toasters November 2012

toasters@lists.teaparty.net

16 participants
10 discussions

NetApp / AWS Alliance
by Steven Kreuzer 30 Nov '12

30 Nov '12

So NetApp just announced this: http://www.netapp.com/us/company/news/news-rel-20121128-693554.html I am not familiar with Amazon's offerings, but it sounds like you can stick a filer in certain datacenters have your clients continue to access a primary filer via nfs or cifs and then snapmirror that filer to a secondary filer that magically writes it to the cloud? The details are a bit light from what I have been abe to find online, so I am curious if anyone has any additional information. Thanks

2 1

SMI-S support within recent NetApp filers/OnTap
by John Constable 30 Nov '12

30 Nov '12

Hey folks, Intrigued by the possibility of this, and NetApp appear to be on board (albeit at 1.2 rather than 1.6 version of the spec), but wondering if anyone has any real world experience of trying to use it with their products, particularly cross platform i.e. not Powershell ( I've nothing against Powershell* but SMI-S has the possibility of OS independence), and cross vendor? https://communities.netapp.com/docs/DOC-1055 cheers John *some of my best friends are Powershell coders :-) -- John Constable, Storage Team x6924 (+44 1223 496924) Wellcome Trust Sanger Institute, Wellcome Trust Genome Campus, Hinxton, Cambridge, UK -- The Wellcome Trust Sanger Institute is operated by Genome Research Limited, a charity registered in England with number 1021457 and a company registered in England with number 2742969, whose registered office is 215 Euston Road, London, NW1 2BE.

1 0

cf.takeover.on_network_interface_failure question
by Ray Van Dolson 21 Nov '12

21 Nov '12

Hello; FAS2050 running with ONTAP 7.3.5. If we set cf.takeover.on_network_interface_failure to "on" and the failure policy to "any_nic", and network connectivity is _lost_ on a partner-configured NIC (but the NIC hasn't necessarily "failed"), is this sufficient to trigger a takeover? We had a situation today where a patch panel or switch issue caused one of the NICs to trigger a "Link down". We didn't have the network interface failure takeover option configured, but I am wondering if this could have saved us. Thanks, Ray

2 2

LUNs lost initiator setting after a power outage
by Andrew Laurence 16 Nov '12

16 Nov '12

So, this was fun. After a power outage on Saturday, our Exchange 2010 mailbox servers (all hosted on VMWare ESX) came up with only some of their LUNs. These LUNs are hosted on our HA-paired FAS2040 (OnTAP 7.3.4); each LUN hosts an Exchange database. Try as we might, we couldn't get these LUNs to mount. After opening a support case with each of NetApp and Microsoft, and conferencing in both engineers, and several hours, the Microsoft engineer finally suggested we check the target LUNs on the filer. Turns out that each of the missing LUNs no longer had the setting for the mailbox servers' initiators. After checking that box the LUNs mounted without issue. Anyone seen this happen before? The NetApp engineer didn't have any immediate ideas, and I haven't had luck finding a match in the list archives or in NOW. Thanks, Andrew -- Andrew Laurence Office of Information Technology atlauren(a)uci.edu University of California, Irvine

8 8

VIF Issues
by Nail, Thomas E 16 Nov '12

16 Nov '12

All, I am needing to re-order some of the virtual interfaces on an HA pair of 3170s running OnTap 7.3.7. The current configuration has: 2 x 1 Gbe interfaces in an LACP 'vif_r0' 2 x 1 Gbe interfaces in an LACP 'vif_r1' 1 second-level vif, vif_rsec, comprised of vif_r0 and vif_r1. What I want to (eventually) get to is: 4 x 1 Gbe interfaces in an LACP vif_r0 And I don't want to take a downtime to do it. Unfortunately, with an HA pair, this isn't going to be possible (I don't think…).Once a failover and configuration change is made, the takeover partner doesn't have a "correct" interface to give back to, since it's "partner" interface name has changed. So what I'm proposing is: Leave the second-level vif alone. Remove the physical interfaces from vif_r1 and put them in vif_r0. The question I have is: can I fully de-populate a vif of physical interfaces? Will it stick on the last one? I don't have anywhere to test this, so I'm hoping someone with some spare capacity can either test it and let me know if it will work. Thanks in advance, -=Tom Nail

