toasters October 2001

toasters@lists.teaparty.net

136 participants
184 discussions

Re: file access on a particular file on cifs side seems to hang Windo wsExplorer
by Don.Hickey＠alcatel.com 29 Oct '01

29 Oct '01

I had the same problem. It turned out to be a bug in ontap. I noticed that disabling the virus scanner on my pc fixed it. I reported the problem to netapp and its fixed in 6.1.1R2 .... my suggestion is to upgrade. Don kim(a)dotcast.com Sent by: owner-toasters(a)mathworks.com 2001-10-26 06:30 PM To: toasters(a)mathworks.com cc: Subject: file access on a particular file on cifs side seems to hang Windo ws Explorer Hi, I have this weird issue with file access to a particular file on our filer. When you click on the file it hangs the Windows Explorer for a good few minutes before it returns control. If I attempt to copy the MS Word file (1.7mb) it takes an extremely long time (up to 5 minutes). Other files of the same size or larger copy fine from Filer to Windows 2000 Server or Professional. From NFS the same file copies fine. If I look at the same file from the snapshot directories in Windows, file access time is fine. Here's what we have: F760 with CIFS and NFS licenses. NetApp Release 6.0.1R3 oplocks globally disabled per netapp support mixed qtrees in Windows 2000 domain and NIS environment Windows 2000 Server/Professional (SP2) as clients Below is a cifs session of the host that has this file open. filer> cifs sessions HOST users shares/files open HOST (DOMAIN\username - username) public R&W-denyN - \Share\Spring_2001_Demonstration\Demonstration - HW SW Interface Description.doc I'm not sure what the "denyN" in "R&W-denyN" means. I'm curious if anyone's run across this before. I have 2 other NetApps in similar environments and haven't seen this condition on either yet. Any help is greatly appreciated. Thanks, -Kim P. Lam kim(a)dotcast.com

1 0

wafl.maxdirsize max
by Roman.Ustoyev＠chase.com 29 Oct '01

29 Oct '01

What is the maximum value for wafl.maxdirsize option? The default is 10M but we might need to increase it to 40M.

1 0

RE: Used gear?
by Ziller, Frank 29 Oct '01

29 Oct '01

They have to "re-certify" the equipment before they support it...can be costly. -----Original Message----- From: Nick Steel. (lists) [mailto:mrlist@noid.org] Sent: Monday, October 29, 2001 4:25 AM To: toasters(a)mathworks.com Subject: Used gear? Does Netapp have any problems providing hardware support for used equipment? I'm looking at adding some additional space to our F840's and I'd like to shop the used market if the price break is worth it and the support is there from Netapp. Also, does anyone have a vendor they'd recommend for used Netapp gear? Thanks! - Nick

1 0

file access on a particular file on cifs side seems to hang Windo ws Explorer
by kim＠dotcast.com 29 Oct '01

29 Oct '01

Hi, I have this weird issue with file access to a particular file on our filer. When you click on the file it hangs the Windows Explorer for a good few minutes before it returns control. If I attempt to copy the MS Word file (1.7mb) it takes an extremely long time (up to 5 minutes). Other files of the same size or larger copy fine from Filer to Windows 2000 Server or Professional. From NFS the same file copies fine. If I look at the same file from the snapshot directories in Windows, file access time is fine. Here's what we have: F760 with CIFS and NFS licenses. NetApp Release 6.0.1R3 oplocks globally disabled per netapp support mixed qtrees in Windows 2000 domain and NIS environment Windows 2000 Server/Professional (SP2) as clients Below is a cifs session of the host that has this file open. filer> cifs sessions HOST users shares/files open HOST (DOMAIN\username - username) public R&W-denyN - \Share\Spring_2001_Demonstration\Demonstration - HW SW Interface Description.doc I'm not sure what the "denyN" in "R&W-denyN" means. I'm curious if anyone's run across this before. I have 2 other NetApps in similar environments and haven't seen this condition on either yet. Any help is greatly appreciated. Thanks, -Kim P. Lam kim(a)dotcast.com

2 1

RE: NetApp and Samba anyone ?
by Taylor, Bryant 29 Oct '01

29 Oct '01

Ya that will work without a hitch.... atleast I'm using it that way with an 840 and I haven't see any problems... More secure if you ask me.... -B -----Original Message----- From: Frank Bonnet [mailto:bonnetf@bart.esiee.fr] Sent: Monday, October 29, 2001 2:05 AM To: toasters(a)mathworks.com Subject: NetApp and Samba anyone ? Hi We actually use a F85 filer as NFS server only but we are palnnig to use it also as a CIFS server for our PCs , I wonder if I could safely use a Samba server as a domain controller in combination with the filer as a user data server ? Any infos/experiences/links welcome Thanks a lot. -- Frank Bonnet

