toasters March 2001

toasters@lists.teaparty.net

113 participants
149 discussions

Re: Strange mounting problem
by Paul Wiltsey 05 Mar '01

05 Mar '01

what can you verify through rpcinfo command? what can you verify with showmount? ----- Original Message ----- From: "Stephen C. Woods" <scw(a)seas.ucla.edu> Date: Monday, March 5, 2001 2:03 pm Subject: Strange mounting problem > We have a Dell Linux 7.0 system that can't mount from a 740 > (5.3.4R2).However it can mount from a 540 (5.1.2R3), and also from > a AIX (4.2) and > Sun (2.6) machine with no problems. Packet sniffer indicates that > packets are sent to the filer but never return. > > Does anybody reconize these symptoms? > > > ----- > Stephen C. Woods; UCLA SEASnet; 2567 Boelter hall; LA CA 90095; > (310)-825-8614 > Unless otherwise noted these statements are my own, Not those of > the > University of California. Internet > mail:scw@seas.ucla.edu

1 0

Strange mounting problem
by Stephen C. Woods 05 Mar '01

05 Mar '01

We have a Dell Linux 7.0 system that can't mount from a 740 (5.3.4R2). However it can mount from a 540 (5.1.2R3), and also from a AIX (4.2) and Sun (2.6) machine with no problems. Packet sniffer indicates that packets are sent to the filer but never return. Does anybody reconize these symptoms? ----- Stephen C. Woods; UCLA SEASnet; 2567 Boelter hall; LA CA 90095; (310)-825-8614 Unless otherwise noted these statements are my own, Not those of the University of California. Internet mail:scw@seas.ucla.edu

1 0

RE: ait2 jukeboxes
by Sundquist, Richard 03 Mar '01

03 Mar '01

Neil - I am one month into a Qualstar 4440 with 2 AIT2 drives. So far, no problems :) Using Veritas NetBackup with one AIT2 drive direct attached to the NetApp. The other drive is connected to a Ultra10 and does the rest of the network. The Qualstar is rack mounted, though the footprint is not small. - Rich -----Original Message----- From: Michael Carter [mailto:michael@worksta.com] Sent: Friday, March 02, 2001 4:49 PM To: 'toasters' Subject: RE: ait2 jukeboxes Neil, Qualstar and Overland Data are pretty good ones. Overland you can add on in a small rack area. Mike -----Original Message----- From: owner-toasters(a)mathworks.com [mailto:owner-toasters@mathworks.com]On Behalf Of neil lehrer Sent: Friday, March 02, 2001 6:58 PM To: toasters Subject: ait2 jukeboxes i am testing spectralogic now. does anyone have another ait2 jukebox mfg they like? -- regards

1 0

ait2 jukeboxes
by neil lehrer 03 Mar '01

03 Mar '01

i am testing spectralogic now. does anyone have another ait2 jukebox mfg they like? -- regards

2 1

Filer and redundant mail-solution
by SSV Steven Sinnaeve 02 Mar '01

02 Mar '01

Hi, Is anybody using the Netapp Filer with a redundant mail solution (pop/webbased e-mail). If so, can you tell me what kind of OS and software you are using. I'm looking for a Linux based solution that supports multiple domains. tnx! Steven Sinnaeve Technical Support Customer Care Steven Sinnaeve Technical Support Customer Care ITinera Services - A VersaTel Company Dam 71 B-8500 Kortrijk Belgium T. +32 (0)56 269 100 M. +32 (0)496 57 39 32 F. +32 (0)56 269 109 E. steven.sinnaeve(a)ITinera.net www.versatel.be www.ITinera.be Legal statement: This message and any attachment are confidential and may be privileged or otherwise protected from disclosure. If you are not the intended recipient, please telephone or email the sender and delete this message and any attachment from your system. If you are not the intended recipient you must not copy this message or attachment or disclose the contents to any other person and destroy all copies of the original message and attachment.

