toasters

toasters@lists.teaparty.net

13531 discussions

Virus Scanning?
by Strange, John 26 Oct '01

26 Oct '01

We were just wondering how everyone was handling virus scanning of their Netapp filers, with the recent attack of nimda we've been cleaning up the filers. We would prefer to do this from a solaris box, unless it's not possible. Is there a native app for the filer? Or is everyone doing this through cifs/nfs? Thanks, - John

2 1

RE: Virus Scanning?
by Ziller, Frank 26 Oct '01

26 Oct '01

Trnd Micro and Symantec both sell "carrier" grade solutions designed specifically for the NetApp filers. I think Symantec's product is called CarrierScan, not sure about TrendMicro. -----Original Message----- From: Strange, John [mailto:John.ws.Strange@marconi.com] Sent: Friday, October 26, 2001 8:06 AM To: toasters (E-mail) Subject: Virus Scanning? We were just wondering how everyone was handling virus scanning of their Netapp filers, with the recent attack of nimda we've been cleaning up the filers. We would prefer to do this from a solaris box, unless it's not possible. Is there a native app for the filer? Or is everyone doing this through cifs/nfs? Thanks, - John

1 0

Upgrade from F740 to F840
by Uros Lampret 26 Oct '01

26 Oct '01

Hi! I intend to upgrade from F740 to F840. I will only swap heads and keep the disks. I can't seem to find document describing this procedure. Any body done that? How do you change ONTAP from Alpha to Intel version? Regards, Uros

1 0

Etherchannel vs. Jumbo Frames
by jwitham＠takedapharm.com 25 Oct '01

25 Oct '01

Hi all: Firing up my new F880 and have a question about gigabit Ethernet throughput: Currently, we vif multi our filers to our Catalyst 6509 switches using Cisco Gigabit EtherChannel with 1500 MTU I went to fire up the 880 today, and decided new filer, new UNIX boxes, let's use Jumbo Frames! (9000 MTU). Looks like you can't EtherChannel Jumbo frame ports. I'm wondering if anyone has done a comparison (formal or informal) between Gig EtherChannel and Jumbo Frames. If so, which was faster? I'm fine single vif'ing the 2 gig-E nics to different switches if that will perform better than the lower MTU port channeling. Thanks! -john

1 0

F720 CPU Maxing out
by Jean-Christophe Smith 25 Oct '01

25 Oct '01

We have a NetApp F720 doing both NFS and CIFS using mixed mode security. It has 256 megs of ram. During parts of the day the CPU and RAM spike to %100 utilization. We do a lot of sendmail, windows media, apache and IIS traffic over the filer. I have two questions: 1. Is there a way we can add more ram, perhaps 512 or a gig? The docs say we are maxxed out with 256. 2. Is it possible that the extra cpu overhead that provides the NFS/CIFS user mapping is causing much of the ram and cpu starvation? Perhaps going to a simpler security model would offload a lot of CPU cycles. Any suggestions would be appreciated.. Jean-Christophe Smith VitalStream jsmith(a)vitalstream.com

