toasters January 2001

toasters@lists.teaparty.net

135 participants
157 discussions

RE: Mark Conley's comments on used NetApp systems
by Clawson, Simon 19 Jan '01

19 Jan '01

While looking at the purchase of a new system last year, I asked about trade-ins on old equipment. NetApps can do this it seems. My question would be - "What happens to all that old hardware?" Judging by the trade in values I would rather follow this course of action then sell it on privatley. On the point of selling on hardware such as disks, surely you are getting into a legal minefield here Scott. What happens to equipment used to store data suject to non-disclosure agreements? How do you guarentee complete data scrubbing? I think I would feel a little uncomfotable with my system (a development machine) finding its way out onto the open market. Likewise I would be a bit cautious about purchasing equipment that may have been used in a similar role.. Simon -----Original Message----- From: Pete Ehlke [mailto:pde@ehlke.net] Sent: 18 January 2001 17:21 To: ScottUCE(a)aol.com Cc: toasters(a)mathworks.com Subject: Re: Mark Conley's comments on used NetApp systems ScottUCE(a)aol.com (ScottUCE(a)aol.com) said, on [010118 09:11]: > downturns, forcing them to put their systems on the market. If Network > Appliance were to interfere with the transfer of their systems' NFS and CIFS > licenses, the value of their F760 heads would be reduced to that of spare > parts kits. > And your profits would be affected in like measure. > Unless and until Network Appliance clarifies its policy on the re-sale of its > systems, NetApp's end-user and/or leasing company customers -- before they > buy their next box -- should request a modification of their software license > agreements so as to limit Network Appliance's discretion to forbid software > license transfer, thus helping to safeguard the value of their investments in > their NetApp systems. > Have a little honesty, here, Scott. This isn't about the value of my investment in my filers, it's about your ability to profit as a broker of used equipment. You're asking us, the netapp user community, to pressure netapp to guarantee your business model. That's not my job, man. And anyone- *anyone*- who spends the kind of mone one spends to get a filer without having vetted the sales & licence agreements has fools for both lawyers and purchasing managers. -Pete

1 0

RE: solaris 2.6 nfs client tuning?
by Venier, Federico 19 Jan '01

19 Jan '01

See Sun's bug id 4114271,4267423, and 4271267 (not sure!) =============================================================== Federico VENIER System Engineer Phone : +39 039 6858483 Network Appliance Srl Fax : +39 039 6858485 Centro Direzionale Torri Bianche Mob. : +39 0348 4719025 Palazzo Larice mail : fvenier(a)netapp.com 20059 Vimercate (MI) - Italy http://www.netapp.com =============================================================== -----Original Message----- From: Venier, Federico Sent: venerdì 19 gennaio 2001 16:53 To: Toal, Dave; 'toasters(a)mathworks.com' Subject: RE: solaris 2.6 nfs client tuning? I have seen this before. It has something to do with the mmap routine called by the cp program in Solaris 2.6. I believe that it is fixed in Solaris 2.8 build 33. Using a dd everyting goes OK. Maybe it is also possible to "tar" the directory. CIAO =============================================================== Federico VENIER System Engineer Phone : +39 039 6858483 Network Appliance Srl Fax : +39 039 6858485 Centro Direzionale Torri Bianche Mob. : +39 0348 4719025 Palazzo Larice mail : fvenier(a)netapp.com 20059 Vimercate (MI) - Italy http://www.netapp.com =============================================================== -----Original Message----- From: Toal, Dave [mailto:dave.toal@t-t.com] Sent: lunedì 15 gennaio 2001 21:00 To: 'toasters(a)mathworks.com' Cc: Toal, Dave Subject: solaris 2.6 nfs client tuning? Hey, all. This lots-of-nfs-mounts topic inspires me to ask yet another sanity-check question: Currently I'm fixing a process which moves lots of data from one vol to another. Can't simply vol copy because there are things I can't over-write on the destination. This data is in about 40 directories, with maybe 2G in each. The method I'm using is to set up many pairs of mounts, one for each directory, all from the same two vols. This is because the nfs client, a sun 450 running solaris 2.6, shows huge lag for ls, cp, whatever, in a mounted directory where a cp is already running. iostat shows the nfsd devices at 100% busy -- for destination and source -- when a cp runs between a mount-point pair. So: filer1:/vol/A/d1 /mnt/A_01 filer2:/vol/B/d1 /mnt/B_01 filer1:/vol/A/d2 /mnt/A_02 filer2:/vol/B/d2 /mnt/B_02 filer1:/vol/A/d3 /mnt/A_03 filer2:/vol/B/d3 /mnt/B_03 ad nauseum... and if I cp /mnt/A_01/fatfile to /mnt/B_01 then there's no i/o lag whatsoever in /mnt/A_02. These filers are 760's, by the way. Then I discovered a serious "sweet spot" at a very low number. "max" is the number of simultaneous copies between mount point pairs. "k/sec" are my visual estimates of _each_ cp rate, from watching iostat for about a minute; rates jump around by +- 100 k/sec. Column on the right is total throughput for all cp. max=3 ~ 2300 k/sec |= 6900 max=4 ~ 1800 k/sec |= 7200 max=5 ~ 1500 k/sec |= 7500 max=6 ~ 1200 k/sec |= 7200 max=8 ~ 800 k/sec |= 6400 max=9 ~ 800 k/sec |= 7200 max=10 ~ 600 k/sec |= 6000 I've seen much higher data rates from the 760's. So I'm thinking this means I need to learn nfs client tuning for solaris. Yes? Dave -- dave toal systems optimist Thomson & Thomson N. Quincy, MA -----Original Message----- From: Jeffrey Krueger To: Rainchik, Aleksandr (MED, Non GE) Cc: 'Jeffrey Krueger '; 'toasters(a)mathworks.com ' Sent: 1/15/01 1:37 PM Subject: Re: /home layout with many filers and NIS automount On Sat, Jan 13, 2001 at 03:16:20PM -0600, Rainchik, Aleksandr (MED, Non GE) wrote: > > There is another thing against > > #auto_home NIS map > > user1 filer2:/vol/vol1/& > design. We have a lot of development servers. So any time you > add/delete/modify a single user you should go trough _all_ the > NIS/automount clients and run "automount" to let automountd know > that passwd map has been just updated. Am I wrong again? This is correct, but I simple cron job which runs periodically on all NIS clients should make short work of this task. =) -- Jeff

