toasters August 2007

toasters@lists.teaparty.net

65 participants
45 discussions

Netapp and VMware... It's all so confusing!
by Timothy Hollingworth 01 Apr '10

01 Apr '10

So, say for example, I want to virtualize an Exchange server. Lets also say that I want to manage it via Snapdrive and SME. Lets also say, just for the heck of it, that I want both the new front-engined Acura NSX as well as the Porsche RC3. The cars aside, I would have to run iSCSI from within the VM, install and use Snapdrive from within the VM to provision LUNs, install Exchange and then use SME? It seems kind of silly to use iSCSI from within a VM if the ESX box were fiber attached to the Filer, just to be able to use Snapdrive and SME, no? I would love to be able to use the features of SD and SME within a completely virtual environment and am wondering what some real world implementations other VMware/Netapp customers are running. Do you run storage for the databases and logs in VMDK's and manage snapshots and backups from a VMware virtual machine perspective or do you manage them as iSCSI LUNs and use SD and SME? Or am I completely blind and missing something? Timothy L. Hollingworth Sr. Network Engineer, ePlus Technology Inc. 678.462.6698 (cell) AIM: HollingworthTim YIM: t_holling

11 15

autosupport stops functioning
by Leeds, Daniel 27 Feb '08

27 Feb '08

anyone else have this happen? suddenly one of our filers stops generating autosupport messages. both autosupport.enable and autosupport.support.enable are on. if i generate a test email with the autosupport.doit option nothing happens. not even a failed message, the console just sits there as if i never generated one. needless to say neither netapp or our email server gets anything from this filer and nothing hits the console about generating any autosupport emails.

8 12

GbE card for F840
by Scott Lowe 10 Dec '07

10 Dec '07

8 11

[Fwd: Network Appliance Customer Support Bulletin: Critical Upgrade - AT-FCX FW to v34 (CSB-0708-03)]
by Paul Letta 14 Sep '07

14 Sep '07

Hello, I can't stress the below bulletin enough. Our site experienced a 12+ hour outage on a FAS3040's first day of production due to this bug. On Sunday, I did a migration from 2 FAS940's and 1 F880 to a new FAS3040 with 3 SATA shelves. The first day of production on Monday was great, it took the load with ease and response was great. Level 0 backups were due. So at about 5pm on Monday, I started level 0's of the volumes on the new 3040. At 7pm, it panic'ed and halted. It said it lost 1 disk in the root aggr and was rebuilding, during which time it said it lost 2 more. I wasn't on the phone with L3 tech support more than 5 minutes before they said I was hit with this firmware bug. The shelves came with V33, and I hadn't put them in production before the May 31st email alert about the FW upgrade to V34 came out. So by around 11pm Monday we started the WAFL_check on the root aggr. And it finished about 5am. But there were a lot of lost files and support did not want us to accept the changes by this WAFL_check and do it against a snapshot from before the crash. We elected to accept the lost files and then search the snapshot and copy the lost files back to the live file system ourselves. But the file system was offline until about 11am, 3 hours into a work day for 2200 users -- not good. And then the 3040 was so slow during that day doing a double reconstruction that many services were not responsive at all, our email spool being the most visible. So, If you have shelves with this firmware -- update it as soon as possible ! The firmware upgrade was the first thing I did the night of the crash, and it only took about 15 minutes to do 3 shelves with 2 modules each. The good news is, we got a 4th shelf that was came later than the rest, and it came with V34 firmware. Paul 9 August 2007 Customer Support Bulletin CSB-0708-03 Critical Upgrade – AT-FCX FW to v34 *Summary**:* This Customer Support Bulletin is meant to reinforce and amplify the need to expeditiously upgrade to the AT-FCX v34 Firmware Release that is described in CSB-0705-03 . Customers are required to schedule a maintenance window and upgrade to AT-FCX FW v34 as soon as possible. *What is the potential service impact **if AT-FCX firmware is not upgraded to v34**:* Systems with AT-FCX I/O modules (X/SP-5612A-R5) not upgraded to firmware v34 can experience the following problems (see link above for more details): * WAFL® file system inconsistency * Write-data loss * Extended system outages * The need to run WAFL recovery utilities to restore data integrity * Unexpected reservation conflicts that in turn can cause additional service outages *What are the failure symptoms if AT-FCX firmware is not upgraded to v34?* Systems with AT-FCX I/O modules (X/SP-5612A-R5) not upgraded to firmware v34 would see the following failure symptoms related to pre-v34 firmware:** o Multiple RAID lost-write or checksum errors are seen on multiple drives attached to an AT-FCX shelf running shelf I/O module firmware version 33 or lower. These errors are caused by misdirected writes and/or reads to a disk. In some cases, not only is the location wrong, but the wrong disk is involved. o The AT-FCX I/O module can occasionally panic during shelf firmware downloading. This will result in loss of disk connectivity and storage multi-disk panic. *Additional Benefits* In addition to protection against the above-mentioned problems, the following fixes are included in firmware v34: * Corrective action that recognizes the failure of the first I/O AFTER a cache flush has failed. This I/O is returned with a senseKey/asc/ascq of 9/88/01 error that causes Data ONTAP® to take the drive out of service. The data on the drive will then be reconstructed normally without data loss. * Corrects an issue in which the reservation database is not updated properly, resulting in unexpected reservation conflicts that in turn can cause service outages. * Avoids a known problem in which a controller failover can occur while downloading shelf firmware. *Support* Please contact NetApp Global Services and/or Professional Services for questions or assistance concerning the firmware upgrade of AT-FCX (X/SP-5612A-R5) to v34.** *NOW Self-Service Options* * To register online for NOW access, go to http://now.netapp.com/newuser/ * To unsubscribe from the Customer Product Announcement distribution list, deselect the Field Alerts option in the Subscriptions <https://now.netapp.com/eservice/personal/loadSubscription.do?moduleName=MYP…> area on NOW. <https://now.netapp.com/eservice/personal/loadSubscription.do?moduleName=MYP…> * To review, order, and renew software subscriptions, click Manage Service Contracts on the Service and Support <http://now.netapp.com/Self-Service/Forms/SupportHome.asp> home page on NOW. The purpose of this communication is for NetApp Global Services to notify its installed base end users about urgent and important product information that may affect product performance or reliability. The information contained herein and the distribution list are Network Appliance™ confidential materials that are subject to restrictions on redistribution and that cannot be shared outside of this email distribution list. © 2007 Network Appliance, Inc. All rights reserved. Specifications subject to change without notice. NetApp, the Network Appliance logo, Data ONTAP, and WAFL are registered trademarks and Network Appliance and NOW are trademarks of Network Appliance, Inc. in the U.S. and other countries. All other brands or products are trademarks or registered trademarks of their respective holders and should be treated as such.