2 1

how significant / non-optimal path error
by Stuart Kendrick 12 Nov '12

12 Nov '12

How substantially can this affect performance? scsitarget.partnerPath.misconfigured:error]: FCP Partner Path Misconfigured - Host I/O access through a non-primary and non-optimal path was detected. We have a two-node FAS3020 cluster running 7.2.4, serving two clients via Fibre Channel. [More precisely, four clients: two pairs of Active/Standby SQL Server clusters. A pair of Fibre Channel switches provide the fabric for this tiny SAN.] Cleverly, we've configured the clients to cross the cluster interconnect in order to reach their shelves. i.e. under normal operation, Client1's traffic must traverse the fabric, ToasterA, the cluster interconnect, and ToasterB, before reaching its shelves. Conversely, Client2's traffic must traverse the fabric, ToasterB, the cluster interconnect, and ToasterA before reaching its shelves. Occasionally, we see the error message above in the logs ... sometimes just once/week, occasionally twice/day. We'd like to ignore this ... we hope to retire the installation sometime next year ... but on the other hand, if this degrades performance substantially, then we'll reconsider. ? --sk Stuart Kendrick FHCRC

2 1

no thread since 10/31/2012
by Uddhav Regmi 12 Nov '12

12 Nov '12

Just making sure... From: toasters-bounces(a)teaparty.net [mailto:toasters-bounces@teaparty.net] On Behalf Of Sto RageC Sent: Wednesday, October 31, 2012 11:18 PM To: Ray Van Dolson Cc: toasters(a)teaparty.net Subject: Re: Clarification on CIFS Permissions (ONTAP 8.0.2P3) On Wed, Oct 31, 2012 at 5:45 PM, Ray Van Dolson <rvandolson(a)esri.com> wrote: Where is this default "Everyone" permission set set by default? It doesn't seem to be tied to the CIFS share security settings so I presume it's an NTFS qtree default? Thanks, Ray Yes, the NTFS security defaults to Everyone when a NTFS qtree is created. We normally don't set the permissions at the share level, it is set at the security level on NTFS. The first step is to remove Everyone, add a share administrator - full control and then the user groups with modify. -HTH

2 1

Looking for Source
by Carolyn Chambers 09 Nov '12

09 Nov '12

Hello, I am looking for source code for the old symlink_tool.exe tool. I understand that it is not supported but it is very handy to have around. I have an idea for its next life... Thanks, Carolyn ________________________________ Carolyn Chambers 972-679-4211 - cell 972-767-0555 - fax 972-578-2708 - office cc(a)storageassessments.com<mailto:cc@storageassessments.com> 1255 W. 15th Street, Suite 825 - Plano, TX 75075 [cid:image001.png@01CDBE9F.F83542D0]

1 0

probably a n00b quota question
by Randy Rue 06 Nov '12

06 Nov '12

Hello All, Found an anomaly with how a quota is being applied on a vFiler and it feels like I must be missing something obvious. We have a vFiler that serves up a couple of hundred folders for researchers. This is on 7.3.5 so the aggregate is limited to 16TB. We've set a 500GB quota per folder (qtree), strictly to hopefully keep any one researcher from tanking the filer. Here's the /etc/quotas file: #Auto-generated by setup Fri Dec 18 11:16:33 PST 2009 * tree@/vol/cs_researcher 500G - 450G - - /vol/cs_researcher/Rue_R tree 13G - 10G - - /vol/cs_researcher/tosh_M tree 1024G - 950G - - If I read this correctly, all qtrees are limited to 500G with two exceptions, me (testing) and one researcher that we allowed to go to a TB. But if I look at the volume I have one folder with 6TB in it. But if I run a "quota report" on that qtree, it says they're using 437GB: cs@tungsten-a> quota report /vol/cs_researcher/Bradley_P K-Bytes Files Type ID Volume Tree Used Limit Used Limit Quota Specifier ----- -------- -------- -------- --------- --------- ------- ------- --------------- tree 16 cs_researcher dley_P 458297068 524288000 3261880 - /vol/cs_researcher/dley_P It's worth noting that a Windows reporting tool (TreeSize) shows the folder has 350K folders and 11.3M files but the above shows 3.2M files. In either case, will that overload the system's ability to track usage? And why would the two tools show two numbers? Also, while the well-behaved folders are primarily touched via NTFS/CIFS and show AD owners, the tricky folder is mostly NFS and shows as owned by root. But while we often hit quota situations on our home drive filer (user based quotas) where garbled ownership mixes up quotas, in this case (qtrees) it shouldn't make any difference? Am I missing something? Hope to hear from you, Randy

1 0

Clarification on CIFS Permissions (ONTAP 8.0.2P3)
by Ray Van Dolson 01 Nov '12

01 Nov '12

Have a volume with an NTFS qtree being shared out via CIFS. The CIFS share has a number of different share level permissions. When I browse to the share from a Windows client and view Security permissions on a folder within, I see only the user "Everyone" listed with implicit full control. Where is this default "Everyone" permission set set by default? It doesn't seem to be tied to the CIFS share security settings so I presume it's an NTFS qtree default? Thanks, Ray

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 November 2012