toasters

toasters@lists.teaparty.net

13531 discussions

RE: File Sharing Windows <> NFS Volume on R150 (6.5.2R1) ...
by Sphar, Mike 18 Apr '05

18 Apr '05

Hey, if you can build your own file locking mechanism into Microsoft Office, more power to you! ;) -- Michael W. Sphar - IS&T - Lead Systems Administrator SMBU Engineering Support Services, BMC Software -----Original Message----- From: McCarthy, Tim [mailto:timothy.mccarthy@netapp.com] Sent: Monday, April 18, 2005 6:05 PM To: Sphar, Mike; toasters(a)mathworks.com Subject: RE: File Sharing Windows <> NFS Volume on R150 (6.5.2R1) ... Which is why you write your own locking mechanism ;) --tmac ====================== Tim McCarthy Professional Services/Systems Engineer NetApp Federal Systems, Inc. 410-551-3970 (o) 443-363-0208 (f) tmac(a)netapp.com tmac-pager(a)netapp.com ====================== -----Original Message----- From: Sphar, Mike [mailto:Mike_Sphar@bmc.com] Sent: Monday, April 18, 2005 6:38 PM To: toasters(a)mathworks.com Subject: RE: File Sharing Windows <> NFS Volume on R150 (6.5.2R1) ... A lot of file-locking is dependent on the client, of course. Assuming that an NFS file-lock was put in place, it's still up to the client to decide "Okay, that file is locked for writing; I will just open it up in read-only mode instead." That's my understanding anyway...I've never found nfs-based file locking to be terribly reliable. -- Michael W. Sphar - IS&T - Lead Systems Administrator SMBU Engineering Support Services, BMC Software -----Original Message----- From: McCarthy, Tim [mailto:timothy.mccarthy@netapp.com] Sent: Monday, April 18, 2005 4:27 PM To: Doug Chomyn; toasters(a)mathworks.com Subject: RE: File Sharing Windows <> NFS Volume on R150 (6.5.2R1) ... How about writing a wrapper around the file calls that does very proper file locking? I know....more work...just an idea. --tmac -----Original Message----- From: Doug Chomyn [mailto:chomyn@corefa.com] Sent: Monday, April 18, 2005 3:55 PM To: toasters(a)mathworks.com Subject: Re: File Sharing Windows <> NFS Volume on R150 (6.5.2R1) ... Um, I'm looking at dynamic sharing, where if host 1 has rw, hosts 2, 3, 4 have r only. when host 1 relinquishes w, the hosts 2, 3, 4 have the possibility of opening the file for w since they too have the privilege. McCarthy, Tim wrote: >Why not: >(6.5.1 or higher) >exportfs -p ro=host1:host2:host3,rw=host4:netgroup1:subnet/24 >/vol/vol1/path > >--tmac > >-----Original Message----- >From: Doug Chomyn [mailto:chomyn@corefa.com] >Sent: Monday, April 18, 2005 2:24 PM >To: toasters(a)mathworks.com >Subject: Re: File Sharing Windows <> NFS Volume on R150 (6.5.2R1) ... > >Yes, we have SFU installed on the Windows clients and can easily access >the NFS volumes, but I need the "file share" as if the shared document >was on a Windows NT volume, permissions-wise that is ... > >emilio brambilla wrote: > > > >>hello, >> >>Doug Chomyn wrote: >> >> >> >>>document R only, etc, etc. Ordinarily we would do a re-share via >>>Samba, or perhaps make a CIFS volume share, but I'm trying to reduce >>>complexity (and we're not going to buy a CIFS license) ... anyone >>>have experience >>> >>> >>if you have only a few workstations accesing the storage with windows >>sharing you can try installing on each workstation the "microsoft nfs >>client" you can download from http://www.microsoft.com/windows/sfu/ >> >>we did use this workaround 6 month ago to allow a few windows box to >>access a nfs-only fas270C (the customer has 300 unix boxes and only 2 >>windows clients so he did not agree to buy the cifs license) >> >>it's still working and the customer is habby about it, but we had to >>force the workstation to use nfs over tcp in order to have a stable >>connection >> >>if you need it, this is the registry key you have to set to force tcp >>connection: >>[HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE\SOFTWARE\Microsoft\Client for >>NFS\CurrentVersion\Default] "PreferTCP"=dword:00000001 >> >> >> > > > >

1 0

RE: File Sharing Windows <> NFS Volume on R150 (6.5.2R1) ...
by McCarthy, Tim 18 Apr '05