1 0

RE: Veritas Netbackup Database
by Strange, John 25 Oct '01

25 Oct '01

Hmm, I would say that file locking has improved, if you want to test that setup a mail server on the NFS mount and generate a lot of emails, or database of some type to test it. Where I would be concerned would be in the middle of the back to have a network problem and end up trashing the backup database. I would really be hard pressed to use NFS to store the backup database. If you plan on doing it make sure you are forcing sync on your NFS mount also as NFS v2 usually defaults to async writes. Which could cause a consistency problem if you suffer a network outage. Also another concern would be that your backup would probably fail if you hang the NFS mount as most *NIX boxes hate when you lose network connectivity across an active NFS mount. - John -----Original Message----- From: Manny Kaiser [mailto:mkaiser@mmcnet.com] Sent: Thursday, October 25, 2001 3:28 AM To: Jon Walton Cc: toasters@mathworks. com Subject: RE: Veritas Netbackup Database I was under the distinct impression that file locking in NFS in today's operating systems is considerably more reliable then it was years ago. I have never encountered a problem with any application running on an NFS mounted file system. I am under the impression that the quote below is something that was copied out of earlier versions of the manual and never reviewed again. When using NFS you might suffer a performance penalty if your systems are not correctly configured. -----Original Message----- From: owner-toasters(a)mathworks.com [mailto:owner-toasters@mathworks.com]On Behalf Of Jon Walton Sent: Wednesday, October 24, 2001 11:31 PM To: Jeff Kennedy Cc: toasters@mathworks. com Subject: RE: Veritas Netbackup Database Now that I look, the 3.4 DataCenter install guide states: "Because the product uses file locking, VERITAS recommends that you not install NetBackup in an NFS mounted directory. File locking in NFS mounted files systems can be unreliable" I mentally took this to mean "not supported". Sorry if my previous email was misleading. Regards, Jon -----Original Message----- From: Jeff Kennedy [mailto:jlkennedy@amcc.com] Sent: Wednesday, October 24, 2001 6:18 AM To: Jon Walton Cc: toasters@mathworks. com Subject: Re: Veritas Netbackup Database OK, I did some checking again. Veritas does officially support putting /usr/openv onto an NFS file system. However, they say that performance does suffer due to the large write streams. So, if performance is not an issue then it is a very nice solution. Also, db backups do not yet support disk storage unit backups. Supposedly in 4.5 they will for just this reason. ~JK Jon Walton wrote: > > I believe they do not support this due the fact that operations on the > database files involve file locking. That is what is remember reading > in the Unix Admin Guide. > > Regards, > > Jon > > -----Original Message----- > From: Jeff Kennedy [mailto:jlkennedy@amcc.com] > Sent: Friday, October 19, 2001 10:39 AM > To: Manny Kaiser > Cc: toasters@mathworks. com > Subject: Re: Veritas Netbackup Database > > Got word from Vertias that putting the /usr/openv filesystem itself on > NFS was NOT supported. However, you could backup the database to a NFS > disk without issue.... > > ~JK > > > Manny Kaiser wrote: > > > > Has anyone placed the Veritas Netbackup database on an NFS mounted > > file system? > > More specifically on a netapp? > > I was just told by Veritas that they do not recommend doing this > > because NFS is unreliable. > > Any feedback would be helpful. > > > > > > -- > ===================== > Jeff Kennedy > Unix Administrator > AMCC > jlkennedy(a)amcc.com -- ===================== Jeff Kennedy Unix Administrator AMCC jlkennedy(a)amcc.com

2 1

carrierscan
by Tim Longo 25 Oct '01

25 Oct '01

Greetings: I am preparing to install Symantec CarrierScan, and came across something in the manual I have a question about. There is a statement in the manual that says "Virus scanning should be disabled before initiating backup of the NetApp Filer". It seems to me that this may not apply if ndmp were being used for backup? Anyone else have experience with this issue? Thanks, Tim

1 0

Ndmpcopy - inconsistent dumpmap
by Dawn Lovell 25 Oct '01

25 Oct '01

Thanks to everyone who replied to my question regarding ndmpcopy versus vol copy when migrating from a F740 to a F820! Based on the recommendations, we've done a level 0 ndmpcopy and two increasing incrementals (level 1 and level 2). On what was to be our last incremental (level 3) with the source filesystem read-only, we received the following message: newfiler: LOG: RESTORE: newfiler: LOG: Inconsistent dumpmap on inode 10831660. The copy goes on to complete successfully, but I'm concerned about the impact of this. I'm running a find to try to locate the file or directory with that inode, but it's going to run forever with the number of files we have. Is there a faster way than find to match the inode to a file? Does anyone know if this is a serious error? I'd thought that it was probably the result of a file on the target filesystem being changed outside of the ndmpcopy process. That shouldn't have happened, but it's certainly possible. I called NetApp support about this, however, and was told that it was a filesystem problem on the target filer and that we should bring it down and run wafl_check. I can't find the error in the archives or on the NOW site, so I would greatly appreciate any insight. Thanks for your time! Dawn Lovell dlovell(a)centurytel.net

