toasters May 2007

toasters@lists.teaparty.net

64 participants
41 discussions

RE: Off Topic - brocade monitoring
by Alejandro Orellano 15 May '07

15 May '07

Hi Blake, You should use TX and RX FC Words. Note that these values HAS TO be multiplied by four to recieve number of bytes! OIDs: TX FC Words: 1.3.6.1.4.1.1588.2.1.1.1.6.2.1.11.(port+1) RX FC Words: 1.3.6.1.4.1.1588.2.1.1.1.6.2.1.12.(port+1) SNMP starts port count at 1, not at 0. So, for switch port 0 you should use 1.3.6.1.4.1.1588.2.1.1.1.6.2.1.11.1 and 1.3.6.1.4.1.1588.2.1.1.1.6.2.1.12.0 Finally, note that (RxWord + TxWord * 4) give the same results as PortPerfShow. More info on http://www.brocadeconnect.com (you need a user/pass). Regards, ./alex -----Mensaje original----- De: owner-toasters(a)mathworks.com [mailto:owner-toasters@mathworks.com] En nombre de Blake Golliher Enviado el: martes, 15 de mayo de 2007 2:24 Para: toasters(a)mathworks.com Asunto: Off Topic - brocade monitoring Anyone here know how to get MB/ Sec / Port metric out of a brocade 4100 using SNMP? I'll upgrade the firmware / OS if I have to, but I can't find anywhere in the MIB. Can I take the frames counter, and multiply it by 2116 (2112 byte frame + 4 byte header)? That'd only work if the frames were always fulll, which seems wrong. It's driving me crazy, and I was just hoping someone knew on this list. If there's a more brocade centric list, please let me know. Thanks, -Blake

1 0

Off Topic - brocade monitoring
by Blake Golliher 15 May '07

15 May '07

Anyone here know how to get MB/ Sec / Port metric out of a brocade 4100 using SNMP? I'll upgrade the firmware / OS if I have to, but I can't find anywhere in the MIB. Can I take the frames counter, and multiply it by 2116 (2112 byte frame + 4 byte header)? That'd only work if the frames were always fulll, which seems wrong. It's driving me crazy, and I was just hoping someone knew on this list. If there's a more brocade centric list, please let me know. Thanks, -Blake

1 0

offline ldap impacting cifs
by jay d 14 May '07

14 May '07

I have 2 clustered filers. One filer shares several vols via nfs. The security on these vols is set to unix. Some of them require access from windows in which case a cifs share has been created and ldap is used to map windows accounts to unix uids/gids. On the other filer, all vols are ntfs, there's no nfs (cifs only), and ldap is configured and enabled. We experienced an outage on all cifs connections on both filers when the one ldap server we were using went down. "net view" (from a windows client) would hang and explorer couldn't find the network path. I would expect the mapping to fail and windows users to be mapped to the default pcuser on the unix vols accessed via cifs. I would also expect the cifs only filer to have no issues continuing to serve cifs. Is my expectation off? I can resolve the issue by adding additional ldap hosts but I want to uncover why cifs only connections are dependent on ldap when my ad domain controllers are online. Thanks, jd

1 0

Problems with mixed mode
by Michael Fahy 14 May '07

14 May '07

We have an FAS960 running NFS and CIFS. There are entries in the cifs_homedir.cfg file so that Windows users can map drives to their Unix home directories. Windows users can successfully map drives to their unix home directories but unless their files and directories are configured with write permission for "everyone", (i.e. 666 permissions for files) the Windows users cannot write to their own files and directories. The filer is not successfully matching the Windows username with the corresponding Unix username (even though the names are the same). We are using OpenLDAP for authentication on the Unix side. We have been told that "Files and directories created from unix using nfs only get their permissions read properly by other unix systems, and the same with cifs by Windows systems" but I do not believe this. I'm sure we are just not configuring the filer correctly. Any suggestions?

