toasters December 2008

toasters@lists.teaparty.net

41 participants
33 discussions

OSSV and Windows 2008
by Milazzo Giacomo 06 Dec '08

06 Dec '08

Hi all OSSV 2.5 and 2.6 does not include Windows 2008 Server in their compatibility matrix. Does anybody had the chance to test the OSSV agent on 2008 and NTFS volumes? Regards,

2 1

StoreVault (S550) Cifs Homedirectories
by ifstat 05 Dec '08

05 Dec '08

Hi this might be a bad question, but I'm sure many people have the same query. I've just found out that CIFS Homedirctories it not supported in the S-Series, now being familiar with the full version of Ontap i've managed to configure it. My question is; why is this not supported? Will enabling homedirectories cause a problem to the StoreVault including stabilty and in terms of managebility. I'm fine with doing this from console. Any other reason why doing this is a bad idea? -- View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/StoreVault-%28S550%29-Cifs-Homedirectories-tp20852013… Sent from the Network Appliance - Toasters mailing list archive at Nabble.com.

1 0

Wiring question
by Peta Spies 04 Dec '08

04 Dec '08

Hi all, Thanks for your responses to my earlier question about swapping small disks for larger ones. Looks like we're going to have to get the mice in the comms room to pedal faster... Anyway, another query entirely. I've just found that one of my netapps is really poorly wired - it's a 3040C with two SATA shelves on one loop, and most of the wiring has IN and OUT ports swapped from the way it should be, aside from one example where it's the right way around. The netapp head can see the shelves though, so it's clearly not too much of a problem. I now want to add two more shelves to the loop. Is it worth recabling the whole thing so it's done correctly, bearing in mind that vol0 lives on the affected SATA shelves and there is production stuff on the other loop (FCAL shelves), I'm guessing the filer won't like it if vol0 goes away? Someone here suggested that the incorrect wiring may be affecting performance. Or does it make no difference and I can just add the new shelves with the wiring inthe same backwards manner? Peta

3 2

Win 2008 AD domain with StoreVault
by Paul Letta 04 Dec '08

04 Dec '08

Hi Everyone. I thought I should add a few more details. Our 2008 AD domain is now in a 2008 only mode with no backwards compatibility to 2003 AD. So that rules out keeping a 2003 AD server for this storevault to use. My next thought was to use either local passwords or NIS. This storevault only has a handful of users. But the data is in an NTFS style qtree. All of the ACLs are based on domain users/groups. Is there a way to map local users/groups to domain users/groups if the filer can't contact/use the domain ? I'm thinking I may just have to punt and move the data back to real NetApp that is working with 2008 AD. Thanks for any suggestions. Paul Hi Everyone. We have just upgraded our Windows AD domain from a 2003 domain to a 2008 domain. All of our filers are fine, because they are at 7.2.5.1. Except for one. A StoreVault. (I know..) It is at OnTap 7.2.1S9. StoreVault support says the 'newest' version is 7.2.1S10. And that StoreVault will not work with 2008 AD domains. I asked for a recommendation, they had none. I checked the CIFS compatibility matrix on NOW, but did not notice that 7.2.1S9 fell outside the chart. Is anyone on the list trying to use 2008 AD domain with a StoreVault ? Downgrading back to a 2003 AD domain is not an option. Thankfully, the number of users that depend on this StoreVault is small, so I may look to use the local /etc/password option during a cifs setup, but I'm not sure if that will work either. Suggestions ?? other than read the matrix better :-) Thanks, Paul