18 Apr '05

Which is why you write your own locking mechanism ;) --tmac ====================== Tim McCarthy Professional Services/Systems Engineer NetApp Federal Systems, Inc. 410-551-3970 (o) 443-363-0208 (f) tmac(a)netapp.com tmac-pager(a)netapp.com ====================== -----Original Message----- From: Sphar, Mike [mailto:Mike_Sphar@bmc.com] Sent: Monday, April 18, 2005 6:38 PM To: toasters(a)mathworks.com Subject: RE: File Sharing Windows <> NFS Volume on R150 (6.5.2R1) ... A lot of file-locking is dependent on the client, of course. Assuming that an NFS file-lock was put in place, it's still up to the client to decide "Okay, that file is locked for writing; I will just open it up in read-only mode instead." That's my understanding anyway...I've never found nfs-based file locking to be terribly reliable. -- Michael W. Sphar - IS&T - Lead Systems Administrator SMBU Engineering Support Services, BMC Software -----Original Message----- From: McCarthy, Tim [mailto:timothy.mccarthy@netapp.com] Sent: Monday, April 18, 2005 4:27 PM To: Doug Chomyn; toasters(a)mathworks.com Subject: RE: File Sharing Windows <> NFS Volume on R150 (6.5.2R1) ... How about writing a wrapper around the file calls that does very proper file locking? I know....more work...just an idea. --tmac -----Original Message----- From: Doug Chomyn [mailto:chomyn@corefa.com] Sent: Monday, April 18, 2005 3:55 PM To: toasters(a)mathworks.com Subject: Re: File Sharing Windows <> NFS Volume on R150 (6.5.2R1) ... Um, I'm looking at dynamic sharing, where if host 1 has rw, hosts 2, 3, 4 have r only. when host 1 relinquishes w, the hosts 2, 3, 4 have the possibility of opening the file for w since they too have the privilege. McCarthy, Tim wrote: >Why not: >(6.5.1 or higher) >exportfs -p ro=host1:host2:host3,rw=host4:netgroup1:subnet/24 >/vol/vol1/path > >--tmac > >-----Original Message----- >From: Doug Chomyn [mailto:chomyn@corefa.com] >Sent: Monday, April 18, 2005 2:24 PM >To: toasters(a)mathworks.com >Subject: Re: File Sharing Windows <> NFS Volume on R150 (6.5.2R1) ... > >Yes, we have SFU installed on the Windows clients and can easily access >the NFS volumes, but I need the "file share" as if the shared document >was on a Windows NT volume, permissions-wise that is ... > >emilio brambilla wrote: > > > >>hello, >> >>Doug Chomyn wrote: >> >> >> >>>document R only, etc, etc. Ordinarily we would do a re-share via >>>Samba, or perhaps make a CIFS volume share, but I'm trying to reduce >>>complexity (and we're not going to buy a CIFS license) ... anyone >>>have experience >>> >>> >>if you have only a few workstations accesing the storage with windows >>sharing you can try installing on each workstation the "microsoft nfs >>client" you can download from http://www.microsoft.com/windows/sfu/ >> >>we did use this workaround 6 month ago to allow a few windows box to >>access a nfs-only fas270C (the customer has 300 unix boxes and only 2 >>windows clients so he did not agree to buy the cifs license) >> >>it's still working and the customer is habby about it, but we had to >>force the workstation to use nfs over tcp in order to have a stable >>connection >> >>if you need it, this is the registry key you have to set to force tcp >>connection: >>[HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE\SOFTWARE\Microsoft\Client for >>NFS\CurrentVersion\Default] "PreferTCP"=dword:00000001 >> >> >> > > > >

1 0

RE: File Sharing Windows <> NFS Volume on R150 (6.5.2R1) ...
by Sphar, Mike 18 Apr '05

18 Apr '05

A lot of file-locking is dependent on the client, of course. Assuming that an NFS file-lock was put in place, it's still up to the client to decide "Okay, that file is locked for writing; I will just open it up in read-only mode instead." That's my understanding anyway...I've never found nfs-based file locking to be terribly reliable. -- Michael W. Sphar - IS&T - Lead Systems Administrator SMBU Engineering Support Services, BMC Software -----Original Message----- From: McCarthy, Tim [mailto:timothy.mccarthy@netapp.com] Sent: Monday, April 18, 2005 4:27 PM To: Doug Chomyn; toasters(a)mathworks.com Subject: RE: File Sharing Windows <> NFS Volume on R150 (6.5.2R1) ... How about writing a wrapper around the file calls that does very proper file locking? I know....more work...just an idea. --tmac -----Original Message----- From: Doug Chomyn [mailto:chomyn@corefa.com] Sent: Monday, April 18, 2005 3:55 PM To: toasters(a)mathworks.com Subject: Re: File Sharing Windows <> NFS Volume on R150 (6.5.2R1) ... Um, I'm looking at dynamic sharing, where if host 1 has rw, hosts 2, 3, 4 have r only. when host 1 relinquishes w, the hosts 2, 3, 4 have the possibility of opening the file for w since they too have the privilege. McCarthy, Tim wrote: >Why not: >(6.5.1 or higher) >exportfs -p ro=host1:host2:host3,rw=host4:netgroup1:subnet/24 >/vol/vol1/path > >--tmac > >-----Original Message----- >From: Doug Chomyn [mailto:chomyn@corefa.com] >Sent: Monday, April 18, 2005 2:24 PM >To: toasters(a)mathworks.com >Subject: Re: File Sharing Windows <> NFS Volume on R150 (6.5.2R1) ... > >Yes, we have SFU installed on the Windows clients and can easily access >the NFS volumes, but I need the "file share" as if the shared document >was on a Windows NT volume, permissions-wise that is ... > >emilio brambilla wrote: > > > >>hello, >> >>Doug Chomyn wrote: >> >> >> >>>document R only, etc, etc. Ordinarily we would do a re-share via >>>Samba, or perhaps make a CIFS volume share, but I'm trying to reduce >>>complexity (and we're not going to buy a CIFS license) ... anyone >>>have experience >>> >>> >>if you have only a few workstations accesing the storage with windows >>sharing you can try installing on each workstation the "microsoft nfs >>client" you can download from http://www.microsoft.com/windows/sfu/ >> >>we did use this workaround 6 month ago to allow a few windows box to >>access a nfs-only fas270C (the customer has 300 unix boxes and only 2 >>windows clients so he did not agree to buy the cifs license) >> >>it's still working and the customer is habby about it, but we had to >>force the workstation to use nfs over tcp in order to have a stable >>connection >> >>if you need it, this is the registry key you have to set to force tcp >>connection: >>[HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE\SOFTWARE\Microsoft\Client for >>NFS\CurrentVersion\Default] "PreferTCP"=dword:00000001 >> >> >> > > > >