1 0

Problem reading files from Solaris 8
by Rune Bakken 19 Jan '01

19 Jan '01

After resofting one of my Solaris boxen to Solaris 8, I am unable to read some of the files in volumes mounted from a F720 running 5.3.6R2 I get error messages like this doing an ls. # ls ls: c5200-is-l.120-8.0.2.T: Value too large for defined data type ls: c7200-is-mz.121-4.bin: Value too large for defined data type ls: c7200-p-mz.121-4.bin: Value too large for defined data type The files are not really large, somewhere in the 8-10MByte range and is easily accessed from Solaris 2.6, just not from Solaris 8 systems. The systems in question is using the following Solaris version: # uname -a SunOS lft.online.no 5.8 Generic_108528-04 sun4u sparc #mount /local/net on nfs1-net.oke.nextra.no:/vol/vol0/net remote/read/write/setuid/proto=udp/vers=3/bg/intr/dev=3980003 on Thu Jan 18 12:23:42 2001 nfs1> version NetApp Release 5.3.6R2: Sat Aug 5 09:40:44 PDT 2000 I have searched the archives for this list, as well as now.netapp.com,sunsolve.sun.com and docs.sun.com as I suspect this to be more of a Sun Solaris problem than a NetApp Does someone have a solution/workaround for this problem? >>>>>>>>.rune -- Rune Bakken "I feel sorry for people who don't drink. System Administrator When they wake up in the morning, that's as Nextra, good as they're going to feel all day." - Telenor Company - Frank Sinatra