1 0

Win 2008 AD domain with StoreVault
by Paul Letta 04 Dec '08

04 Dec '08

Hi Everyone. We have just upgraded our Windows AD domain from a 2003 domain to a 2008 domain. All of our filers are fine, because they are at 7.2.5.1. Except for one. A StoreVault. (I know..) It is at OnTap 7.2.1S9. StoreVault support says the 'newest' version is 7.2.1S10. And that StoreVault will not work with 2008 AD domains. I asked for a recommendation, they had none. I checked the CIFS compatibility matrix on NOW, but did not notice that 7.2.1S9 fell outside the chart. Is anyone on the list trying to use 2008 AD domain with a StoreVault ? Downgrading back to a 2003 AD domain is not an option. Thankfully, the number of users that depend on this StoreVault is small, so I may look to use the local /etc/password option during a cifs setup, but I'm not sure if that will work either. Suggestions ?? other than read the matrix better :-) Thanks, Paul

2 1

Re: SD 6.01 / W2K8 x64 / iSCSI and NLB Cluster
by Raj Patel 04 Dec '08

04 Dec '08

Cheers Tom, We get slightly different errors on the nodes - * rpc error - mailbx1 * security package error - mailbx2 We did have a suggestion to completely disable the firewall service (not just switch it off in the control panel) - this worked until we rebooted both nodes and the problem came back. Why I asked about the NIC's was because I wondered if the RPC traffic was going out over the data network rather than the iSCSI network. The data network potentially has two addresses per host - its own and the failover cluster IP. I don't think we're doing anything particularly fancy - the cluster setup is obviously the complicating factor. There are a few NOW articles concerning cluster setup but they tend to relate to traditional shared disk rather than independent disk setups. Cheers, Raj. On Wed, Dec 3, 2008 at 11:00 PM, De Wit Tom (Consultant) <tom.de.wit(a)consultant.volvo.com> wrote: > Hey Raj, > > Setting the Preferred filer address is what will tie those RPC calls to a specific destination IP address. Normally you do this to make that traffic go over a specific source interface. The source IP address woudln't matter that much if the traffic can get back to the same host using that IP address. > > Are you experiencing these SD errors on both of your cluster nodes ? > > Tom > > -----Original Message----- > From: Raj Patel [mailto:phigmov@gmail.com] > Sent: dinsdag 2 december 2008 22:47 > To: De Wit Tom (Consultant) > Cc: toasters(a)mathworks.com > Subject: Re: SD 6.01 / W2K8 x64 / iSCSI and NLB Cluster > > Cheers Tom > > We've done some more troubleshooting - > > * if I do a clean w2k8 server install with two nics (one data and the > other iscsi) - SD 6.01 installs and works fine - the initiator even > prompts to open the FW ports on the server > > This made me think it was either something fishy with my previous > install or something funny with the cluster (which is purely failover > - no shared storage). > > * if we evict one of the cluster members (there are two mailbox > servers) the SD 6.01 RPC problem goes away immediately > > So now I'm running up some test VM's to replicate the setup and run up > SD first and then put the cluster on afterwards. > > What I'm wondering now is what part of the SD / SAN interaction is > making the RPC call - presumably over the clustered address ? Is > there any way to tie it to a particular IP or NIC ? > > We'll run another test with a couple of vm's, creating the luns and > then creating the cluster - see at what point the RPC error occurs. > > > Cheers, > > Raj. > > > On Tue, Dec 2, 2008 at 10:04 PM, De Wit Tom (Consultant) > <tom.de.wit(a)consultant.volvo.com> wrote: >> I know of two things that can cause such errors: >> >> - Fill in the "Preferred filer IP addresses". I don't have SD 6.x, on 4.2.1 it was located in MMC under Storage/Snapdrive/Disks, rightclick Disks, select properties. Then fill in the filer DNS/Netbios name and the corresponding IP address and restart Snapdrive services >> >> - Make sure the Snapdrive services is started with a domain user that has both local admin rights on the local server and admin rights on the Netapp filer. >> >> Grtz, >> Tom >> >