1 0

RE: File Sharing Windows <> NFS Volume on R150 (6.5.2R1) ...
by McCarthy, Tim 18 Apr '05

18 Apr '05

How about writing a wrapper around the file calls that does very proper file locking? I know....more work...just an idea. --tmac -----Original Message----- From: Doug Chomyn [mailto:chomyn@corefa.com] Sent: Monday, April 18, 2005 3:55 PM To: toasters(a)mathworks.com Subject: Re: File Sharing Windows <> NFS Volume on R150 (6.5.2R1) ... Um, I'm looking at dynamic sharing, where if host 1 has rw, hosts 2, 3, 4 have r only. when host 1 relinquishes w, the hosts 2, 3, 4 have the possibility of opening the file for w since they too have the privilege. McCarthy, Tim wrote: >Why not: >(6.5.1 or higher) >exportfs -p ro=host1:host2:host3,rw=host4:netgroup1:subnet/24 >/vol/vol1/path > >--tmac > >-----Original Message----- >From: Doug Chomyn [mailto:chomyn@corefa.com] >Sent: Monday, April 18, 2005 2:24 PM >To: toasters(a)mathworks.com >Subject: Re: File Sharing Windows <> NFS Volume on R150 (6.5.2R1) ... > >Yes, we have SFU installed on the Windows clients and can easily access >the NFS volumes, but I need the "file share" as if the shared document >was on a Windows NT volume, permissions-wise that is ... > >emilio brambilla wrote: > > > >>hello, >> >>Doug Chomyn wrote: >> >> >> >>>document R only, etc, etc. Ordinarily we would do a re-share via >>>Samba, or perhaps make a CIFS volume share, but I'm trying to reduce >>>complexity (and we're not going to buy a CIFS license) ... anyone >>>have experience >>> >>> >>if you have only a few workstations accesing the storage with windows >>sharing you can try installing on each workstation the "microsoft nfs >>client" you can download from http://www.microsoft.com/windows/sfu/ >> >>we did use this workaround 6 month ago to allow a few windows box to >>access a nfs-only fas270C (the customer has 300 unix boxes and only 2 >>windows clients so he did not agree to buy the cifs license) >> >>it's still working and the customer is habby about it, but we had to >>force the workstation to use nfs over tcp in order to have a stable >>connection >> >>if you need it, this is the registry key you have to set to force tcp >>connection: >>[HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE\SOFTWARE\Microsoft\Client for >>NFS\CurrentVersion\Default] "PreferTCP"=dword:00000001 >> >> >> > > > >

1 0

RE: File Sharing Windows <> NFS Volume on R150 (6.5.2R1) ...
by McCarthy, Tim 18 Apr '05

18 Apr '05

Why not: (6.5.1 or higher) exportfs -p ro=host1:host2:host3,rw=host4:netgroup1:subnet/24 /vol/vol1/path --tmac -----Original Message----- From: Doug Chomyn [mailto:chomyn@corefa.com] Sent: Monday, April 18, 2005 2:24 PM To: toasters(a)mathworks.com Subject: Re: File Sharing Windows <> NFS Volume on R150 (6.5.2R1) ... Yes, we have SFU installed on the Windows clients and can easily access the NFS volumes, but I need the "file share" as if the shared document was on a Windows NT volume, permissions-wise that is ... emilio brambilla wrote: > hello, > > Doug Chomyn wrote: > >> document R only, etc, etc. Ordinarily we would do a re-share via >> Samba, or perhaps make a CIFS volume share, but I'm trying to reduce >> complexity (and we're not going to buy a CIFS license) ... anyone >> have experience > > > if you have only a few workstations accesing the storage with windows > sharing you can try installing on each workstation the "microsoft nfs > client" you can download from http://www.microsoft.com/windows/sfu/ > > we did use this workaround 6 month ago to allow a few windows box to > access a nfs-only fas270C (the customer has 300 unix boxes and only 2 > windows clients so he did not agree to buy the cifs license) > > it's still working and the customer is habby about it, but we had to > force the workstation to use nfs over tcp in order to have a stable > connection > > if you need it, this is the registry key you have to set to force tcp > connection: > [HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE\SOFTWARE\Microsoft\Client for > NFS\CurrentVersion\Default] "PreferTCP"=dword:00000001 >