8 12

CIFS & Cluster Failover
by Carl Howell 31 Aug '07

31 Aug '07

If I'm running CIFS on node 1 of a cluster, and I failover node 2 to node 1, will it disrupt the CIFS connections on node 1? Thanks, --Carl

3 2

RE: CIFS & Cluster Failover
by Kevin Parker 31 Aug '07

31 Aug '07

Nope. Other way around would present a short disruption, but cf way yuo're going is fine. **Sent using wireless handheld... please excuse any typo's or brevity** Kevin Parker - NWN Corporation kparker(a)nwnit.com (m) 919.830.5819 (o) 919.653.4489 -----Original Message----- From: "Carl Howell" <chowell(a)uwf.edu> To: "toasters(a)mathworks.com" <toasters(a)mathworks.com> Sent: 8/31/2007 12:22 PM Subject: CIFS & Cluster Failover If I’m running CIFS on node 1 of a cluster, and I failover node 2 to node 1, will it disrupt the CIFS connections on node 1? Thanks, --Carl ________________________________ Note: This message and any attachments is intended solely for the use of the individual or entity to which it is addressed and may contain information that is non-public, proprietary, legally privileged, confidential, and/or exempt from disclosure. If you are not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any use, dissemination, distribution, or copying of this communication is strictly prohibited. If you have received this communication in error, please notify the original sender immediately by telephone or return email and destroy or delete this message along with any attachments immediately.

1 0

Customer Support Bulletin CSB-0708-03: Critical Upgrade – AT-FCX FW to v34
by Philip Boyle 30 Aug '07

30 Aug '07

Hi guys, Has anyone had any issues with this firmware upgrade? http://now.netapp.com/NOW/products/csb/csb0708-03.shtml Thanks, Philip

9 10

Dump
by David McWilliams 29 Aug '07

29 Aug '07

I know this is a little 'non-NetApp' related, but please bear with me. I am in the process of trying to troubleshoot a Veritas NDMP backup problem on a filer. I have been asked to try using the dump command on the filer to see if I can backup successfully, thus taking NetBackup out of the picture. I would appear to have an NDMP three-way config, is using the dump command to check this config valid? -- Sláinte, David Get a safer, faster, better web browser @ http://www.mozilla.org/products/firefox/

4 6

clarion cx3-20 vs. netapp
by Willeke, Jochen 28 Aug '07

28 Aug '07

Hi toasters, has anyone a clue to which netapp modell the clarion cx3-20 can be compared?? I have read an older toasters-post where it is put in the ring with a fas270c. Is this really a good competitor? What do you think? Best Regards and thanks for your opinion Jochen

5 5

Cifs ACL reporting
by Jon Hill 26 Aug '07

26 Aug '07

We have a requirement to audit our cifs share security on a monthly basis. For my windows servers I use a vbscript leveraging WMI and the Win32_LogicalShareSecuritySetting. The filers don't respond to the WMI calls, so I thought I'd use plink to execute a cifs shares command. The problem is the formatting of the output of that command is atrocious - basically machine-unreadable. If I grep for "Domain Users," for example, I miss the shares that the group has access to. Plus the description field is usually separated from the path by a single space, which means there's no way for a script to tell where the path ends and the description begins (our paths include spaces). FilerView produces exactly the same output. I thought DFM might help but after reviewing the documentation it doesn't look like it applies. Has anyone come up with a good way to generate a useful (preferably tab-delimited) report on a filer's share permissions? If not I can ignore the description and path fields and kludge together the output I need. I was just hoping for a better way.

3 4

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 August 2007