toasters

toasters@lists.teaparty.net

4 participants
13534 discussions

RE: W2k profile and Netapp
by Mike Sphar 29 Mar '01

29 Mar '01

Also, correct me if I'm wrong, but I believe part of the "problem" MS tried to fix in Win2K is that prior to Win2K you couldn't map a directory below the share point. I.e, if you shared \\server\users you couldn't specifically map a drive letter to \\server\users\username, which was sometimes a problem. It's been a while since I dealt with any of this and I normally don't deal with the Windows side of things much, so I could be completely off base here. -- Mike Sphar - Sr Systems Administrator - Engineering Support Services - Remedy Corporation BOFH, GWP, MCP, MCP+I, MCSE, BFD -----Original Message----- From: Nail, Larry [mailto:lnail@ti.com] Sent: Wednesday, March 28, 2001 1:39 PM To: 'Tim Longo'; toasters(a)mathworks.com Subject: RE: W2k profile and Netapp You can map the share anyway you'd like. The preferred & taught method is to create 1 single share and then let the OS create subdirectories on that share. All our PC home directories are individual shares. 1 reason is that we control all access at the share level if at all possible... don't have to mess with file level ACL's. This also relieves most of the issues of Unix file permisssions vs. NTFS permissions. -----Original Message----- From: Tim Longo [mailto:tlongo@avaya.com] Sent: Wednesday, March 28, 2001 2:25 PM To: toasters(a)mathworks.com Subject: W2k profile and Netapp Greetings: Currently on my NT 4 domain, we map a user share on the netapp,(also the unix home), to a drive letter in the NT account profile. This is in the form of: Z: \\toaster\share We have noticed that with Windows 2000, they want this share to be mapped in the form of: Z: \\toaster\share\folder This makes migrating people from the old convention to the new convention quite a bit of work. Has anyone else encountered this, and how do you work around this problem? Needless to say, we are extremely angry with Microsoft. Thanks

1 0

RE: W2k profile and Netapp
by Loux, Linda 29 Mar '01

29 Mar '01

We encountered the same thing. What I discovered is that we are mounting Z: to the users home directory in their user account profile. That user home directory is \\toaster\share\user. You can change the mount to be \\toaster\share in the logon script. Linda Loux Systems Administrator Rosetta Inpharmatics -----Original Message----- From: Tim Longo [mailto:tlongo@avaya.com] Sent: Wednesday, March 28, 2001 12:25 PM To: toasters(a)mathworks.com Subject: W2k profile and Netapp Greetings: Currently on my NT 4 domain, we map a user share on the netapp,(also the unix home), to a drive letter in the NT account profile. This is in the form of: Z: \\toaster\share We have noticed that with Windows 2000, they want this share to be mapped in the form of: Z: \\toaster\share\folder This makes migrating people from the old convention to the new convention quite a bit of work. Has anyone else encountered this, and how do you work around this problem? Needless to say, we are extremely angry with Microsoft. Thanks **************************************************************************** This e-mail message is the property of Rosetta Inpharmatics and may contain information that is confidential and/or privileged. If you are not the intended recipient, any use, disclosure, copying, or communication of the contents of this message is prohibited. If this message was received in error, please forward a copy to mail_admin(a)rii.com and delete the message and any attachments from your computer. Thank you. ****************************************************************************

1 0

RE: File too large ?
by Kenley, Martin 28 Mar '01

28 Mar '01

More specifically, I believe that NFS v2 wont display the correct size; but if the file is on a multiprotocal box, like a filer, and if your client is running NFS v2, the file only looks like 2 GB, but looked at under CIFS, you will see the correct file size. -----Original Message----- From: Charles Randall [mailto:crandall@matchlogic.com] Sent: Wednesday, March 28, 2001 1:04 PM To: 'Hubbard, Dan'; toasters(a)mathworks.com Subject: RE: File too large ? Two things, 1. NFS v2 doesn't support files larger than 2 GB. Switch to NFS v3. Only very recently has the Linux NFS implementation supported NFS v3 (see below). 2. Can you work with files larger than 2 GB using the same tools on a local file system? If so, NFS v3 will help. If not, you'll have to find out how to "large file enable" your applications. On Solaris, look at the "largefile" and "lfcompile" manpages. For more info on the Linux NFS implementation, see this page http://nfs.sourceforge.net/ No offense intended to our resident Linux aficionados, but I cringed when I read most of it. Charles -----Original Message----- From: Hubbard, Dan [mailto:dhubbard@websense.com] Sent: Wednesday, March 28, 2001 12:10 PM To: toasters(a)mathworks.com Subject: File too large ? All; We are using a ONTAP v 6.0.1 and are NFS mounting Solaris and Redhat Linux boxes. We are in the process of creating some large text files and cannot either gunzip and/or create files greater than 2GB's. We have bumped up our maxfiles and set the options nfs.v2.df_2gb_lim ON without any luck. Our friends in tech support at Netapp told me that I must upgrade to 6.0.1r3 to fix this. Any input from the field ? Also, any input on issues with NFS and Redhat Linux kernel 2.2.14 (RH7.0) ? Thanks