3 2

File Sharing Windows <> NFS Volume on R150 (6.5.2R1) ...
by Doug Chomyn 18 Apr '05

18 Apr '05

Sorry if this a bit lame. Basically, I want to file share .xls documents stored on an NFS volume between Windows clients so that when one client with RW on the document has access, another Windows client can open the document R only, etc, etc. Ordinarily we would do a re-share via Samba, or perhaps make a CIFS volume share, but I'm trying to reduce complexity (and we're not going to buy a CIFS license) ... anyone have experience with doing this kind of thing? Is it possible? tx doug

2 2

Re: Converting to DP
by Reinoud Reynders 15 Apr '05

15 Apr '05

Hi Robert, It's just the same as a normal reconstruction when a disk fails. The time depends on the disk size, filer and the value of your reconstruction speed (low, middle, high). Best regards, Reinoud Reynders UZLeuven Belgium -----Original Message----- From: owner-toasters(a)mathworks.com <owner-toasters(a)mathworks.com> To: Netapp <toasters(a)mathworks.com> Sent: Fri Apr 15 17:55:48 2005 Subject: Converting to DP I have a 13 disk volume that is 600 Gig in size. I also made the raid group 13 disks originally when I first got the Filer in. Its a FAS 940 running 6.5.4. With 56 (72) gig disks 13 disk volumes divided out nicely after subtracting 2 for vol0 and 2 for spares. Now that I'm running 6.5 its time for DP. I've got 3 spares now and want to convert the 600 Gig volume to DP. I upped the raid group on the volume to 14 and plan to issue the command to DP Sunday morning. The volume is 60% full. We run Oracle on it but all DB's will be down Sunday at 7AM. How long will the convet take? I understand the entire volume's parity will need to be recomputed yes? Anybody have a similar environment and situation? TIA -Rob

1 0

RE: Changing Netapp SCSI target ID
by McCarthy, Tim 15 Apr '05

15 Apr '05

You cannot have more than one filer attached to the same SCSI chain. What you can do is have one drive attached to one filer and another drive attached to another filer, as long as you can break the SCSI bus at the library side. Most libraries with more than 2 drives can do this. You will see multiple in/out connections. That is what it is for. --tmac ====================== Tim McCarthy Professional Services/Systems Engineer NetApp Federal Systems, Inc. 410-551-3970 (o) 443-363-0208 (f) tmac(a)netapp.com tmac-pager(a)netapp.com ====================== -----Original Message----- From: Alan Sparks [mailto:asparks@doublesparks.net] Sent: Friday, April 15, 2005 11:00 AM To: Lance R Bailey Cc: Toasters List Subject: Re: Changing Netapp SCSI target ID Lance R Bailey said: > i have a qualstar library with the drives attached to a linux host, > F720, F87 and F85 filers. > > the scsi number is set on the library. each drive slot has a different > number. when the filer sees it (verify with sysconfig -t) the scsi > number assigned to the drive on the scsi bus will be the one on > library. OK. So you're saying that it will not cause a conflict if I daisy chain the filers together onto the same wire to the library drives. OK, that or 3-way NDMP are two possible options then. Thanks. -Alan =========== Alan Sparks, UNIX/Linux Systems Administrator <asparks(a)doublesparks.net>

3 2

Re: ndmp
by Jerry 15 Apr '05

15 Apr '05

I'm not sure I responded to it, but here is the bug: http://now.netapp.com/NOW/cgi-bin/bol?Type=Detail&Display=96894 Bug 96894 Fixed in 6.4.2P4 and higher. --- George Kahler <george(a)YorkU.CA> wrote: > Few weeks ago someone has replied to a post about > ndmp being very > slow in its phase one. The person replied that this > has been fixed > now in a particular version of Data ONTAP. > > I deleted the message and now I would like to find > out what version of > ONTAP the person said it was fixed in. > > Could whoever sent it please resent it to me ? > > Thanks, > George > __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Small Business - Try our new resources site! http://smallbusiness.yahoo.com/resources/

1 0

Converting to DP
by Robert Borowicz 15 Apr '05

15 Apr '05

I have a 13 disk volume that is 600 Gig in size. I also made the raid group 13 disks originally when I first got the Filer in. Its a FAS 940 running 6.5.4. With 56 (72) gig disks 13 disk volumes divided out nicely after subtracting 2 for vol0 and 2 for spares. Now that I'm running 6.5 its time for DP. I've got 3 spares now and want to convert the 600 Gig volume to DP. I upped the raid group on the volume to 14 and plan to issue the command to DP Sunday morning. The volume is 60% full. We run Oracle on it but all DB's will be down Sunday at 7AM. How long will the convet take? I understand the entire volume's parity will need to be recomputed yes? Anybody have a similar environment and situation? TIA -Rob