4 3

RE: Duplicate nonboot vol0
by MCLACHLAN, Alan 11 May '07

11 May '07

I have had this occur a couple of times over the years. Note in Michael's case the two vol0's were on the same physical disks, so it wasn't a result of drive adds. If you search on NOW I think from memery there's a bug article in about a race condition where this can occur. I'm too busy to bother looking it up right now ;) Regards, Alan McLachlan Technical Analyst Information Management Services Department of Education, Training and the Arts (DETA) Floor 11 Education House, 30 Mary Street, Brisbane Fax: 07 3237 9695 Mob: 0429 655644 -----Original Message----- From: owner-toasters(a)mathworks.com [mailto:owner-toasters@mathworks.com] On Behalf Of Dave Rubright Sent: Friday, May 11, 2007 10:41 AM To: Michael Homa; toasters(a)mathworks.com Subject: RE: Duplicate nonboot vol0 I'm curious as to how you ended up with 2 volumes called vol0. Meaning, you can't create a volume named vol0 if it already exists even if it's offline. My only guess would be that you added some drives that were part of another 2 disk volume called vol0 which ONTAP should have renamed to vol0(1) when inserted. Not sure what happened there but... So an option if you did add drives, you should know which drives you added and remove them. If you don't know which drives were added then a prior autosupport should tell you which drives were dedicated to the original vol0 and remove the ones not on the volume list. From here you should be able to rename original vol0 to another name (orig_vol) and bring online. Pop in the drives you removed and offline vol0, destroy it. Then you can rename "orig_vol" volume back to vol0. Dave Rubright Jr 4Base Technology, Inc > -----Original Message----- > From: owner-toasters(a)mathworks.com > [mailto:owner-toasters@mathworks.com] On Behalf Of Michael Homa > Sent: Thursday, May 10, 2007 3:59 PM > To: toasters(a)mathworks.com > Subject: Duplicate nonboot vol0 > > We have a backup F740, running 6.4.5, that serves as an > insurance to our production, primary, netapp system. And, > yes, before someone suggests it, we are in the process of > upgrading it to a 270 with a more recent version of ONTAP. > > Somehow a second vol0 (obviously traditional since the ONTAP > < 7) was created and I'm trying to figure out how to destroy it: > > Volume State Status Options > vol0 offline normal raidsize=14 > > Plex /vol0/plex0: online, normal, active > RAID group /vol0/plex0/rg0: normal > RAID group /vol0/plex0/rg1: normal > > vol0 offline normal raidsize=14 > > Plex /vol0/plex0: online, normal, active > RAID group /vol0/plex0/rg0: normal > RAID group /vol0/plex0/rg1: normal > > A disk in the duplicate vol0 is bad and that's how I > discovered the problem: > > Volume vol0 (restricted, normal) (block checksums) > Plex /vol0/plex0 (online, normal, active) > RAID group /vol0/plex0/rg0 (degraded) > > RAID Disk Device HA SHELF BAY CHAN Used (MB/blks) > Phys (MB/blks) > --------- ------ --------------- ---- -------------- > -------------- > parity 7.48 7 3 0 FC:A 68000/139264000 > 69536/142410400 > data FAILED N/A 68000/139264000 > > I'm a bit unsure how to proceed. If I pull the disk, will the > system not grab one of the spares and rebuild on it? What I'd > like to happen is have the system rename the bad vol0 as > vol0(1) and then I can use the vol destroy command to get rid > of it. How do I do that? If I use the vol rename command, > there's the issue of identifying the "bad" vol0 and not the > one I want to retain. > > There was a ticket in the netapp knowledge base with a > procedure but that situation was for a duplicate boot vol0s > > I'm sure this is relatively simple yet I haven't come up with > a solution. > > Michael Homa > Operating Systems Support and Database Group Academic > Computing and Communication Center University of Illinois at Chicago > email: mhoma(a)uic.edu > >

