toasters February 2021

toasters@lists.teaparty.net

8 participants
5 discussions

SV:
by Heino Walther 04 Mar '21

04 Mar '21

I would recommend 9.7p10 Be aware that you can only jump 2 versions… so it’s 9.1 to 9.3 to 9.5 to 9.7 😉 I would recommend a pause between each version, and get the latest patched version also… I seem to remember one specific version where the cluster certificate in the downloaded ontap version was expired, which resulted in an upgrade of the cluster never completing… no downtime or anything, but NetApp support had to fix the cluster database… 😊 I have been working with NetApp for 15 years and never done a real production revert in my life 😉. But maybe I’m just lucky? /Heino I've got an AFF8020 running 9.1P10 and wondering whether I should target 9.6P10 or 9.7P10 as the destination version. I'm aware that such an upgrade will require a hop to 9.3 first. I'm also aware that reversion can not skip a release, which is a little scary. I *really* hope I don't have to revert from 9.6 or 9.7 all the way back to 9.3 (3 or 4 hops). What I'm looking for is advice on 9.6p10 vs. 9.7p10. Any horror stories of either release? I'm leaning towards 9.7p10, just because it's more recent. Fra: Toasters <toasters-bounces(a)teaparty.net> på vegne af Brian Parent via Toasters <toasters(a)teaparty.net> Dato: fredag, 5. februar 2021 kl. 19.22 Til: toasters(a)teaparty.net <toasters(a)teaparty.net> Emne: <no subject> _______________________________________________ Toasters mailing list Toasters(a)teaparty.net https://www.teaparty.net/mailman/listinfo/toasters

3 2

Motherboard Replacement on out-of-warranty filer
by Alexander Griesser 18 Feb '21

18 Feb '21

Hey there, we do operate a few EOL'ed devices in our labs (and as playground for the automation services, etc.) and from time to time, things break - very rarely, but they do. I do have quite some hardware on stock here and I'm all set for exchanging almost anything that can break inside a filer (from disks to shelves to backplanes, cables, fans, PSUs, NVRAM batteries, etc.), but changing the motherboard proved difficult. I cannot find a way to assign the old S/N to the new motherboard in order to be able to reuse the licenses we had on the (now dead) filer. License transfers to other serial numbers are also not possible without active support contract. Any idea how to make that happen? Thanks, Alexander Griesser Head of Systems Operations ANEXIA Internetdienstleistungs GmbH E-Mail: AGriesser(a)anexia-it.com<mailto:AGriesser@anexia-it.com> Web: http://www.anexia-it.com<http://www.anexia-it.com/> Anschrift Hauptsitz Klagenfurt: Feldkirchnerstraße 140, 9020 Klagenfurt Geschäftsführer: Alexander Windbichler Firmenbuch: FN 289918a | Gerichtsstand: Klagenfurt | UID-Nummer: AT U63216601

2 3

interesting 9.3P17 & 9.5P5 bug
by John Stoffel 12 Feb '21

12 Feb '21

Just ran into an interesting bug in 9.3P17 (yes, I'm off support!) and another 9.5P5 system which I thought I'd share. Let's grab all the export policies on the system in CSV format to make it easy to parse: ntap1::> set -showseparator ","; export-policy show Vserver Policy Name --------------- ------------------- foo default WTF? That's wierd? Let's try something else: ntap1::> set -showseparator ","; export-policy show -fields vserver ,policyname vserver,policyname, Vserver,Policy Name, foo,default, Ah! Now we're getting what we want. Stupid annoying bug when you're trying to write a perl script to pull out data. Can anyone confirm if this is still there in the latest releases? Hmm... poking at it some more... I suspect I'm forgetting that you *must* specify the fields when changing the -showseparator to get easier to parse output. But I still think this is a surprising occurance, since it does include the field names, so there's no need to actually specify them in the output. Principal of least surprise and all that. Cheers, John

2 2

OnTap 9.6 vs 9.7
by Brian Parent 05 Feb '21

05 Feb '21

I've got an AFF8020 running 9.1P10 and wondering whether I should target 9.6P10 or 9.7P10 as the destination version. I'm aware that such an upgrade will require a hop to 9.3 first. I'm also aware that reversion can not skip a release, which is a little scary. I *really* hope I don't have to revert from 9.6 or 9.7 all the way back to 9.3 (3 or 4 hops). What I'm looking for is advice on 9.6p10 vs. 9.7p10. Any horror stories of either release? I'm leaning towards 9.7p10, just because it's more recent. -- Brian Parent Information Technology Services Department ITS Computing Infrastructure Operations Group UC San Diego (858) 534-6090

1 0

7-mode upgrade mismatch
by Carl Howell 04 Feb '21

04 Feb '21

I have a 3240 cluster with node A running 8.2.5P5 and node B running 8.1.4P9. Node A was upgraded to 8.2.5P5 and giveback was performed from node B. Takeover of node B by node A was performed, and both nodes are now running on node A. But, node B was not upgraded to 8.2.5P5 before the takeover and now when we attempt to giveback to node B so that it can be upgraded, it panics. So, node A running 8.2.5P5 in takeover mode. Node B running 8.1.4P9 has been taken over by A. How can we get B upgraded to 8.2.5P5? Thanks, --Carl

3 5

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 February 2021