2 2

RE: Veritas Netbackup Database
by Jon Walton 25 Oct '01

25 Oct '01

Now that I look, the 3.4 DataCenter install guide states: "Because the product uses file locking, VERITAS recommends that you not install NetBackup in an NFS mounted directory. File locking in NFS mounted files systems can be unreliable" I mentally took this to mean "not supported". Sorry if my previous email was misleading. Regards, Jon -----Original Message----- From: Jeff Kennedy [mailto:jlkennedy@amcc.com] Sent: Wednesday, October 24, 2001 6:18 AM To: Jon Walton Cc: toasters@mathworks. com Subject: Re: Veritas Netbackup Database OK, I did some checking again. Veritas does officially support putting /usr/openv onto an NFS file system. However, they say that performance does suffer due to the large write streams. So, if performance is not an issue then it is a very nice solution. Also, db backups do not yet support disk storage unit backups. Supposedly in 4.5 they will for just this reason. ~JK Jon Walton wrote: > > I believe they do not support this due the fact that operations on the > database files involve file locking. That is what is remember reading > in the Unix Admin Guide. > > Regards, > > Jon > > -----Original Message----- > From: Jeff Kennedy [mailto:jlkennedy@amcc.com] > Sent: Friday, October 19, 2001 10:39 AM > To: Manny Kaiser > Cc: toasters@mathworks. com > Subject: Re: Veritas Netbackup Database > > Got word from Vertias that putting the /usr/openv filesystem itself on > NFS was NOT supported. However, you could backup the database to a NFS > disk without issue.... > > ~JK > > > Manny Kaiser wrote: > > > > Has anyone placed the Veritas Netbackup database on an NFS mounted > > file system? > > More specifically on a netapp? > > I was just told by Veritas that they do not recommend doing this > > because NFS is unreliable. > > Any feedback would be helpful. > > > > > > -- > ===================== > Jeff Kennedy > Unix Administrator > AMCC > jlkennedy(a)amcc.com -- ===================== Jeff Kennedy Unix Administrator AMCC jlkennedy(a)amcc.com

3 2

Deleting data
by Benny Wiström 25 Oct '01

25 Oct '01

Hi! I have copied approximately 70Gb from one volume to another. Now I want to delete the data from the original volume. Is is possible to do this without having the data end up in the snapshots and filling up the volume? I would prefer if this could be done without having to delete any snapshots since it still is other data on the volume. -- Regards: Benny Wiström CSC Phone: +46 13 4653647 Systemadministrator 581 88 Linköping Fax: +46 13 185771 Benny.Wistrom(a)consultant.saab.se Sweden Mobile: +46 13 4653647 Sometimes I think the surest sign that intelligent life exists elsewhere in the universe is that none of it has tried to contact us. -Calvin & Hobbes (Bill Watterson)

2 1

RE: MRTG for filers
by Mohler, Jeff 24 Oct '01

24 Oct '01

Then please, do ask. :^) -----Original Message----- From: Jennifer Armenta [mailto:ArmentaJ@mascorp.com] Sent: Wednesday, October 24, 2001 4:11 PM To: toasters(a)mathworks.com Subject: MRTG for filers has anyone downloaded the software on the NOW site for MRTG? I need to ask a question but Netapp says they dont support it

1 0

MRTG for filers
by Jennifer Armenta 24 Oct '01

24 Oct '01

has anyone downloaded the software on the NOW site for MRTG? I need to ask a question but Netapp says they dont support it

1 0

RE: View Security Log from W2K Client
by Drew O'Donnell 24 Oct '01

24 Oct '01

I would like to be able to scan my security logs on our netapps for unauthorized access. Most of the products I have looked at only work on NT servers, and will not work on our filers. Any suggestions would be appreciated. Drew -----Original Message----- From: stefan.holzwarth(a)zentrale.adac.de [mailto:stefan.holzwarth@zentrale.adac.de] Sent: Wednesday, October 24, 2001 2:53 AM To: pkeim(a)snap.org; toasters(a)mathworks.com Cc: twulff(a)snap.org Subject: AW: View Security Log from W2K Client Hi, i had the same problem. Copy the file to a local disk@windows2000 system. Then it works! Regards, Stefan Holzwarth > -----Ursprüngliche Nachricht----- > Von: pkeim(contr-ird) [mailto:pkeim@snap.org] > Gesendet am: Dienstag, 23. Oktober 2001 20:50 > An: toasters(a)mathworks.com > Cc: twulff(contr-ird) > Betreff: View Security Log from W2K Client > > I have an F840 with 6.1.1R1. I've got CIFS access > logging enabled > and I'm able to view my /etc/logs/adtlog.evt file from an > NT4.0 server. > However, when I attempt to open the same file from a Windows 2000 > Professional machine, I receive an error indicating that I > should "Select a > Type for this Log". The pull-down menu of the "Log Type" > field only has > "(Unspecified)" as an option -- it should have application, > security, or > system as choices. Has anyone else had success opening a > filer security log > from the event viewer of a W2K client? > > Thank you in advance, > > Patrick Keim >