1 0

Duplicate nonboot vol0
by Michael Homa 11 May '07

11 May '07

We have a backup F740, running 6.4.5, that serves as an insurance to our production, primary, netapp system. And, yes, before someone suggests it, we are in the process of upgrading it to a 270 with a more recent version of ONTAP. Somehow a second vol0 (obviously traditional since the ONTAP < 7) was created and I'm trying to figure out how to destroy it: Volume State Status Options vol0 offline normal raidsize=14 Plex /vol0/plex0: online, normal, active RAID group /vol0/plex0/rg0: normal RAID group /vol0/plex0/rg1: normal vol0 offline normal raidsize=14 Plex /vol0/plex0: online, normal, active RAID group /vol0/plex0/rg0: normal RAID group /vol0/plex0/rg1: normal A disk in the duplicate vol0 is bad and that's how I discovered the problem: Volume vol0 (restricted, normal) (block checksums) Plex /vol0/plex0 (online, normal, active) RAID group /vol0/plex0/rg0 (degraded) RAID Disk Device HA SHELF BAY CHAN Used (MB/blks) Phys (MB/blks) --------- ------ --------------- ---- -------------- -------------- parity 7.48 7 3 0 FC:A 68000/139264000 69536/142410400 data FAILED N/A 68000/139264000 I'm a bit unsure how to proceed. If I pull the disk, will the system not grab one of the spares and rebuild on it? What I'd like to happen is have the system rename the bad vol0 as vol0(1) and then I can use the vol destroy command to get rid of it. How do I do that? If I use the vol rename command, there's the issue of identifying the "bad" vol0 and not the one I want to retain. There was a ticket in the netapp knowledge base with a procedure but that situation was for a duplicate boot vol0s I'm sure this is relatively simple yet I haven't come up with a solution. Michael Homa Operating Systems Support and Database Group Academic Computing and Communication Center University of Illinois at Chicago email: mhoma(a)uic.edu

2 1

RE: Duplicate nonboot vol0
by MCLACHLAN, Alan 10 May '07

10 May '07

Just thinking - you shouldn't have to boot to maintenance mode to do this, just need to make sure after the rename that the root flag is on the one you want to keep before you offline and destroy the other. But since both volumes are offline in your example you must already be in maintenance mode... Regards, Alan McLachlan Technical Analyst Information Management Services Department of Education, Training and the Arts (DETA) Floor 11 Education House, 30 Mary Street, Brisbane Fax: 07 3237 9695 Mob: 0429 655644 -----Original Message----- From: owner-toasters(a)mathworks.com [mailto:owner-toasters@mathworks.com] On Behalf Of MCLACHLAN, Alan Sent: Friday, May 11, 2007 9:39 AM To: Michael Homa Cc: toasters(a)mathworks.com Subject: RE: Duplicate nonboot vol0 Try booting to maintenance mode and do a vol rename - you should find only one of the "vol0" volumes is renamed. Then identify which volume is the real one and destroy the other. If the one that was renamed was the real vol0 you can rename it back to vol0 if you wish (root volume doesn't have to be called "vol0"). Regards, Alan McLachlan Technical Analyst Information Management Services Department of Education, Training and the Arts (DETA) Floor 11 Education House, 30 Mary Street, Brisbane Fax: 07 3237 9695 Mob: 0429 655644 -----Original Message----- From: owner-toasters(a)mathworks.com [mailto:owner-toasters@mathworks.com] On Behalf Of Michael Homa Sent: Friday, May 11, 2007 8:59 AM To: toasters(a)mathworks.com Subject: Duplicate nonboot vol0 We have a backup F740, running 6.4.5, that serves as an insurance to our production, primary, netapp system. And, yes, before someone suggests it, we are in the process of upgrading it to a 270 with a more recent version of ONTAP. Somehow a second vol0 (obviously traditional since the ONTAP < 7) was created and I'm trying to figure out how to destroy it: Volume State Status Options vol0 offline normal raidsize=14 Plex /vol0/plex0: online, normal, active RAID group /vol0/plex0/rg0: normal RAID group /vol0/plex0/rg1: normal vol0 offline normal raidsize=14 Plex /vol0/plex0: online, normal, active RAID group /vol0/plex0/rg0: normal RAID group /vol0/plex0/rg1: normal A disk in the duplicate vol0 is bad and that's how I discovered the problem: Volume vol0 (restricted, normal) (block checksums) Plex /vol0/plex0 (online, normal, active) RAID group /vol0/plex0/rg0 (degraded) RAID Disk Device HA SHELF BAY CHAN Used (MB/blks) Phys (MB/blks) --------- ------ --------------- ---- -------------- -------------- parity 7.48 7 3 0 FC:A 68000/139264000 69536/142410400 data FAILED N/A 68000/139264000 I'm a bit unsure how to proceed. If I pull the disk, will the system not grab one of the spares and rebuild on it? What I'd like to happen is have the system rename the bad vol0 as vol0(1) and then I can use the vol destroy command to get rid of it. How do I do that? If I use the vol rename command, there's the issue of identifying the "bad" vol0 and not the one I want to retain. There was a ticket in the netapp knowledge base with a procedure but that situation was for a duplicate boot vol0s I'm sure this is relatively simple yet I haven't come up with a solution. Michael Homa Operating Systems Support and Database Group Academic Computing and Communication Center University of Illinois at Chicago email: mhoma(a)uic.edu