1 0

7.2.6p1 experiences
by Page, Jeremy 03 Dec '08

03 Dec '08

Is anyone running this in production? We are using ASIS on the majority of our volumes and really need to get off 7.2.4, I am debating what version to move too, I'd like to get to 7.2.6.1 but even the folks at Netapp have not been able to tell me when it's going to be available. Please be advised that this email may contain confidential information. If you are not the intended recipient, please do not read, copy or re-transmit this email. If you have received this email in error, please notify us by email by replying to the sender and by telephone (call us collect at +1 202-828-0850) and delete this message and any attachments. Thank you in advance for your cooperation and assistance. In addition, Danaher and its subsidiaries disclaim that the content of this email constitutes an offer to enter into, or the acceptance of, any contract or agreement or any amendment thereto; provided that the foregoing disclaimer does not invalidate the binding effect of any digital or other electronic reproduction of a manual signature that is included in any attachment to this email.

5 7

RE: SMSQL help!!
by Ken Williams 02 Dec '08

02 Dec '08

I just spent some time switching to the 32bit version, I received the same results. -----Original Message----- From: Chaim Rieger [mailto:riegersteve@gmail.com] Sent: Tuesday, December 02, 2008 1:13 PM To: Ken Williams Cc: toasters(a)mathworks.com Subject: Re: SMSQL help!! -SMSQL 2.1.1 (previously) and 2.1.2 (currently) you have to install the 32 bit version of SM (if my recollection serves right) we ran into this issue as well Ken Williams wrote: > I've been working with support for several days now on this issue and we > are all stumped. > > Quick background on the environment: > -Clustered FAS3070 > -Fiber channel LUNs > - OnTap 7.2.5.1 > -Windows Server 2003 R2 64bit clustered configuration > -MS SQL 2005 > -1 LUN per filer volume, using mount point vs drive letters for > the mounts. > -SMSQL 2.1.1 (previously) and 2.1.2 (currently) > > This clustered environment is for Sharepoint and also has SMMOSS member > agents. > > This problem has existed since configuration. > > We're in the process of migrating data to a new SQL cluster and we're > coming across a issue with the DBCC verification. > > Collecting verification information... > Getting database backup information from SnapInfo file... > Initializing SnapManager server on remote machine [SNPSPDB01]... > Mounting Snapshot [sqlsnap__prdspdb01_12-02-2008_12.21.38] for Virtual > Disk F:\shpntprod_db\ of Computer PRDSPDB01 > This Snapshot is mounted as the drive [Z:]. > Mount Snapshot succeeded. > Mounting Snapshot [sqlsnap__prdspdb01_12-02-2008_12.21.38] for Virtual > Disk F:\shpntprod_log\ of Computer PRDSPDB01 > This Snapshot is mounted as the drive [Y:]. > Mount Snapshot succeeded. > */Cannot find the data file in the mounted drive:/* > */f:\shpntprod_db\PRD_Hydro_Content_01.mdf/*// > Dismounting Virtual Disk Z of SnapShot > [sqlsnap__prdspdb01_12-02-2008_12.21.38]... > Dismount Snapshot succeeded. > Dismounting Virtual Disk Y of SnapShot > [sqlsnap__prdspdb01_12-02-2008_12.21.38]... > Dismount Snapshot succeeded. > Unable to locate the database data file on the mounted disk drive. > > Database verification information was not updated. > There is an error during database verification. > > > Any ideas why the verification would fail? It looks to me like its > trying to find a data file mounted on the f:\ drive instead of the Y:\ > or Z:\ drive.. Could this be some type of SQL permission issue? I'm at a > total loss. > > Here is the kicker: When I installed SMSQL5.0 the problem went away, but > SMMOSS (Snapmanager for Share point) doesn't work with SMSQL5.0, it > requires 2.1.1/.2.1.2 > > > __________________________________________________________ > *****Ken Williams* > ///Storage Administrator, Business Technology Operations/ > ***Sacramento Municipal Utility District* > E-Mail:_ __kwillia(a)smud.org_ > Phone: (916) 732-6744 > Cell: (916) 240-4213 > -- -- Chaim Rieger www.jravel.com