1 0

Re: RAID-DP
by George Kahler 15 Apr '05

15 Apr '05

Thanks Adam and to others for clearing up the misconception. George On Mon, 4 Apr 2005 09:17:09 -0700, "Fox, Adam" <Adam.Fox(a)netapp.com> wrote: > This is absolutely false. I heard this strange misconception with > RAID-4 too. > (If you lose the parity disk, the whole thing falls down because it's > all on 1 disk). > > Here's a lab box to make you feel better. > > Volume test (online, raid_dp) (block checksums) > Plex /test/plex0 (online, normal, active) > RAID group /test/plex0/rg0 (normal) > > RAID Disk Device HA SHELF BAY CHAN Used (MB/blks) Phys > (MB/blks) > --------- ------ --------------- ---- -------------- > -------------- > dparity 0b.20 0b 1 4 FC:B 68000/139264000 > 69536/142410400 > parity 0b.21 0b 1 5 FC:B 68000/139264000 > 69536/142410400 > data 0b.28 0b 1 12 FC:B 68000/139264000 > 69536/142410400 > > > Spare disks (empty) > > (note: No spares) > > filer> disk fail -i 0b.20 > filer> disk fail -i 0b.21 > > Now, here's sysconfig -r again: > > Volume test (online, raid_dp, degraded) (block checksums) > Plex /test/plex0 (online, normal, active) > RAID group /test/plex0/rg0 (double degraded) > > RAID Disk Device HA SHELF BAY CHAN Used (MB/blks) Phys > (MB/blks) > --------- ------ --------------- ---- -------------- > -------------- > dparity FAILED N/A 68000/139264000 > parity FAILED N/A 68000/139264000 > data 0b.28 0b 1 12 FC:B 68000/139264000 > 69536/142410400 > > > Spare disks (empty) > > Broken disks > > RAID Disk Device HA SHELF BAY CHAN Used (MB/blks) Phys > (MB/blks) > --------- ------ --------------- ---- -------------- > -------------- > admin failed 0b.20 0b 1 4 FC:B 68000/139264000 > 69536/142410400 > admin failed 0b.21 0b 1 5 FC:B 68000/139264000 > 69536/142410400 > > Still running..but degraded. > > -- Adam Fox > adamfox(a)netapp.com > > > > -----Original Message----- > From: George Kahler [mailto:george@YorkU.CA] > Sent: Monday, April 04, 2005 11:22 AM > To: toasters(a)mathworks.com > Subject: RAID-DP > > At a recent NetApp presentation it was mention in passing that RAID-DP > fails if a double disk failure happens to hit the two parity disk. > > Is this true ? > > George

1 1

Changing Netapp SCSI target ID
by Alan Sparks 15 Apr '05

15 Apr '05

Possibly a weird question, but... I need to connect a Qualstore library to my toasters (760 filers) by daisy-chaining them to the library. Just don't have the ports on the library to direct connect to the drives. But unless I really misunderstand, these filers will all have the same SCSI IDs, so there's gonna be a conflict. I need to let my NetBackup server control everything, and run NDMP on the filers to do the backups. Is there any way to retarget the SCSI ports built into the Netapp head to be on an ID of my choosing, so I can sidestep the ID conflict? Thanks in advance. -Alan -- Alan Sparks, UNIX/Linux Systems Integration and Administration <asparks(a)doublesparks.net>

2 3

Re: toasters archive
by Roger Stansfield 15 Apr '05

15 Apr '05

Steve, That works fine for me. Thank you. Roger. At 21:56 14/04/2005, you wrote: >The mathworks hosted archive now seems to no longer need to >specify port 1999 to gain access; try using this: > ><http://teaparty.mathworks.com/toasters/date.html#end>http://teaparty.mathworks.com/toasters/date.html#end > > >(Not exactly the same thing you originallt listed, but I like to >see the latest stuff in the archive, and the #end gets that for >you, along with the other pertinent links.) > > >Hope that helps. > >Steve Babiak

1 0

mrtg config files
by Munn, Stuart 14 Apr '05

14 Apr '05

People, I've used the filer-mrtg scripts from Now in the past, but I'd prefer to go down the SNMP route, as I suspect the network stats are not working well on the later releases of ONTAP ... Has anyone got some mrtg config files they can share with me? I've tried using the search archive facility on the mathworks site but It's not much use as it does not sort in date order and you cannot see the whole of the subject! Any advice welcome... Cheers Stuart Munn SAIC Ltd

1 0

how come you haven't writtent back to me?
by MarinetteGergen 14 Apr '05

14 Apr '05

Where have all these easy people come from, who want to get laid with you? http://www.fornam.com/002/ you'll find out in no time, because it's costless ;) P.S.no'more? http://www.fornam.com/rmv/

1 0

toasters archive
by Roger Stansfield 14 Apr '05

14 Apr '05

There is a toasters archive at http://news.gmane.org/gmane.comp.hardware.netapp/ I also have a record of an archive at http://teaparty.mathworks.com:1999/toasters/Explanation.html but I can't contact this at present. From memory, I found the http://gmane.org/ one more satisfactory anyway. Roger Stansfield.