1 0

RE: Duplicate nonboot vol0
by MCLACHLAN, Alan 10 May '07

10 May '07

Try booting to maintenance mode and do a vol rename - you should find only one of the "vol0" volumes is renamed. Then identify which volume is the real one and destroy the other. If the one that was renamed was the real vol0 you can rename it back to vol0 if you wish (root volume doesn't have to be called "vol0"). Regards, Alan McLachlan Technical Analyst Information Management Services Department of Education, Training and the Arts (DETA) Floor 11 Education House, 30 Mary Street, Brisbane Fax: 07 3237 9695 Mob: 0429 655644 -----Original Message----- From: owner-toasters(a)mathworks.com [mailto:owner-toasters@mathworks.com] On Behalf Of Michael Homa Sent: Friday, May 11, 2007 8:59 AM To: toasters(a)mathworks.com Subject: Duplicate nonboot vol0 We have a backup F740, running 6.4.5, that serves as an insurance to our production, primary, netapp system. And, yes, before someone suggests it, we are in the process of upgrading it to a 270 with a more recent version of ONTAP. Somehow a second vol0 (obviously traditional since the ONTAP < 7) was created and I'm trying to figure out how to destroy it: Volume State Status Options vol0 offline normal raidsize=14 Plex /vol0/plex0: online, normal, active RAID group /vol0/plex0/rg0: normal RAID group /vol0/plex0/rg1: normal vol0 offline normal raidsize=14 Plex /vol0/plex0: online, normal, active RAID group /vol0/plex0/rg0: normal RAID group /vol0/plex0/rg1: normal A disk in the duplicate vol0 is bad and that's how I discovered the problem: Volume vol0 (restricted, normal) (block checksums) Plex /vol0/plex0 (online, normal, active) RAID group /vol0/plex0/rg0 (degraded) RAID Disk Device HA SHELF BAY CHAN Used (MB/blks) Phys (MB/blks) --------- ------ --------------- ---- -------------- -------------- parity 7.48 7 3 0 FC:A 68000/139264000 69536/142410400 data FAILED N/A 68000/139264000 I'm a bit unsure how to proceed. If I pull the disk, will the system not grab one of the spares and rebuild on it? What I'd like to happen is have the system rename the bad vol0 as vol0(1) and then I can use the vol destroy command to get rid of it. How do I do that? If I use the vol rename command, there's the issue of identifying the "bad" vol0 and not the one I want to retain. There was a ticket in the netapp knowledge base with a procedure but that situation was for a duplicate boot vol0s I'm sure this is relatively simple yet I haven't come up with a solution. Michael Homa Operating Systems Support and Database Group Academic Computing and Communication Center University of Illinois at Chicago email: mhoma(a)uic.edu