1 0

RE: Veritas Netbackup Database
by Jon Walton 24 Oct '01

24 Oct '01

I believe they do not support this due the fact that operations on the database files involve file locking. That is what is remember reading in the Unix Admin Guide. Regards, Jon -----Original Message----- From: Jeff Kennedy [mailto:jlkennedy@amcc.com] Sent: Friday, October 19, 2001 10:39 AM To: Manny Kaiser Cc: toasters@mathworks. com Subject: Re: Veritas Netbackup Database Got word from Vertias that putting the /usr/openv filesystem itself on NFS was NOT supported. However, you could backup the database to a NFS disk without issue.... ~JK > Manny Kaiser wrote: > > Has anyone placed the Veritas Netbackup database on an NFS mounted > file system? > More specifically on a netapp? > I was just told by Veritas that they do not recommend doing this > because NFS is unreliable. > Any feedback would be helpful. > > -- ===================== Jeff Kennedy Unix Administrator AMCC jlkennedy(a)amcc.com

2 1

AW: View Security Log from W2K Client
by stefan.holzwarth＠zentrale.adac.de 24 Oct '01

24 Oct '01

Hi, i had the same problem. Copy the file to a local disk@windows2000 system. Then it works! Regards, Stefan Holzwarth > -----Ursprüngliche Nachricht----- > Von: pkeim(contr-ird) [mailto:pkeim@snap.org] > Gesendet am: Dienstag, 23. Oktober 2001 20:50 > An: toasters(a)mathworks.com > Cc: twulff(contr-ird) > Betreff: View Security Log from W2K Client > > I have an F840 with 6.1.1R1. I've got CIFS access > logging enabled > and I'm able to view my /etc/logs/adtlog.evt file from an > NT4.0 server. > However, when I attempt to open the same file from a Windows 2000 > Professional machine, I receive an error indicating that I > should "Select a > Type for this Log". The pull-down menu of the "Log Type" > field only has > "(Unspecified)" as an option -- it should have application, > security, or > system as choices. Has anyone else had success opening a > filer security log > from the event viewer of a W2K client? > > Thank you in advance, > > Patrick Keim >

1 0

View Security Log from W2K Client
by pkeim(contr-ird) 23 Oct '01

23 Oct '01

I have an F840 with 6.1.1R1. I've got CIFS access logging enabled and I'm able to view my /etc/logs/adtlog.evt file from an NT4.0 server. However, when I attempt to open the same file from a Windows 2000 Professional machine, I receive an error indicating that I should "Select a Type for this Log". The pull-down menu of the "Log Type" field only has "(Unspecified)" as an option -- it should have application, security, or system as choices. Has anyone else had success opening a filer security log from the event viewer of a W2K client? Thank you in advance, Patrick Keim

1 0

6.1.1 and Ultrium
by Jon Walton 23 Oct '01

23 Oct '01

Now that 6.1.1 supports LTO (Ultrium) has anyone made the plunge? I have seen some discussion in the archives, but no actual testimonies as of yet. We are replacing our library, and seriously looking at the LTO technology. We have been using direct attached NDMP with DLT7000s up until now. Regards, Jon

1 0

quotas for windows users under ontap 6.1x?
by neil lehrer 23 Oct '01

23 Oct '01

anybody have any experience with the new quota mechanism? ~~~~~~~~~~~ from 6.1 doc: jsmith,corp\jsmith,engineering\"john smith", S-1-5-32-544 user@/vol/rls 500M 10K The user, represented by four IDs, can use 500 MB of disk space and 10,240 files in the /vol/rls volume. ~~~~~~~~~~~~ comments appreciated. -- regards

3 2

Virus Alert
by postmaster＠mathworks.com 23 Oct '01

23 Oct '01

Have detected a virus (TROJ_SIRCAM.A) in your mail traffic on 10/23/2001 06:36:27 with an action quarantined.