1 0

Textile Machinery
by J K International Trading Company 14 Apr '05

14 Apr '05

April 14, 2005 Dear Sir J K International is a dealer of used textile machinery and parts. We specially deal in Sulzer weaving machines. Please inform if you have any Sulzer weaving machine or spare parts available for sale. We deal in other brands too like Picanol, Vamatex etc. We can also help you to find the machinery according to your needs or selling your machinery at good price. Looking forward to business with you Thank you & with best regards Sohail Ahmed J-K International Trading Company B 174-175 S.I.T.E. Karachi Sindh Pakistan Phone: +92-21-2582523 / 2566567 / 2569604 Fax: +92-21-2564484 Website: www.jkitc.org Email: info(a)jkitc.org Unsubscription : http://www.34all.net/~sohail4/news/subscription.php?list_id=1&op=leave&emai…

1 0

ndmp
by George Kahler 13 Apr '05

13 Apr '05

Few weeks ago someone has replied to a post about ndmp being very slow in its phase one. The person replied that this has been fixed now in a particular version of Data ONTAP. I deleted the message and now I would like to find out what version of ONTAP the person said it was fixed in. Could whoever sent it please resent it to me ? Thanks, George

1 0

Optimize business operations
by Data Group 10 Apr '05

10 Apr '05

The *2005 Canadian Business Database* is now available = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = Marketing/Sales professionals and entrepreneurs, optimize business operations with the *2005 Canadian Business Database*, a pro quality business database packed with built-in search capabilities and 100% free expotable data. Features : - More than 900,000 businesses listed - Nearly 600 categories - Addresses - Phone numbers - Fax numbers - Easy navigation - Fully exportable (txt, wk1, , dbf, csv, bas, slk, htm...) - High compatibility (Avery, Winfax, MS Office, Filemaker, Act, Goldmine...) - Advanced searching and sorting capabilities x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x PROMOTION Now for only $149.95! Call us toll free in North America : 1 * 8 6 6 * 3 2 2 * 3 3 7 6 x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x

1 0

Catch the exp|OsiOn frOm breaking news
by Luther Simon 09 Apr '05

09 Apr '05

Secured Data Inc. (SCRE) Emerging Leader In Chinese Export of Pharmaceutica|s! Tota| Shares Issued & Outstanding: 9O,000,000 EST Current Price: O.O9 2O04 Success lead into an exciting 2OO5. Secured Data Inc. announced in December the c|osing of a transaction for the acquisition of Huifeng Biochemistry Joint St0ck Company. Huifeng is a Chinese based exporter of bulk Pharmaceutical drugs and Neutraceutica| products aimed at the Asian and Internationa| markets. Huifeng has achieved GMP status in China in addition to receiving ISO 90O1 industria| certification with respect to its manufacturing, distribution and qua|ity of produced compounds. Included in the stab|e of compounds currently produced by Huifeng are: Rutin NF11, Troxerutin Dab99, Quercetin 98%, L-Rhamnone, Diosimin Ep4, Be||adonna Ep4, Si|ymarin dab10, Hesperidin, Matrine, Oxymatrine, phytostero|, Stigmasterol, Pueraria, Reseverator|, Naringin, Baica|in Berberine Hydrochlorrde, 1O-Deacety| Baccatin, Pac|itaxo|, Gikgo bi|oba P.E., Grape seed P.E., Epimedium Extract, Pueraria Lobata Extract, Magnolia P.E., Red Clover P.E., Ch|orogenic acid, Gynostema Extract, Fructucs Aurantii P.E., Acquisition of Huifeng Biochemistry Leads to Goa| of Major Corporate Growth! Huifeng Biochemistry was formed in the year 2OOO with a view to become a cost effective producer and supp|ier of bu|k Pharmaceutical and Neutraceutica| products wor|dwide. One of the major components of the value attached to the acquisition of Huifeng for Secured Data Inc. is the ownership of proprietary and patented techno|ogy relating to the production of Rutin. Rutin is a member of biof|avonoids, a |arge gr0up of phenolic secondary metabo|ites of p|ants that inc|ude more than 2,OOO different known chemica|s. Bioflavonoids such as Quercetin, Rutin, and Hesperidin are important nutrients due to their abi|ity to strengthen and modulate the permeability of the walls of the b|ood vessels inc|uding capillaries. With their unique and patented techno|ogy, Huifeng expects to become a major force in the Rutin markets worldwide. Secured Data Inc. stands to benefit from this acquisition through the ownership of proprietary techno|ogy, strong corporate relations with Chinese governmental agencies, certified manufacturing facilities and access to growing markets in which to se|| its drug products. Estimated revenues for 2O04-20O5 are more then $100 mil|i0n USD Further developments of the transaction and the deve|opment at Huifeng should be expected in the near future. Conc|usion: The Examples Above Show The Awesome, Earning Potentia| of Little Known Companies That Exp|ode Onto Investor's Radar Screens; Many of You Are Already Fami|iar with This. Is SCRE Poised and Positioned to Do that For You? Then You May Feel the Time Has Come to Act... And P|ease Watch this One Trade Monday! Go SCRE. Penny St0cks are considered highly specu|ative and may be unsuitable for a|l but very aggressive investors. This Profile is not in any way affiliated with the featured company. We were compensated 300O dollars to distribute this report. This report is for entertainment and advertising purposes only and should not be used as investment advice. If you wish to stop future mailings, or if you fee| you have been wrongful|y p|aced in our membership, please go here or send a b|ank e mai| with No Thanks in the subject to st0ck67 @yahoo.com