1 0

RE: GbE card for F840
by MCLACHLAN, Alan 10 May '07

10 May '07

The X1027 is a stock standard Intel Pro1000T without an Intel decal on it, sold as OEM product by Intel to NetApp and other vendors. Some vendors change firmware on the cards, but I've seen no indication that NetApp does. I have successfully used the MUCH cheaper regular boxed Intel Pro1000T in a range of test / dev filer models (F7xx and F8xx series). It should be no problem in an F840, and will show up as an X1027. Similarly the others are other Intel NIC's - been a while but I'm pretty sure the old X1025 fibre card was a regular Intel PRO1000 (1000BaseSX) card. ***NOTE: You shouldn't do this on a system with an active NetApp maintenance contract of course... :-) Regards, Alan McLachlan Technical Analyst Information Management Services Department of Education, Training and the Arts (DETA) Floor 11 Education House, 30 Mary Street, Brisbane Fax: +61 7 3237 9695 Mob: +61 429 655644 -----Original Message----- From: owner-toasters(a)mathworks.com [mailto:owner-toasters@mathworks.com] On Behalf Of Tom Samplonius Sent: Friday, May 11, 2007 7:33 AM To: Dave Rubright Cc: Scott Lowe; toasters(a)mathworks.com Subject: Re: GbE card for F840 Is there any different in performance between the different GigE cards? I noticed that the dual port copper and the quad port copper GigE cards are nearly the same price on the used/refurb market. It seems a bit odd. ----- "Dave Rubright" <dave(a)4basetech.com> wrote: > You didn't specify which ONTAP version you plan to use so I'll list > the NetApp supported cards for ONTAP GD release 7.0.6. > > NetApp PN Description > > X1027* GBE with copper > X1027B-R5 GBE with copper > X1037-R5 Dual GBE with copper > > * indicates by RMA only but if you find a card, still works. > > How you obtain the cards is up to you. > > > Dave Rubright Jr > 4Base Technology, Inc > > > > > > From: owner-toasters(a)mathworks.com [mailto: > owner-toasters(a)mathworks.com ] On Behalf Of Scott Lowe > Sent: Thursday, May 10, 2007 10:49 AM > To: toasters(a)mathworks.com > Subject: GbE card for F840 > > > > > Good afternoon all, > > I have an old F840 that has been donated for use in a test/development > lab at my office. I need an inexpensive Gigabit Ethernet adapter for > this system. Does anyone have any suggestions on what cards are > compatible with ONTAP and could be used in this system? > > Best regards, > Scott Lowe > Senior Engineer > ePlus Technology, Inc. > slowe(a)eplus.com

1 0

upgrading from 270c to 3040
by Jeff DiNisco 09 May '07

09 May '07

I'm considering upgrading from a 270c to a 3040 (all aggrs, no traditional vols). I'm wondering about the proper procedure to swap the heads. Here's what I'm thinking the steps will be, but I'd like someone to confirm or let me know if there's a better way to go about it... on 270c... change root vol size to accommodate 3040 (both) upgrade ontap to 7.2.2 (both) modify /etc/rc for different interface names (both) record ownership info, which filer owns which disks (both) disable cluster shutdown both heads replace EFH mods w/ ESH2 mods on 3040... attach shelves to both 3040 heads boot 1 head into maintenance mode remove ownership on all disks take ownership of only the disks that were previously owned by 1st filer as recorded in above step run "storage release disks" run "mailbox destroy local" shutdown head boot other head into maintenance mode take ownership of only the disks that were previously owned by 2nd filer as recorded in above step shutdown head boot 1 head, confirm things look good boot other head, confirm things look good install 7.2.2 for 3040 architecture apply new licenses enable/test failover I think that might work, not sure. As I see it, the biggest risk is missing a disk or 2 when assigning ownership. My guess is the filer would attempt to recover the aggregate by rebuilding on a spare. Is there an autorebuild option I can turn off that would allow me to recognize that a have missing disks, boot back into maint mode, and fix manually? Just trying to uncover my biggest areas of risk in the procedure and mitigate them if possible. Thanks. JeffD

3 2

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 2007