toasters August 2009

toasters@lists.teaparty.net

19 participants
18 discussions

unix UID change on NTFS file systems
by Tim Thomas 25 Aug '09

25 Aug '09

Has anyone run into the situation where you have a mixed environment (NIS/NFS for UNIX access; AD/CIFS for NTFS access) and in the process of changing a UNIX UID for a user it does not properly show the change for NTFS files when viewed via NFS from a UNIX box? If you run fsecurity on the ntfs file you can see that it does imbed the UNIX UID in the NTFS file itself. For unix files, it's no problem, you just chown the file to the new UID, however there does not appear to be any solution for NTFS files. I had a case open with NetApp and they say it is "merely cosmetic" and doesn't actually impact the file access or security of the file, which is all true. However if you do an LS from a unix box and see a bogus UID for a user that no longer exists, you might think the file doesn't need to be around, which is a false assumption in this case. It is merely cosmetic, however it can be horribly misleading. Why store the UID in the first place if you can't correct it when it changes. Anyway, any insights would be appreciated. Thanks! Tim Thomas Lockheed Martin

1 0

Re: 7.2.6.1 P2-P8?
by David N. Blank-Edelman 25 Aug '09

25 Aug '09

On Aug 25, 2009, at 10:04 AM, John Stoffel wrote: > How has > 7.3.x been for people? Any gotchas? It doesn't support the DS14mk1 shelves (which is why it isn't an option for us at the moment). -- dNb

2 1

RE: 2050 with high CPU Usage during weekly asup
by Halton, Robert 24 Aug '09

24 Aug '09

Lets say for argument sake that the system is a brand new install with nothing on it apart from the root vols. And that I have 3 of them.. And they all do the same thing. Was just looking for feedback from the world at large before opening my ticket. From: Jeff Mohler [mailto:speedtoys.racing@gmail.com] Sent: Monday, August 17, 2009 8:06 AM To: Borders, Rich Cc: Halton, Robert; toasters(a)mathworks.com Subject: Re: 2050 with high CPU Usage during weekly asup Or it could be nothing at all. High CPU doesnt equal high latencies or slow user performance by itself. Backups will bump up CPU, on slower systems more than faster ones..capture more data. On Mon, Aug 17, 2009 at 7:44 AM, Borders, Rich <Rich.Borders(a)netapp.com> wrote: Well, the asup is a list of commands that generate a lot of file responses that are then later sent off to the asup tool NetApp uses. It could be that it puts stress on vol0 (or root vol) and that is generating the load. (unless you can verify that DFM is erroneous) Rich From: Halton, Robert [mailto:rhalton@tpg.com] Sent: Monday, August 17, 2009 10:30 AM To: toasters(a)mathworks.com Subject: 2050 with high CPU Usage during weekly asup Has anyone else seen this? A 2050 Cluster when it sends the weekly ASUP will max out CPU, or at least DFM tells me so.. *** Event details follow.*** General Information ------------------- DataFabric Manager Serial Number: 1-50-008777 Alarm Identifier: 4 Event Fields ------------- Event Identifier: 2327284 Event Name: CPU Too Busy Event Description: CPU utilization on an appliance Event Severity: Warning Event Timestamp: 16 Aug 03:21 Source of Event --------------- Source Identifier: 4111 Source Name: RCNETAPP2 Type: Active/Active Controller Source Status: Warning Event Arguments --------------- cpuTooBusyThreshold: 95 cpuUtilization: 97.6871 --NetApp DataFabric Manager This message is intended only for the person(s) to which it is addressed and may contain privileged, confidential and/or insider information. If you have received this communication in error, please notify us immediately by replying to the message and deleting it from your computer. Any disclosure, copying, distribution, or the taking of any action concerning the contents of this message and any attachment(s) by anyone other than the named recipient(s) is strictly prohibited. -- No Signature Required Save The Bits, Save The World! This message is intended only for the person(s) to which it is addressed and may contain privileged, confidential and/or insider information. If you have received this communication in error, please notify us immediately by replying to the message and deleting it from your computer. Any disclosure, copying, distribution, or the taking of any action concerning the contents of this message and any attachment(s) by anyone other than the named recipient(s) is strictly prohibited.

2 1

2050 with high CPU Usage during weekly asup
by Halton, Robert 17 Aug '09

17 Aug '09

Has anyone else seen this? A 2050 Cluster when it sends the weekly ASUP will max out CPU, or at least DFM tells me so.. *** Event details follow.*** General Information ------------------- DataFabric Manager Serial Number: 1-50-008777 Alarm Identifier: 4 Event Fields ------------- Event Identifier: 2327284 Event Name: CPU Too Busy Event Description: CPU utilization on an appliance Event Severity: Warning Event Timestamp: 16 Aug 03:21 Source of Event --------------- Source Identifier: 4111 Source Name: RCNETAPP2 Type: Active/Active Controller Source Status: Warning Event Arguments --------------- cpuTooBusyThreshold: 95 cpuUtilization: 97.6871 --NetApp DataFabric Manager This message is intended only for the person(s) to which it is addressed and may contain privileged, confidential and/or insider information. If you have received this communication in error, please notify us immediately by replying to the message and deleting it from your computer. Any disclosure, copying, distribution, or the taking of any action concerning the contents of this message and any attachment(s) by anyone other than the named recipient(s) is strictly prohibited.