1 0

NetApp and Samba anyone ?
by Frank Bonnet 29 Oct '01

29 Oct '01

Hi We actually use a F85 filer as NFS server only but we are palnnig to use it also as a CIFS server for our PCs , I wonder if I could safely use a Samba server as a domain controller in combination with the filer as a user data server ? Any infos/experiences/links welcome Thanks a lot. -- Frank Bonnet

2 1

Very high CIFS ops
by Uros Lampret 29 Oct '01

29 Oct '01

Hi! Can anybody explain this? I have very high number of CIFS ops/sec but very low trafic. This client uses 10Mbit Ethernet interface. CPU NFS CIFS HTTP Net kB/s Disk kB/s Tape kB/s Cache in out read write read write age 33% 0 1266 0 149 175 48 0 0 0 5 32% 0 1264 0 148 152 0 0 0 0 5 32% 0 1267 0 148 152 0 0 0 0 5 32% 0 1268 0 149 152 0 0 0 0 5 32% 0 1263 0 148 154 0 0 0 0 5 33% 0 1264 0 148 154 0 0 0 0 5 33% 0 1269 0 149 155 0 0 0 0 5 31% 0 1217 0 143 149 0 0 0 0 5 30% 0 1135 0 133 142 0 0 0 0 5 32% 0 1152 0 135 151 84 280 0 0 5 31% 0 1196 0 140 151 0 0 0 0 5 32% 0 1230 0 144 149 0 0 0 0 5 32% 0 1253 0 147 151 0 0 0 0 5 32% 0 1266 0 148 152 0 0 0 0 5 CPU NFS CIFS HTTP Net kB/s Disk kB/s Tape kB/s Cache in out read write read write age 33% 0 1267 0 149 154 0 0 0 0 5 33% 0 1259 0 182 154 0 0 0 0 5 33% 0 1265 0 148 152 0 0 0 0 5 33% 0 1271 0 149 153 0 0 0 0 5 33% 0 1271 0 149 153 0 0 0 0 5 33% 0 1274 0 166 155 0 0 0 0 5 35% 0 1238 0 145 151 100 380 0 0 5 33% 0 1270 0 149 153 0 0 0 0 5 33% 0 1266 0 151 152 0 0 0 0 5 Regards, Uros

1 0

Used gear?
by Nick Steel. (lists) 29 Oct '01

29 Oct '01

Does Netapp have any problems providing hardware support for used equipment? I'm looking at adding some additional space to our F840's and I'd like to shop the used market if the price break is worth it and the support is there from Netapp. Also, does anyone have a vendor they'd recommend for used Netapp gear? Thanks! - Nick

1 0

Virus Alert
by postmaster＠mathworks.com 27 Oct '01

27 Oct '01

Have detected a virus (TROJ_SIRCAM.A) in your mail traffic on 10/27/2001 01:13:01 with an action quarantined.

1 0

Re: F720 CPU Maxing out
by Michael Rogan 27 Oct '01

27 Oct '01

We found that symlinks were causing 60% of the CPU load on our F740. -------------------------- Sent from my BlackBerry Wireless Handheld (www.BlackBerry.net) -----Original Message----- From: Jean-Christophe Smith <jsmith(a)vitalstream.com> To: toasters(a)mathworks.com <toasters(a)mathworks.com> CC: jsmith(a)publichost.com <jsmith(a)publichost.com> Sent: Thu Oct 25 13:51:06 2001 Subject: F720 CPU Maxing out We have a NetApp F720 doing both NFS and CIFS using mixed mode security. It has 256 megs of ram. During parts of the day the CPU and RAM spike to %100 utilization. We do a lot of sendmail, windows media, apache and IIS traffic over the filer. I have two questions: 1. Is there a way we can add more ram, perhaps 512 or a gig? The docs say we are maxxed out with 256. 2. Is it possible that the extra cpu overhead that provides the NFS/CIFS user mapping is causing much of the ram and cpu starvation? Perhaps going to a simpler security model would offload a lot of CPU cycles. Any suggestions would be appreciated.. Jean-Christophe Smith VitalStream jsmith(a)vitalstream.com

4 5

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 October 2001