1 0

RE: solaris 2.6 nfs client tuning?
by Venier, Federico 19 Jan '01

19 Jan '01

I have seen this before. It has something to do with the mmap routine called by the cp program in Solaris 2.6. I believe that it is fixed in Solaris 2.8 build 33. Using a dd everyting goes OK. Maybe it is also possible to "tar" the directory. CIAO =============================================================== Federico VENIER System Engineer Phone : +39 039 6858483 Network Appliance Srl Fax : +39 039 6858485 Centro Direzionale Torri Bianche Mob. : +39 0348 4719025 Palazzo Larice mail : fvenier(a)netapp.com 20059 Vimercate (MI) - Italy http://www.netapp.com =============================================================== -----Original Message----- From: Toal, Dave [mailto:dave.toal@t-t.com] Sent: lunedì 15 gennaio 2001 21:00 To: 'toasters(a)mathworks.com' Cc: Toal, Dave Subject: solaris 2.6 nfs client tuning? Hey, all. This lots-of-nfs-mounts topic inspires me to ask yet another sanity-check question: Currently I'm fixing a process which moves lots of data from one vol to another. Can't simply vol copy because there are things I can't over-write on the destination. This data is in about 40 directories, with maybe 2G in each. The method I'm using is to set up many pairs of mounts, one for each directory, all from the same two vols. This is because the nfs client, a sun 450 running solaris 2.6, shows huge lag for ls, cp, whatever, in a mounted directory where a cp is already running. iostat shows the nfsd devices at 100% busy -- for destination and source -- when a cp runs between a mount-point pair. So: filer1:/vol/A/d1 /mnt/A_01 filer2:/vol/B/d1 /mnt/B_01 filer1:/vol/A/d2 /mnt/A_02 filer2:/vol/B/d2 /mnt/B_02 filer1:/vol/A/d3 /mnt/A_03 filer2:/vol/B/d3 /mnt/B_03 ad nauseum... and if I cp /mnt/A_01/fatfile to /mnt/B_01 then there's no i/o lag whatsoever in /mnt/A_02. These filers are 760's, by the way. Then I discovered a serious "sweet spot" at a very low number. "max" is the number of simultaneous copies between mount point pairs. "k/sec" are my visual estimates of _each_ cp rate, from watching iostat for about a minute; rates jump around by +- 100 k/sec. Column on the right is total throughput for all cp. max=3 ~ 2300 k/sec |= 6900 max=4 ~ 1800 k/sec |= 7200 max=5 ~ 1500 k/sec |= 7500 max=6 ~ 1200 k/sec |= 7200 max=8 ~ 800 k/sec |= 6400 max=9 ~ 800 k/sec |= 7200 max=10 ~ 600 k/sec |= 6000 I've seen much higher data rates from the 760's. So I'm thinking this means I need to learn nfs client tuning for solaris. Yes? Dave -- dave toal systems optimist Thomson & Thomson N. Quincy, MA -----Original Message----- From: Jeffrey Krueger To: Rainchik, Aleksandr (MED, Non GE) Cc: 'Jeffrey Krueger '; 'toasters(a)mathworks.com ' Sent: 1/15/01 1:37 PM Subject: Re: /home layout with many filers and NIS automount On Sat, Jan 13, 2001 at 03:16:20PM -0600, Rainchik, Aleksandr (MED, Non GE) wrote: > > There is another thing against > > #auto_home NIS map > > user1 filer2:/vol/vol1/& > design. We have a lot of development servers. So any time you > add/delete/modify a single user you should go trough _all_ the > NIS/automount clients and run "automount" to let automountd know > that passwd map has been just updated. Am I wrong again? This is correct, but I simple cron job which runs periodically on all NIS clients should make short work of this task. =) -- Jeff

1 0

RE: Mark Conley's comments on used NetApp systems
by ScottUCE＠aol.com 19 Jan '01

19 Jan '01

I am responding to a posting last week from Mark Conley, a Network Appliance salesman from Northern California, regarding used NetApp systems. Mark wrote "FYI on the used equipment, none of the software licenses on Netapp equipment are transferable. Which means you are paying for hardware only!" Mark Conley does not make policy for Network Appliance. In fact, Union Computer has been involved in the sale or brokering of numerous NetApp systems and parts, and, in every case, Network Appliance has been a pleasure to work with; they have accepted the equipment for maintenance service and have, where applicable, allowed software licenses to transfer without charge. The market for used NetApp gear is growing, and Network Appliance should enunciate its policy with respect to the re-sale of its used systems; in particular, their boilerplate software license agreement clearly gives Network Appliance the discretion to allow or forbid the seller's transfer of software licenses to buyers of used equipment. Without doubt, it is in the clear interest of Network Appliance's customers that they be able to re-sell their systems without harassment. We are currently working with several NetApp users in the midst of severe business downturns, forcing them to put their systems on the market. If Network Appliance were to interfere with the transfer of their systems' NFS and CIFS licenses, the value of their F760 heads would be reduced to that of spare parts kits. Unless and until Network Appliance clarifies its policy on the re-sale of its systems, NetApp's end-user and/or leasing company customers -- before they buy their next box -- should request a modification of their software license agreements so as to limit Network Appliance's discretion to forbid software license transfer, thus helping to safeguard the value of their investments in their NetApp systems. Scott Fischmann Union Computer Exchange, Inc. 6233 Idylwood Lane Minneapolis, MN 55436 Phone: 952 935 7282 www.unioncomputer.com

3 2

RE: Backups of both NFS and CIFS Directories
by Benn, Paul 18 Jan '01

18 Jan '01

Glenn, To retain both permission styles you'll need to backup using the local dump command, an NDMP enabled backup application or backup over CIFS. Backing up over NFS will not retain NTFS file permissions or DOS attributes. If you back up over CIFS, not only are the UNIX and NT file permissions retained but we also backup the DOS file attributes and track an archive bit for files with UNIX-style permissions. If backing up over CIFS is your plan, have a look at our white paper on this subject: http://www.netapp.com/tech_library/3052.html Regards, Paul Benn Network Appliance -----Original Message----- From: Glenn Case - Informix Software [mailto:glennc@informix.com] Sent: Thursday, January 18, 2001 2:57 PM To: toasters(a)mathworks.com Subject: Backups of both NFS and CIFS Directories I have a new netapp that I am in the process of trying to set up It will be supporting both NFS and CIFS Clients. I was wondering if anyone knew how Backing up the Permissions for the Two different permissions styles works with the different backup styles ? I am concerned that If I back the machine up "Wrong" we would lose the permissions of CIFS users files. For example If I back the machine up with tar from a UNIX machine I know the permissions will be lost. If I back it up with the built in backup command and then restore with solaris ufsrestore It will also lose the CIFS permissins. So what do I need to do to make sure that the CIFS permissions are saved ? If this is a FAQ question or I just need to RTFM Please just refer me to the appropreate document. (With URL if avalable ) Thanks in advance Glenn