2 1

7.2.6.1 P2-P8?
by David N. Blank-Edelman 13 Aug '09

13 Aug '09

Hi- We recently had a crash due to bug #327361 (quotas not play nice with CIFS alternate streams). This is apparently fixed by P2. A quick check on now.netapp.com shows they are now up to P8 with what looks like a number of less than great bugs fixed in the releases later than P2 as well. Netapp support recommends we go to P2 because that is all we strictly need but suggests there would likely be no problem going all the way to P8 if we want. Has anyone had any experiences with either P2 or P8 (or any number in between) that would suggest we should pick one over the other? Thanks! -- dNb

2 1

CIFS volume deduplication
by Davies,Matt 10 Aug '09

10 Aug '09

Hi everyone, We have a NetApp Filer 3040 running 7.2.6.1. We have configured Dedupe on a few volumes with ESX VM's and have saved about 15-25% disk space. Last week, we ran it on our CIFS Volume (Homedir, Shared Drives, etc), which is 950Gigs, but we only saved about 700 megs. These are the following commands we used to start the deduplication... sis on VOL sis start -s VOL It took about 8 hours to scan the volume. Afterwards, "df -s" showed that it saved 0%. Netapp suggested that I wait for the old snapshots to delete, but it still didn't help. Does anyone have any ideas about this ? Thanks Matt ____________________________ Matt Davies Director of International IT Operations General Atlantic 83 Pall Mall London SW1Y 5ES Tel: +44 207 484 3203 Fax: +44 207 484 2803 Mobile: +44 777 559 4265 ____________________________ ________________________________ _____________________________________________________________ This e-mail (including all attachments) is confidential and may be privileged. It is for the exclusive use of the addressee only. If you are not the addressee, you are hereby notified that any dissemination of this communication is strictly prohibited. If you have received this communication in error, please erase all copies of the message and its attachments and notify us immediately at help(a)generalatlantic.com . Thank You.

4 3

User based Quotas - Why don't they show up correctly when mapped?
by Langdon, Laughlin T. (Lock) 07 Aug '09

07 Aug '09

More fun with user based quotas. When a user has a mapped CIFS share to their home drive the size of the entire volume shows up when they map the drive. I thought user quotas used to just show the "quotaed" space for that user. I.E. I have a 11TB volume. I create a user quota of 500MB and apply it to a user (say xyz99). When XYZ99's home share is mapped they see 11TB available to them, not 500MB. A tree based quota with a hard limit works just fine in showing only 500MB available. I've worked with Netapp support and did get an obscure bug (88541 <http://now.netapp.com/NOW/cgi-bin/bol?Type=Detail&Display=88541> ) that has no information and a reply that there isn't much information on this issue. (Maybe the functionality just isn't there? I could swear we used to have that function.) Does anyone use user quotas and have this same problem? Are there better ways to do user home share type CIFS shares? Thanks lock p.s. (Also posted on the NetApp Support Community if you want "points" for answering) J https://forums.netapp.com/thread/2900

4 7

Re: User based Quotas - Why don't they show up correctly when mapped?
by Langdon, Laughlin T. (Lock) 05 Aug '09