1 0

(no subject)
by Mike Kade 07 Apr '05

07 Apr '05

Subscribe toasters End simplifying Enterprise Storage Michael Kade Solutions Architect NuView, Inc <http://maps.yahoo.com/py/maps.py?Pyt=Tmap&addr=15973+N.+115th+Way&csz=Scott sdale%2C+AZ+85255&country=us> 15973 N. 115th Way Scottsdale, AZ 85255 <mailto:mike.kade@nuview.com> mike.kade(a)nuview.com <http://www.nuview.com> http://www.nuview.com tel: mobile: (480) 993-2787 (480) 703-7329 <http://www.plaxo.com/signature> Want a signature like this?

1 0

RE: experience with iSCSI from W2K3 servers?
by Hill, Aaron 05 Apr '05

05 Apr '05

Win2k3 and the latest Microsoft iSCSI initiator handling the connection to a LUN sitting on a FAS960. A moderately active 5Gb MS-SQL database is mounted on the LUN. Transaction log on the local Win2k3 server. The LUN itself is only 10Gb, so it is only small. We also have another system mapping a ~100Gb iSCSI LUN mounted on the same physical volume. This is used to hold a backup image catalog. Flat files, no SQL databases. HP DL360 and 380 servers. No dedicated HBA's for iSCSI. No clustering here. The iSCSI path is shared with other traffic over gigabit fibre. i.e. No dedicated LAN. We have not had any performance or contention issues of any kind related to iSCSI. I evaluated the clustering as part of a solution and would strongly advise the use of a dedicated network path for the iSCSI connections to the cluster quorum and shared SQL database. In fact, I believe that it is required by Microsoft for the solution to be supported. Aaron -----Original Message----- From: Alan Biren [mailto:ABIREN@amccorp.com] Sent: Monday, 4 April 2005 10:26 PM To: Rob Winters; toasters(a)mathworks.com Subject: RE: experience with iSCSI from W2K3 servers? When working with iSCSI on W2K3 server or any Microsoft OS, the key is the networking component. If it is at all possible, I enable Jumbo Frames and create a separate VLAN for the storage traffic, very similar to a FC SAN. You also want to make sure that you Bind the Volumes and make the target Persistent. I also use a VIF (multi or single) as well as etherchannels and NIC Teaming to try to aggregate bandwidth. If you are able to use SnapDrive, it'll make connecting and managing the LUNs much easier, especially if you will need to increase their size. I've only used HP Proliant servers. I've used the MS iSCSI Initiator (all versions) and the QLOGIC 4010. If you are going to cluster and iSCSI environment, I recommend reading MS Article 883397. I would follow the steps even if it not a pure iSCSI environment. -----Original Message----- From: owner-toasters(a)mathworks.com [mailto:owner-toasters@mathworks.com] On Behalf Of Rob Winters Sent: Wednesday, March 30, 2005 5:39 PM To: toasters(a)mathworks.com Subject: experience with iSCSI from W2K3 servers? Does anyone have feedback or gotchas about W2K3 accessing large iSCSI space on NetApp filers? With what hardware? HBA and/or software initiator? How about clustering W2K3 servers to a NetApp iSCSI target, or similar HA configurations? Thanks! /// Rob P.S. Yes, *this* is how well the MacOS X research is going... :-| -- Rob Winters SAIC, NASA Headquarters ISEM Contract rwinters(a)hq.nasa.gov **************************************************************************** ************************* If you have received this email in error please notify the the system manager or the sender immediately and do not disclosed the to anyone or make copies. ** eSafe scanned this email for viruses, vandals or malicious content ** ** To find out eSafe(TM) and other Aladdin Security Products, contact AMC Corporation at (212) 736-0111 **************************************************************************** ************************* ************** IMPORTANT MESSAGE ************** This e-mail message is intended only for the addressee(s) and contains information which may be confidential. If you are not the intended recipient please advise the sender by return email, do not use or disclose the contents, and delete the message and any attachments from your system. Unless specifically indicated, this email does not constitute formal advice or commitment by the sender or the Commonwealth Bank of Australia (ABN 48 123 123 124) or its subsidiaries. We can be contacted through our web site: commbank.com.au. If you no longer wish to receive commercial electronic messages from us, please reply to this e-mail by typing Unsubscribe in the subject line. ***************************************************************