1 0

Backups of both NFS and CIFS Directories
by Glenn Case - Informix Software 18 Jan '01

18 Jan '01

I have a new netapp that I am in the process of trying to set up It will be supporting both NFS and CIFS Clients. I was wondering if anyone knew how Backing up the Permissions for the Two different permissions styles works with the different backup styles ? I am concerned that If I back the machine up "Wrong" we would lose the permissions of CIFS users files. For example If I back the machine up with tar from a UNIX machine I know the permissions will be lost. If I back it up with the built in backup command and then restore with solaris ufsrestore It will also lose the CIFS permissins. So what do I need to do to make sure that the CIFS permissions are saved ? If this is a FAQ question or I just need to RTFM Please just refer me to the appropreate document. (With URL if avalable ) Thanks in advance Glenn

1 0

RE: FW: Multicast support in ONTAP?
by Rainchik, Aleksandr (MED, Non GE) 18 Jan '01

18 Jan '01

MU3 for Solaris 7? There is only MU1 available for Solaris 8 at this time, at least at sunsolve.sun.com. -----Original Message----- From: Chris Thompson [mailto:cet1@cus.cam.ac.uk] Sent: Wednesday, January 17, 2001 6:29 PM To: Rainchik, Aleksandr (MED, Non GE) Cc: toasters(a)mathworks.com Subject: Re: FW: Multicast support in ONTAP? Aleksandr.Rainchik(a)med.ge.com (Rainchik Aleksandr) writes [...] > Can I ask you about that "Solaris's IP network multipathing > failover and fallback" you've mentioned on toasters mailing > list: > > Is is something that Solaris 8 has right out of box? Yes, if you use MU3 or later. Or you can apply a raft of patches to an earlier version (109898-01 109742-02 109279-05 109900-01 109472-03 109740-02 109902-01 109904-01 109906-01); but this won't get the man pages updated (cue for a rant about documentation maintenance, but this isn't the place for it). Chris Thompson University of Cambridge Computing Service, Email: cet1(a)ucs.cam.ac.uk New Museums Site, Cambridge CB2 3QG, Phone: +44 1223 334715 United Kingdom.

2 1

Re: Mark Conley's comments on used NetApp systems
by mds＠gbnet.net 18 Jan '01

18 Jan '01

I'd just like to pitch in and say that a healthy used NetApp market would be a fine thing indeed for those of us who would like to buy the equipment but can't normally afford it. If the software licenses transferred, NetApp would still have made their main money from the original sale. Support, however, *should* be a different ball-game, and people shouldn't be able to just transfer the client-NetApp relationship with the hardware automatically and purchasers of 2nd-hand hardware shouldn't expect to get support from NetApp without paying for it. NetApp could, of course, offer support tiers, allowing for software updates separate from hardware RMA, separate from SE on-site attendance. This would allow the budget-limited and the 2nd-hand market to benefit and grow, while not missing out on the support bucks that people would be willing to spend with them. Support can be a viable revenue stream and not just something that you do to keep selling hardware. Just look at the Enhanced Margin Company - they get you coming and going! I've observed before (but possibly not here) that products in NetApp's line get EOL'd rather more aggressively than other maufacturers products (Sun, IBM, HP, even SGI all sell/support old models longer). Having a viable re-sale market could also take the sting out of that policy. I guess it all comes down to whether it could be seen to be made to benefit NetApp's bottom-line and medium-long term plans or not. I'd like to think it could be. -- -Mark ... an Englishman in London ...

1 0

Add more disks and upgrade to 6.0 - which first?
by Chris Thompson 18 Jan '01

18 Jan '01

There are two things I want to do within the next three months or so, neither of them urgent: 1. Add 2 x 18GB discs (currently spare) to a volume that currently has 6 x 18 GB data discs. 2. Upgrade the F740 from ONTAP 5.3.7R? to 6.0.1R?. Is there any advantage to be gained by doing these in any particular order? Chris Thompson University of Cambridge Computing Service, Email: cet1(a)ucs.cam.ac.uk New Museums Site, Cambridge CB2 3QG, Phone: +44 1223 334715 United Kingdom.

2 1

← Newer
1
...
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
...
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 January 2001