05 Aug '09

Yep we use na_ntfschown as well. I will setup some test shares to test your setup. Thaks Lock -----Original Message----- From: Bill Holland Sent: Aug 05, 2009 4:17 PM To: "Tim Thomas" <timothy.b.thomas(a)lmco.com>, "Langdon, Laughlin T. (Lock)" <Langdon.Lock(a)mayo.edu> Cc: "toasters(a)mathworks.com" <toasters(a)mathworks.com> Subject: Re: User based Quotas - Why don't they show up correctly when mapped? There is a tool in the Toolchest on the NOW site called na_chstuff. Within it is one called na_chmod.exe I have a script that I run at 3am every day that uses this to change the ownership of each folder based on the users' login name. We have our user shares saved as filername:/vol/users/username and shared as \\filername\users. They are using NTFS security style and no QTrees. Authenticated Users has List on the first level subfolders with Administrators, System, and Creator Owner having Full Control of everything. The script is something like (I'm at home and doing this off the top of my head): for /d %f in (\\filername\users\*.*) do na_ntfschown /r domain\%f The exact syntax may be off a bit, but you get the idea. Hope this helps. ----- Original Message ----- From: "Tim Thomas" <timothy.b.thomas(a)lmco.com> To: "Langdon, Laughlin T. (Lock)" <Langdon.Lock(a)mayo.edu> Cc: "Bill Holland" <hollandwl(a)gmail.com>; <toasters(a)mathworks.com> Sent: Wednesday, August 05, 2009 5:28 PM Subject: Re: User based Quotas - Why don't they show up correctly when mapped? > We also are using user level quotas and it shows up just fine when mapped. > are you using usermap.cfg to definite your qtrees as homedir qtrees, so > the mapping is \\filer\userid? > do all your users infact "own" their own files. if using unix security > style for your qtrees this is usually easy to check. > If using ntfs security style this is more difficult to check and set, but > you have to make sure that the "owner" of the files and the directories is > the individual user. (we use unix security style, it makes things much > easier to script up) > the only exception we have run into is if the user is in the > administrators group, if this is the case you must set > wafl.nt_admin_priv_map_to_root to off for the quota to appear properly for > those users in the local administrators group. if you set that option to > off, then the quotas show up correctly, even for the admins. > > Tim Thomas > > Langdon, Laughlin T. (Lock) wrote: >> >> I’m running 7.2.5.1p6 (upgrading to 7.2.6.1 this weekend) >> >> They are enabled, and active (can’t put more data than the quota is set >> to). I’ve even created a monitoring tree based quota per the >> documentation from netapp. >> >> Here’s a modified version of my quotas for homeshares >> >> #USER HOME SHARES BEGIN >> >> * user@/vol/VOLUME/QTREE04 - - - 1048576K - >> >> * user@/vol/ VOLUME/QTREE09 - - - 104857600K - >> >> * user@/vol/ VOLUME/QTREE02 - - - 102400K - >> >> * user@/vol/ VOLUME/QTREE06 - - - 10485760K - >> >> * user@/vol/ VOLUME/QTREE10 - - - 209715200K - >> >> * user@/vol/ VOLUME/QTREE01 - - - 20480K - >> >> * user@/vol/ VOLUME/QTREE07 - - - 26214400K - >> >> * user@/vol/ VOLUME/QTREE03 - - - 512000K - >> >> * user@/vol/ VOLUME/QTREE08 - - - 52428800K - >> >> * user@/vol/ VOLUME/QTREE05 - - - 5242880K - >> >> * user@/vol/ VOLUME/QTREE11 - - - 20480K - >> >> #USER HOME SHARES END >> >> Here’s a direct quote from Netapp Support re: my issue of USER quotas not >> properly showing when mapped >> >> “I wanted to find you some documentation for this condition but found >> little. However, I did confirm your suspicion that this is by design” >> >> To me that says what you have currently should not work. Sigh… round and >> round we go J >> >> Thanks for the info, It will give me more firepower to figure out what >> the issue really is. >> >> *From:* Bill Holland [mailto:hollandwl@gmail.com] >> *Sent:* Wednesday, August 05, 2009 9:00 AM >> *To:* Langdon, Laughlin T. (Lock) >> *Cc:* toasters(a)mathworks.com >> *Subject:* Re: User based Quotas - Why don't they show up correctly when >> mapped? >> >> We are using user quotas for our users and it shows the capacity based on >> their quota, not the entire volume. We are using 7.2.6.1. Perhaps your >> quotas aren't enabled or haven't completed a resize operation? >> >> On Wed, Aug 5, 2009 at 11:47 AM, Langdon, Laughlin T. (Lock) >> <Langdon.Lock(a)mayo.edu <mailto:Langdon.Lock@mayo.edu>> wrote: >> >> More fun with user based quotas. When a user has a mapped CIFS share to >> their home drive the size of the entire volume shows up when they map the >> drive. I thought user quotas used to just show the "quotaed" space for >> that user. >> >> I.E. I have a 11TB volume. I create a user quota of 500MB and apply it to >> a user (say xyz99). When XYZ99's home share is mapped they see 11TB >> available to them, not 500MB. A tree based quota with a hard limit works >> just fine in showing only 500MB available. >> >> I've worked with Netapp support and did get an obscure bug (88541 >> <http://now.netapp.com/NOW/cgi-bin/bol?Type=Detail&Display=88541>) that >> has no information and a reply that there isn’t much information on this >> issue. (Maybe the functionality just isn’t there? I could swear we used >> to have that function.) >> >> Does anyone use user quotas and have this same problem? >> >> Are there better ways to do user home share type CIFS shares? >> >> Thanks >> lock >> >> p.s. (Also posted on the NetApp Support Community if you want “points” >> for answering) J >> >> https://forums.netapp.com/thread/2900 >>

1 0

2025

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 2009