1 0

Investment Considerations
by Miranda Benitez 04 Apr '05

04 Apr '05

Domestic Oil & Gas Report Investors and traders: Biogenerics LTD (BIGN) Announces Commencement of Dri||ing 0perations in Gas-Rich Formation. The company's recent lucrative acquisition of Tyche Energy ,coup|ed with a joint venture with Hydro Slotter Corp (a technology-driven company) has increased we|| production by up to 6OO%. BIGN stOck Status - Last Sale: 0.83 Share Volume: 109OO Investment Considerations: - 0i| prices are approaching $50 a barre| - OPEC warns oil rates wi|| continue to rise - BIGN stOck continues to trend to new 52 week highs - BIGN stOck is positioned for growth due to recent 0i| and gas aquisitions & ventures - BIGN Focuses Completely on the Domestic 0il & Gas Arena (Market Exceeds $1O Billion) - Domestic 0i| & Gas Sector Provide Immediate Opportunity to Garner Va|ue - BIGN is pursuing strategies to create shareho|der value - Company�s growth strategy is driven by M&A Brian Kelley, CEO of Biogenerics,says: "Dril|ing in such a rich area of gas reserves represents another mi|estone for Biogenerics. The Company's new affi|iation with Tyche Energy could garner significant short and |ong-term va|ue" PRESS RELEASE--TOR0NT0--(BUSINESS WIRE)--March 4, 20O5 Biogenerics Inc. today announced that Tyche Energy Inc., the Company's joint venture partner,advised that dri||ing operations at the Mosa 6-13-III well have commenced. The Mosa 6-13-III we|| is the first of an initia| two (2) we|| exp|oration dri||ing programs targeting the Gas prone Silurian Grimsby formation encountered at a depth of approximate|y 2,100 feet. Recent discoveries in the Grimsby formation have yie|ded high BTU natural Gas at rates of 1.2 to 4.2 mi|lion cubic feet (MMCFD) per day.Individual pool reserves may be up to 1O billion cubic feet (1O BCF). Tyche Inc. current|y ho|ds over 4,OOO acres of petro|eum and natura| gas |eases within the fairway of this expanding natura| Gas play. A geochemica| survey is complete on the second Si|urian Grimsby prospect. Ana|ysis of this data wi|| assist the company in identifying prospective dri||ing targets on these lands. Company Profile: BI0GENERICS LTD is a domestic oil and gas provider, and through its joint ventures is a techno|ogy leader in today�s Energy market. The company�s shares trade on the NQB (ticker BIGN). Sourcing Domestic 0i| and Gas is Bush�s #1 priority and, therefore, the Board of Biogenerics deemed it prudent and appropriate to focus its principa| business in this hotbed of activity. The Company, prior to its change of focus, he|d significant positions in biotechno|ogy, fiber optics and other techno|ogy ventures that management believed cou|d prope| shareholder value. The Board of Directors took in account the enormous shift to oil & gas, and acquired Tyche Energy and formed a joint venture with Hydro S|otter Corporation � an oil and gas techno|ogy |eader. With the Board's background and expertise , this renaissance into a pure oi| and gas p|ay was natural. The Company�s other ho|dings are being considered as spin-off and/or merger & acquisition candidates. Management plans to fi|e a Form 1O in the immediate future. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Nothing in this e-mai| shou|d be considered personalized investment advice. Although our employees may answer your general customer service questions, they are not |icensed under securities |aws to address your particu|ar investment situation. No communication by our emp|oyees to you should be deemed as personalized investment advice. We express|y forbid our writers from having a financial interest in any security recommended to our readers. A|l of our employees and agents must wait 24 hours after on-line pub|ication or 72 hours after the mailing of printed-on|y publication prior to fo||owing an initia| recommendation. Any investments recommended in this |etter shou|d be made on|y after consu|ting with your investment advisor and on|y after reviewing the prospectus or financia| statements of the company. Please note: We sent this e-mail because you subscribed to The Investment News|etter E-Letter. To cance| by mail or for any other subscription issues, rep|y p|ease to: iklo812@ yahoo.com (c) 20O5 Investment News|etter A|| Rights Reserved

1 0

what will happend if i replace x225 by X231 disk
by Constantin 04 Apr '05

04 Apr '05

Hi, i'm very low on x225 spares , i have few x231 can i just swap them ? thnks cb

1 0

RE: How to use non netapp disks on an F720 netapp ?
by Iain Barnetson 04 Apr '05

04 Apr '05

Anton, Have you checked that the drives are all formatted 520 bytes per sector? Seagate have on their website "Seagate Tools Enterprise" that will allow you to change this. http://www.seagate.com/support/seatools/B7b.html -----Original Message----- From: owner-toasters(a)mathworks.com [mailto:owner-toasters@mathworks.com] On Behalf Of Anton Sent: 04 April 2005 11:07 To: toasters(a)mathworks.com Subject: How to use non netapp disks on an F720 netapp ? Hello, I have an old F720 it has 3 9gig drives , but 2 of them are dead , i would love to be able to reuse this netapp but netapp drives are too expensive for me , as i use this stuff at home i'm not able to invest more . I tried to make an 72gig fc drive to be reconized by the netapp but without any succes (i tried to downgrade the netapp to its very old version also) . But it sill dont want to flash the firmware on this segate drive . Is there any way to make it work ? I'm thinking about mount the fc array on an linux with an fc card and flash the disk firmware with the netapp firmware using segate flash utility . Any help would be very apreciable . thanks an

4 3

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