2 1

BakBone 6.03 has command line functions as well as the BEST NetApp and NDMP support
by Dale Sykes 02 Mar '01

02 Mar '01

This email was forwarded to me by an acquaintance, and I would like to give some feedback. First of all, I work for BakBone as the Northwest Regional Manager, and have been familiar with the NetVault product since 1995, when AT&T still owned the product. My last company, Andataco, was the original reseller of the product then, and since, the product has been acquired by BakBone, and world headquarters have been moved to San Diego, with other engineering and support facilities in Lanham, MD, England, and Japan. 6.03 gives you the command line interface capabilities that John Ross referred to. In 6.01, they were not available. With the product as modular as it is, we received numerous request for command line, and turned out the functionality within months. NDMP and NetApp support are also a feature set of 6.03, and the performance is quite spectacular there as well, as John found with the Exabyte M2 drives. We are seeing as much as 19MB/sec with a STK 9840 directly attached to a NetApp. It takes just minutes to hook up a NetApp box, and similar amount of time and effort to use Netvault to back up a SAN. We can dynamically shares drives between a NetApp and any other server or Client, UNIX, NT, or LINUX as well More information is available at www.bakbone.com, or anyone can call me at 503-892-3933. I hope this is of value to you. Thanks for your time, Dale Sykes Northwest Regional Manager BakBone >>From: John Ross >>Sent: Wednesday, February 28, 2001 6:36 PM >>To: Lichteveld, Edwin >>Cc: 'toasters(a)mathworks.com' >>Subject: Re: Dead or alive : References wanted for Netvault required >> >> >>We're just in the process of rolling out Netvault, so I don't have >>extensive experience with it but overall I like a lot. >> >>We're running version 6.0.1 here, and have to admit, the interface sucks. >>It's copied from the NT version, and has a very NT way of doing things. >>I'm sure if that's what your used to, then it's O.K, but for unix people, >>it can get frusterating. There is no command line interface, so if you >>want to setup lost of different backup jobs, then plan on putting a lot of >>miles on your mouse. I have similar complaints about logging - It logs in >>an 'event manager' style. Little support for logs outside of the GUI. I >>have ben told however that command line support is planed, and that 6.1 in >>fact has some of it alredy. >> >>Despite the interface, NetVault does seem to work well. It's fairly >>intuitive (just slow to setup) so learing it is fairly simple. Once it's >>setup, it seems to work quite well, and is as fast as anything else we've >>tried. (Although we havn't tried using NDMP yet) >> >>One feature it has that absolutely kicks (IMHO) is it's virtual library. >>We have our backup host connected to a whack of local disk. On the disks >>we have a virtual library. As fas as netvault is concerned, it looks, and >>acts just like a real tape library, except that its on disk, so we don't >>have the standard latency you have with tapes. Once the backup is on the >>local drives, Netvault automaticly copys everything over to tape. Right >>now we're using MammothII tapes, and can get all 4 drives going at >>~15MB/sec each (Whee!!!) What that means is that if you want to expand >>your backup cluster, all you need to do is create a few more virtual >>drives. No need to have more then a couple real tape drives since they're >>no longer the bottle necks. >> >>So far, the only problems I've had with NetVault is it's interface, but >>other then that, I really don't have anything bad to say about it. Once >>you get it setup it seems to run as advertized. >> >>On Tue, 27 Feb 2001, Lichteveld, Edwin wrote: >> >>> Hello list, >>> >>> As the last release of NetVault supports NDMP in order >>> to backup a Network Appliance filer, I am very much >>> interested in references wrt this product. Who is willing >>> to share experiences and their configurations? >>> >>> regards, >>> >>> Edwin >>> >> >>-- >>John Ross >>Systems Administrator >>AT&T Canada >> >>Tact, n.: >> The unsaid part of what you're thinking. >> >

1 0

Fwd: Veritas Netbackup 3.4 for Solaris & Breecehill Q6.210 DLT Library]]
by nachshon yeshurun 01 Mar '01