1 0

Re: SD 6.01 / W2K8 x64 / iSCSI and NLB Cluster
by Raj Patel 02 Dec '08

02 Dec '08

Cheers Tom We've done some more troubleshooting - * if I do a clean w2k8 server install with two nics (one data and the other iscsi) - SD 6.01 installs and works fine - the initiator even prompts to open the FW ports on the server This made me think it was either something fishy with my previous install or something funny with the cluster (which is purely failover - no shared storage). * if we evict one of the cluster members (there are two mailbox servers) the SD 6.01 RPC problem goes away immediately So now I'm running up some test VM's to replicate the setup and run up SD first and then put the cluster on afterwards. What I'm wondering now is what part of the SD / SAN interaction is making the RPC call - presumably over the clustered address ? Is there any way to tie it to a particular IP or NIC ? We'll run another test with a couple of vm's, creating the luns and then creating the cluster - see at what point the RPC error occurs. Cheers, Raj. On Tue, Dec 2, 2008 at 10:04 PM, De Wit Tom (Consultant) <tom.de.wit(a)consultant.volvo.com> wrote: > I know of two things that can cause such errors: > > - Fill in the "Preferred filer IP addresses". I don't have SD 6.x, on 4.2.1 it was located in MMC under Storage/Snapdrive/Disks, rightclick Disks, select properties. Then fill in the filer DNS/Netbios name and the corresponding IP address and restart Snapdrive services > > - Make sure the Snapdrive services is started with a domain user that has both local admin rights on the local server and admin rights on the Netapp filer. > > Grtz, > Tom >

1 0

SMSQL help!!
by Ken Williams 02 Dec '08

02 Dec '08

I've been working with support for several days now on this issue and we are all stumped. Quick background on the environment: -Clustered FAS3070 -Fiber channel LUNs - OnTap 7.2.5.1 -Windows Server 2003 R2 64bit clustered configuration -MS SQL 2005 -1 LUN per filer volume, using mount point vs drive letters for the mounts. -SMSQL 2.1.1 (previously) and 2.1.2 (currently) This clustered environment is for Sharepoint and also has SMMOSS member agents. This problem has existed since configuration. We're in the process of migrating data to a new SQL cluster and we're coming across a issue with the DBCC verification. Collecting verification information... Getting database backup information from SnapInfo file... Initializing SnapManager server on remote machine [SNPSPDB01]... Mounting Snapshot [sqlsnap__prdspdb01_12-02-2008_12.21.38] for Virtual Disk F:\shpntprod_db\ of Computer PRDSPDB01 This Snapshot is mounted as the drive [Z:]. Mount Snapshot succeeded. Mounting Snapshot [sqlsnap__prdspdb01_12-02-2008_12.21.38] for Virtual Disk F:\shpntprod_log\ of Computer PRDSPDB01 This Snapshot is mounted as the drive [Y:]. Mount Snapshot succeeded. Cannot find the data file in the mounted drive: f:\shpntprod_db\PRD_Hydro_Content_01.mdf Dismounting Virtual Disk Z of SnapShot [sqlsnap__prdspdb01_12-02-2008_12.21.38]... Dismount Snapshot succeeded. Dismounting Virtual Disk Y of SnapShot [sqlsnap__prdspdb01_12-02-2008_12.21.38]... Dismount Snapshot succeeded. Unable to locate the database data file on the mounted disk drive. Database verification information was not updated. There is an error during database verification. Any ideas why the verification would fail? It looks to me like its trying to find a data file mounted on the f:\ drive instead of the Y:\ or Z:\ drive.. Could this be some type of SQL permission issue? I'm at a total loss. Here is the kicker: When I installed SMSQL5.0 the problem went away, but SMMOSS (Snapmanager for Share point) doesn't work with SMSQL5.0, it requires 2.1.1/.2.1.2 __________________________________________________________ Ken Williams Storage Administrator, Business Technology Operations Sacramento Municipal Utility District E-Mail: kwillia(a)smud.org Phone: (916) 732-6744 Cell: (916) 240-4213

1 0

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 December 2008