934285 henrique(a)corp.terra.com.br

1 0

RE: NT + Unix access rights
by rob.hawley＠netapp.com 30 May '00

30 May '00

The NetApp security model is that each file/directory has exactly one type of security style; Unix or NT. When accessing the file from the native security side (i.e. NT accessing a file with ACLs) then Native security rules apply. When accessing from the other side (i.e. NFS accessing a file with an ACL), we must first map the user into an NT user. Once we do that we can use normal ACL rules. Normally we just convert the UID into a user name and then look up the user name in the filer's domain ( or in a list of trusted domains). It is possible to override this default mapping using the mapping file described below. These are used when the names are different on the two sides ( e.g. Administrator on NT and root on UNIX). This is a more detailed article on the security model http://now.netapp.com/NOW/knowledge/docs/olio/guides/53_troubleshooting/con… .shtml Here are two articles that will allow you to diagnose security problems: http://now.netapp.com/NOW/knowledge/docs/olio/guides/53_troubleshooting/ts2… l http://now.netapp.com/NOW/knowledge/docs/olio/guides/53_troubleshooting/ts1… l The console commands wcc and cifs security -s can help in understanding how the mapping operates. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ 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: Bruce Sterling Woodcock [mailto:sirbruce@ix.netcom.com] Sent: Monday, May 29, 2000 5:06 PM To: Michael van Elst Cc: toasters(a)mathworks.com Subject: Re: NT + Unix access rights ----- Original Message ----- From: "Michael van Elst" <mlelstv(a)xlink.net> To: "Bruce Sterling Woodcock" <sirbruce(a)ix.netcom.com> Cc: "Michael van Elst" <mlelstv(a)xlink.net>; <toasters(a)mathworks.com> Sent: Monday, May 29, 2000 4:30 PM Subject: Re: NT + Unix access rights > On Mon, May 29, 2000 at 10:14:10AM -0700, Bruce Sterling Woodcock wrote: > > > The usermap maps the UNIX 'root' account to the NT 'Administrator' > > > account. The NT 'Administrator' account is mapped to an unprivileged > > > UNIX account different from the file owner. > > > > Can someone explain this? I don't follow. > > The software release 5.3 has the feature to map Accounts independently > for the UNIX side and the NT side. I.e. the usermap file has the lines: > > Administrator <= root > Administrator => ntadmin > > where ntadmin is an unprivileged account and root is the regular > privileged account. Is the mapping only for access, or only for ownership? I understand that if root creates a file, and you look at it from NT, it will be owned by Administrator (with the mapping given above). But when Administrator tries to access it, he'll be mapped to ntadmin, which doesn't have access?? Bruce

1 0

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 May 2000