01 Mar '01

Hello Douglas I work with Veritas Netbackup 3.4 and STK 9714 libraries with DLT 7000 drives. I am not sure your problem originates from the Breecehill library. I experience very similar problems to what you described, so I will write down freely some points I can think of. 1. Did the problems start when you upgraded to 3.4 , or have you experienced such problems prior to using 3.4 as well ? 2. Drives are brought down if they experience 3 i/o errors within 12 hours. Check the following places to see if this occur 1. Media log report ( invoke it from xbpadm->reports ) 2. /usr/openv/netbackup/logs/bptm/log.<date> 3. /usr/openv/netbackup/logs/bpbrm/log.<date> 4. /var/adm/messages In all these log files grep for DOWN or Down - some lines before or after it will describe the reason for bringing the drives down 3. If you change passowrd on the netapps you have to report this change to Veritas NetBackup using /usr/openv/volmgr/bin/set_ndmp_attr command. If you fail to do it the drives go down. Hope this helps Please let me know. Best Regards Nachshon Yeshurun Motorola Semiconductor > > > mati > ---------------------------------------------------------------- > > Subj > ct: Veritas Netbackup 3.4 for Solaris & Breecehill Q6.210 DLT Library > Date: Tue, 27 Feb 2001 09:44:47 MST > From: Douglas Ritschel <Douglas.Ritschel(a)tddny.fujitsu.com> > To: "toasters(a)mathworks.com" <toasters(a)mathworks.com> > > Does anyone have experience with Veritas Netbackup 3.4 for Solaris and > a > Breecehill Q6.210 DLT Library? > > We have a Breecehill Q6.210 with 6 Quantum DLT 7000 drives in it. The > first two drives are daisy chained to a NetApp 740. The second two are > daisy chained to the robot, which is connected to a Sun 450, running > Solaris 2.6. The third pair of drives are daisy chained to a NetApp > 760. > > The problem, is that when I come in every Monday morning, after the > our > Full backups are scheduled to run, 4 of the 6 drives are reported as > being down in Veritas Device Monitor. The 4 drives that are down are > not > the same every week. To get the backups going again, I have to > shutdown > the Veritas daemons, reboot the Library, reinventory the Library and > Verites, then restart the backups that did not complete. > > The following day, after some of the backups completed, some of the > drives are down again, and I have to repeat the process. >

1 0

Dead or alive : References wanted for Netvault required
by Lichteveld, Edwin 01 Mar '01

01 Mar '01

Hello list, As the last release of NetVault supports NDMP in order to backup a Network Appliance filer, I am very much interested in references wrt this product. Who is willing to share experiences and their configurations? regards, Edwin

2 1

RE: Unix permissions on a cifs copy
by Hawley, Rob 01 Mar '01

01 Mar '01

Here are two articles that will allow you to diagnose security problems: http://now.netapp.com/NOW/knowledge/docs/olio/guides/53_troubleshooting/ts2. shtml http://now.netapp.com/NOW/knowledge/docs/olio/guides/53_troubleshooting/ts1. shtml This is a more detailed article on the security model http://now.netapp.com/NOW/knowledge/docs/olio/guides/53_troubleshooting/conc epts.shtml In general, the permissions for a newly created file will match the permissions of the parent directory. mailto: hawleyr(a)netapp.com US Mail: Network Appliance Inc. Windows Networking Engineering 495 E Java Dr Phone/pager: 408-822-6661 Sunnyvale, CA 94089 http://www.netapp.com -----Original Message----- From: Chuck Ross [mailto:chuck.ross@signiant.com] Sent: Wednesday, February 28, 2001 11:08 AM To: Net App List (E-mail) Subject: Unix permissions on a cifs copy When I copy a file on the NetApp via cifs, it sets the Unix permissions to 777. I have Full Control access to my share. Is there a way keep Full Control but make it so that all cifs copies would be 644? Thanks Chuck Ross SIGNIANT - A Nortel Networks Venture 1550 Carling Avenue, Suite 101 Ottawa, ON K1Z 8S8 email: Chuck.Ross(a)signiant.com tel: (613) 761-3605 fax: (613) 761-3629

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 March 2001