toasters September 2007

toasters@lists.teaparty.net

67 participants
41 discussions

Keeping CIFS from autostarting
by Nils Vogels 26 Sep '07

26 Sep '07

Hi! Is there any known way of keeping CIFS from autostarting upon reboot, once CIFS has been configured? Greets, Nils -- Simple guidelines to happiness: Work like you don't need the money, Love like your heart has never been broken and Dance like no one can see you.

8 9

Time issue
by David McWilliams 26 Sep '07

26 Sep '07

I'm have weird stuff going on, it seems like it may be related to the timezone thingy, but I can't think why. We have a FAS250 running 7.0.4. Timed is configured and is pulling the time from the domain controller. The times appear to be in sync (confirmed in the messages file). We cannot mount the shares, it refuses due to the times being more than 5mins apart. The timezone is being reported as EST. When we changed the timezone to US/Michigan and rebooted. It now reports the time as exactly one hour ahead and the timezone is EDT. Right now I have disabled timed and set the time manually - all is well... for now. Does anyone have any ideas? -- Sláinte, David Get a safer, faster, better web browser @ http://www.mozilla.org/products/firefox/

3 2

RE: ONTAP UPGRADE - FEEDBACK REQUEST
by Borzenkov, Andrey 26 Sep '07

26 Sep '07

As you have clusters, I would recommend first updating to 7.0.6 and then – if required – to 7.2.3 or whatever version is available at this time. Then both of them are NDU. NDU between major releases are supported first starting with 7.2.3 and minimal base release is 7.0.6. Personally I do not see any point jumping through 7.1 additionally. Otherwise update from 7.0.4 directly to 7.2.3 was quite straightforward. С уважением / With best regards / Mit freundlichen Grüβen --- Andrey Borzenkov Senior system engineer ________________________________ From: owner-toasters(a)mathworks.com [mailto:owner-toasters@mathworks.com] On Behalf Of Philip Boyle Sent: Monday, September 24, 2007 9:19 PM To: toasters(a)mathworks.com Subject: ONTAP UPGRADE - FEEDBACK REQUEST Hi guys, I’m currently running a number of FAS940 clusters with DATA ONTAP Version 7.0.4 (Sun Feb 5 00:52:53 PST 2006 ) Primarily NFS with some ISCSI. I’d like to hear back from you re your experiences upgrading to the current s/w releases available on the NOW Site for the FAS940 series system. http://now.netapp.com/NOW/cgi-bin/software?product=Data+ONTAP&platform=FAS9…. Our immediate options are to take a small step to 7.0.6, move up a little further to 7.1.2.1 or go for the latest and greatest, 7.2.3. Have you guys seen any issues along the upgrade path to any of the above releases? Looking at the stats there are a decent number of systems running 7.2.3, however the average run-time days per system is quite low. Feedback appreciated. Thanks, Philip

5 5

RE: ONTAP UPGRADE - FEEDBACK REQUEST
by Leeds, Daniel 25 Sep '07

25 Sep '07

we do not utilize CIFS and we have no non production filers to verify/test on :) NDU works for us but yes i agree with you on all points here. -- Daniel Leeds Manager, Storage Operations Edmunds.com -----Original Message----- From: Scott Miller [mailto:Scott.Miller@dreamworks.com] Sent: Tue 9/25/2007 3:24 PM To: Leeds, Daniel Cc: Kennedy, Jeffrey; Borzenkov, Andrey; philip.boyle(a)eircom.net; toasters(a)mathworks.com Subject: Re: ONTAP UPGRADE - FEEDBACK REQUEST I'm with Jeff. A reboot takes less time that failover/failback, and I'd rather have CIFS shares disconnect and re-connenct just once. Rather than NDU, I upgrade both heads and then reboot them at the same time. After having tested the new release on non-critical filer resources, of course ;-) reboots occur during non-peak times or during scheduled maintenance windows, when possible. -skottie Leeds, Daniel wrote: > > NDU is highly valuable when you are running 24x7 environments with live > active data. We have had alot of success with this but still prefer a > scheduled upgrade downtime if possible. Both work great. :) > > > -- > Daniel Leeds > Manager, Storage Operations > Edmunds.com > > > > -----Original Message----- > From: owner-toasters(a)mathworks.com on behalf of Kennedy, Jeffrey > Sent: Tue 9/25/2007 11:16 AM > To: Borzenkov, Andrey; philip.boyle(a)eircom.net; toasters(a)mathworks.com > Subject: RE: ONTAP UPGRADE - FEEDBACK REQUEST > > NDU really isn't is it? CIFS connections are still severed and NFS > survives both an NDU and a reboot easily enough. > > > > I've never understood the value of NDU honestly but if someone has a > success story I'd be interested to hear it. > > > > Thanks. > > > > Jeff Kennedy > > QCT Engineering Compute > > 858-651-6592 > > > -- Scott.Miller(a)DreamWorks.com