1 0

RE: W2k profile and Netapp
by Nail, Larry 28 Mar '01

28 Mar '01

You can map the share anyway you'd like. The preferred & taught method is to create 1 single share and then let the OS create subdirectories on that share. All our PC home directories are individual shares. 1 reason is that we control all access at the share level if at all possible... don't have to mess with file level ACL's. This also relieves most of the issues of Unix file permisssions vs. NTFS permissions. -----Original Message----- From: Tim Longo [mailto:tlongo@avaya.com] Sent: Wednesday, March 28, 2001 2:25 PM To: toasters(a)mathworks.com Subject: W2k profile and Netapp Greetings: Currently on my NT 4 domain, we map a user share on the netapp,(also the unix home), to a drive letter in the NT account profile. This is in the form of: Z: \\toaster\share We have noticed that with Windows 2000, they want this share to be mapped in the form of: Z: \\toaster\share\folder This makes migrating people from the old convention to the new convention quite a bit of work. Has anyone else encountered this, and how do you work around this problem? Needless to say, we are extremely angry with Microsoft. Thanks

2 1

RE: Toasters and WINS
by Nail, Larry 28 Mar '01

28 Mar '01

If you have downlevel clients (NT, 9x), you'll need still need WINS, however the W2K implementation is quite a bit more stable & less inclinded to corrupt than the NT version. -----Original Message----- From: Tim Longo [mailto:tlongo@avaya.com] Sent: Wednesday, March 28, 2001 2:27 PM To: toasters(a)mathworks.com Subject: Toasters and WINS We are migrating users to a Windows 2000 domain. Wondering if anyone has run a Netapp in a Win2k environment without WINS? We will probably try to add the domain, and domain crontroller entries to the toaster hosts file?

1 0

dump -L - ndmp w/ Legato
by jlbreyfo＠collins.rockwell.com 28 Mar '01

28 Mar '01

Hello folks, Does anyone know how (or know why I wouldn't want to) to use the -L option to the dump command when using Legato NDMP. The -L is supposed to do a backup via file system as opposed to inode table. This would seem to me to make restores (esp. of directories) alot quicker. I'm sure there would be a significant hit on the backups, but maybe tolerable. I haven't seen any mention in Legato or documentation of -L in NetApp docs. Thanks in advance. John Breyfogle

2 1

RE: File too large ?
by Charles Randall 28 Mar '01

28 Mar '01

Two things, 1. NFS v2 doesn't support files larger than 2 GB. Switch to NFS v3. Only very recently has the Linux NFS implementation supported NFS v3 (see below). 2. Can you work with files larger than 2 GB using the same tools on a local file system? If so, NFS v3 will help. If not, you'll have to find out how to "large file enable" your applications. On Solaris, look at the "largefile" and "lfcompile" manpages. For more info on the Linux NFS implementation, see this page http://nfs.sourceforge.net/ No offense intended to our resident Linux aficionados, but I cringed when I read most of it. Charles -----Original Message----- From: Hubbard, Dan [mailto:dhubbard@websense.com] Sent: Wednesday, March 28, 2001 12:10 PM To: toasters(a)mathworks.com Subject: File too large ? All; We are using a ONTAP v 6.0.1 and are NFS mounting Solaris and Redhat Linux boxes. We are in the process of creating some large text files and cannot either gunzip and/or create files greater than 2GB's. We have bumped up our maxfiles and set the options nfs.v2.df_2gb_lim ON without any luck. Our friends in tech support at Netapp told me that I must upgrade to 6.0.1r3 to fix this. Any input from the field ? Also, any input on issues with NFS and Redhat Linux kernel 2.2.14 (RH7.0) ? Thanks

1 0

Toasters and WINS
by Tim Longo 28 Mar '01

28 Mar '01

We are migrating users to a Windows 2000 domain. Wondering if anyone has run a Netapp in a Win2k environment without WINS? We will probably try to add the domain, and domain crontroller entries to the toaster hosts file?

1 0

W2k profile and Netapp
by Tim Longo 28 Mar '01

28 Mar '01

Greetings: Currently on my NT 4 domain, we map a user share on the netapp,(also the unix home), to a drive letter in the NT account profile. This is in the form of: Z: \\toaster\share We have noticed that with Windows 2000, they want this share to be mapped in the form of: Z: \\toaster\share\folder This makes migrating people from the old convention to the new convention quite a bit of work. Has anyone else encountered this, and how do you work around this problem? Needless to say, we are extremely angry with Microsoft. Thanks

1 0

File too large ?
by Hubbard, Dan 28 Mar '01

28 Mar '01

All; We are using a ONTAP v 6.0.1 and are NFS mounting Solaris and Redhat Linux boxes. We are in the process of creating some large text files and cannot either gunzip and/or create files greater than 2GB's. We have bumped up our maxfiles and set the options nfs.v2.df_2gb_lim ON without any luck. Our friends in tech support at Netapp told me that I must upgrade to 6.0.1r3 to fix this. Any input from the field ? Also, any input on issues with NFS and Redhat Linux kernel 2.2.14 (RH7.0) ? Thanks

1 0

Jump to page:

2026

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