1 0

Number of mailbox disks with a SyncMirrored root volume
by Nicolai E M Plum 25 Sep '07

25 Sep '07

Hi If I have an active/active (non-Metro) filer cluster, and I use SyncMirror to mirror the root volume of one filer, will I end up with mailbox disks in both plexes, or are the mailbox disks only in one plex (leaving me with a problem if that plex goes away completely)? Online documentation on this is not entirely clear. Would someone who has a SyncMirror setup be able to have a look at their system and answer this definitively? Nicolai

2 2

RE: ONTAP UPGRADE - FEEDBACK REQUEST
by Sphar, Mike 24 Sep '07

24 Sep '07

Coincidentally, just this last weekend I upgraded an FAS940 from 6.5.5 to 7.2.2, as well as two FAS3020s from 7.0.5 to 7.2.3. (There wasn't a specific reason for doing 7.2.2 on one and 7.2.3 on the other, it just worked out that way because I talked to two different Netapp support staff about the different servers.) All the updates went completely painlessly and smoothly. I was a little concerned about the big jump from 6.5 but have not as yet discovered any problems or interruptions in service from the update. One thing that I think helped the update go smoothly is this time I contacted Netapp support and requested Upgrade Plans for each server, which I'd never done before. (I've just historically done the upgrades myself without help.) I was especially concerned with the 3020s because there were several firmware updates to apply and I wasn't entirely sure what the correct order should be. Netapp provided me PDFs of fairly detailed instructions for the upgrades. You can also have them provide a Downgrade Plan in the event of problems. I highly recommend taking advantage of that very helpful service, even if you're fairly familiar with he process. (It's also nice to have an official plan already drawn up to file with the Change Control teams.) -- Michael W. Sphar - IS&T - Lead Systems Administrator SMBU Engineering Support Services, BMC Software ________________________________ From: owner-toasters(a)mathworks.com [mailto:owner-toasters@mathworks.com] On Behalf Of Philip Boyle Sent: Monday, September 24, 2007 10:19 AM To: toasters(a)mathworks.com Subject: ONTAP UPGRADE - FEEDBACK REQUEST Hi guys, I'm currently running a number of FAS940 clusters with DATA ONTAP Version 7.0.4 (Sun Feb 5 00:52:53 PST 2006 ) Primarily NFS with some ISCSI. I'd like to hear back from you re your experiences upgrading to the current s/w releases available on the NOW Site for the FAS940 series system. http://now.netapp.com/NOW/cgi-bin/software?product=Data+ONTAP&platform=F AS940. Our immediate options are to take a small step to 7.0.6, move up a little further to 7.1.2.1 or go for the latest and greatest, 7.2.3. Have you guys seen any issues along the upgrade path to any of the above releases? Looking at the stats there are a decent number of systems running 7.2.3, however the average run-time days per system is quite low. Feedback appreciated. Thanks, Philip

2 2

RE: ONTAP UPGRADE - FEEDBACK REQUEST
by Glenn Marsh 24 Sep '07

24 Sep '07

Is it just me or are the numbers the same for just about any system? http://now.netapp.com/NOW/cgi-bin/software/?product=Data+ONTAP&platform=FAS… http://now.netapp.com/NOW/cgi-bin/software/?product=Data+ONTAP&platform=FAS… http://now.netapp.com/NOW/cgi-bin/software/?product=Data+ONTAP&platform=FAS… I guess we don't know for sure now what the real stats are. :( ************************************************************************ Glenn Marsh Lattice Semiconductor Corporation Senior Unix Systems Administrator 5555 NE Moore Court CAD Engineering Hillsboro, Oregon 97124 glenn.marsh(a)latticesemi.com 503-268-8000 503-268-8136 phone - 503-268-8459 fax ************************************************************************

2 1

ONTAP UPGRADE - FEEDBACK REQUEST
by Philip Boyle 24 Sep '07

24 Sep '07

Hi guys, I'm currently running a number of FAS940 clusters with DATA ONTAP Version 7.0.4 (Sun Feb 5 00:52:53 PST 2006 ) Primarily NFS with some ISCSI. I'd like to hear back from you re your experiences upgrading to the current s/w releases available on the NOW Site for the FAS940 series system. http://now.netapp.com/NOW/cgi-bin/software?product=Data+ONTAP <http://now.netapp.com/NOW/cgi-bin/software?product=Data+ONTAP&platform=FAS9 40> &platform=FAS940. Our immediate options are to take a small step to 7.0.6, move up a little further to 7.1.2.1 or go for the latest and greatest, 7.2.3. Have you guys seen any issues along the upgrade path to any of the above releases? Looking at the stats there are a decent number of systems running 7.2.3, however the average run-time days per system is quite low. Feedback appreciated. Thanks, Philip

1 0

Re: snapmirror status / lag
by Brett Rabe 21 Sep '07

21 Sep '07

OnTap 7.2.3. -bmr On 09:37 Fri 21 Sep , George, Andrew wrote: > Which OnTap version? > I remember some of the 6.5's had a problem with the snapmirror date > rolling over > > -----Original Message----- > From: owner-toasters(a)mathworks.com [mailto:owner-toasters@mathworks.com] > On Behalf Of Kleinbrahm, Robert > Sent: Friday, 21 September 2007 9:18 AM > To: Brett Rabe; toasters(a)mathworks.com > Subject: RE: snapmirror status / lag > > Try turning snapmirror off and then back on. See if next run shows > correct lag time. > > Bob K. > > > -----Original Message----- > From: owner-toasters(a)mathworks.com [mailto:owner-toasters@mathworks.com] > On Behalf Of Brett Rabe > Sent: Thursday, September 20, 2007 2:03 PM > To: toasters(a)mathworks.com > Subject: snapmirror status / lag > > Howdy. Trivial question for y'all. > > I have two FAS3040 heads (-01 and -02) in an HA configuration. > > I have one FAS3040 head (-03) to which both of these are mirroring their > data (every 5 minutes). The following is the status output on the backup > toaster: > > mpls-toaster-03> snapmirror status > Snapmirror is on. > Source Destination State Lag > Status > mpls-toaster-01-priv:vol1 mpls-toaster-03:vol1 Snapmirrored 00:04:28 > Idle > mpls-toaster-02-priv:vol1 mpls-toaster-03:vol2 Snapmirrored > 17895:54:16 Idle > > It all works just fine. > > I'm curious about the Lag time. What exactly does that mean? > Why is it "17895:54:16"? It appeared that way after I did a failover of > -02 (to -01) for the purposes of replacing a DIMM. > Brought it back, did the giveback, and everything is working fine. > > The mirroring still seems to be working just great ... this is more of a > curiosity question than anything, I guess. > > -bmr > > The information transmitted is intended only for the person or entity to > which it is addressed and may contain confidential and/or privileged > material. Any review, retransmission, dissemination or other use of, or > taking of any action in reliance upon, this information by persons or > entities other than the intended recipient is prohibited. If you > received this in error, please contact the sender and delete the > material from any computer. This message cannot be guaranteed to be > secure or error-free. > > First Republic Bank and its subsidiaries do not take responsibility for, > or accept time-sensitive instructions sent by email including orders, > funds transfer instructions or stop payments on checks. All instructions > of this nature must be handled by direct communication, not email. > > We reserve the right to monitor and review the content of all email > communications sent or received. Emails sent to or from this address may > be stored in accordance with regulatory requirements. > > > > "This e-mail and any attachments to it (the "Communication") is, unless otherwise stated, confidential, may contain copyright material and is for the use only of the intended recipient. If you receive the Communication in error, please notify the sender immediately by return e-mail, delete the Communication and the return e-mail, and do not read, copy, retransmit or otherwise deal with it. Any views expressed in the Communication are those of the individual sender only, unless expressly stated to be those of Australia and New Zealand Banking Group Limited ABN 11 005 357 522, or any of its related entities including ANZ National Bank Limited (together "ANZ"). ANZ does not accept liability in connection with the integrity of or errors in the Communication, computer virus, data corruption, interference or delay arising from or in respect of the Communication."

1 0

Re: snapmirror status / lag
by Brett Rabe 21 Sep '07

21 Sep '07

Right on the button. I'm not clear on why the date would have been hosed replacing a DIMM, but that appears to be exactly what happened. It got set to 9/5/05 00:00:00 GMT. Wow. I feel a little silly for not even thinking to check that. Thanks for the advice without ", moron" attached at the end. :) -bmr On 15:39 Thu 20 Sep , Dave Barr (????) wrote: > Check the time (clock) on your filers. I bet -02's clock is way off. > > --Dave > > On 9/20/07, Brett Rabe <brett(a)uswest.net> wrote: > > Howdy. Trivial question for y'all. > > > > I have two FAS3040 heads (-01 and -02) in an HA configuration. > > > > I have one FAS3040 head (-03) to which both of these are mirroring > > their data (every 5 minutes). The following is the status output > > on the backup toaster: > > > > mpls-toaster-03> snapmirror status > > Snapmirror is on. > > Source Destination State Lag Status > > mpls-toaster-01-priv:vol1 mpls-toaster-03:vol1 Snapmirrored 00:04:28 Idle > > mpls-toaster-02-priv:vol1 mpls-toaster-03:vol2 Snapmirrored 17895:54:16 Idle > > > > It all works just fine. > > > > I'm curious about the Lag time. What exactly does that mean? > > Why is it "17895:54:16"? It appeared that way after I did a > > failover of -02 (to -01) for the purposes of replacing a DIMM. > > Brought it back, did the giveback, and everything is working > > fine. > > > > The mirroring still seems to be working just great ... this is > > more of a curiosity question than anything, I guess. > > > > -bmr > >

2 1

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 September 2007