1 0

»õ·Î ¸¸µé±â Microsoft Word ¹®¼
by unknown＠example.com 23 Oct '01

23 Oct '01

------------------ Virus Warning Message (on scanner) Found virus TROJ_SIRCAM.A in file �� Microsoft Word ��.doc.lnk The uncleanable file �� Microsoft Word ��.doc.lnk is moved to /etc/iscan/virus/virFYBk5ai2f. --------------------------------------------------------- Hi! How are you? I send you this file in order to have your advice See you later. Thanks ------------------ Virus Warning Message (on scanner) �� Microsoft Word ��.doc.lnk is removed from here because it contains a virus. ---------------------------------------------------------

1 0

Virus Alert
by postmaster＠mathworks.com 23 Oct '01

23 Oct '01

Have detected a virus (TROJ_SIRCAM.A) in your mail traffic on 10/22/2001 23:16:47 with an action quarantined.

1 0

»õ·Î ¸¸µé±â Microsoft Word ¹®¼
by unknown＠example.com 23 Oct '01

23 Oct '01

------------------ Virus Warning Message (on scanner) Found virus TROJ_SIRCAM.A in file �� Microsoft Word ��.doc.com The uncleanable file �� Microsoft Word ��.doc.com is moved to /etc/iscan/virus/virULAxfaiHa. --------------------------------------------------------- Hi! How are you? I send you this file in order to have your advice See you later. Thanks ------------------ Virus Warning Message (on scanner) �� Microsoft Word ��.doc.com is removed from here because it contains a virus. ---------------------------------------------------------

1 0

ontap 6.1x
by neil lehrer 22 Oct '01

22 Oct '01

anybody have any comments on 6.1x, my environment is clustered 760s with nfs, cifs, nt 4 domain, nis. am currently on 6.01r3d3, debating moving up to take advantage of the new quota capability for windows users. thanks. -- regards

1 0

program to warn for over quotas
by glennm＠latticesemi.com 22 Oct '01

22 Oct '01

I have started using SWatch to monitor quotas on my F740. SWatch, The Simple WATCHer, can be found at: http://www.oit.ucsb.edu/~eta/swatch/ It is great for monitoring all kinds of system files. I use it to let me know when one of my users has hit their quota. This allows me to act on it promptly. Here is my .swatchrc file for my filer named "toaster" that is mounted on my admin system where the progam runs: ---------------------------------------------------- # # Swatch configuration file for constant monitoring # # people out of quota on praxis watchfor /disk quota exceeded/ echo mail ---------------------------------------------------- I enter the command "swatch --tail-file=/toaster/etc/messages" and it both echos the error in the window and emails me the error. Of course the user is a UID as NetApp has not setup the error so that it translates the uid to a user. I am working on the program, it is in perl, to do more for me. I have perl version perl5.005_03 and I had to get several modules to get it to make, but it wasn't to bad. The cool thing is I want to update to 6.1.1R1 so that the quota threshold can be used. Then I can have a program warn the user when they are getting close to their quota limit. It would be nice if this was built into the NetApp though. ************************************************************************* Glenn Marsh Lattice Semiconductor Corporation Unix Systems Administrator 5555 NE Moore Court CAD Engineering Hillsboro, Oregon 97124 glenn.marsh(a)latticesemi.com 503-268-8000 503-268-8136 phone - 503-268-8459 fax *************************************************************************

1 0

Re: Windows 2000 and DataONTap 5.3.4
by Blake Folgner 22 Oct '01

22 Oct '01

I will not be using Active Directory on any of my 2K Servers. They are only IIS Servers. Will 5.3.4r3 Work on 2k? ----- Original Message ----- From: Lossner, Rick To: 'Blake Folgner' Sent: Monday, October 22, 2001 12:51 PM Subject: RE: Windows 2000 and DataONTap 5.3.4 W2K compatibility is best achieved with DataOntap 6.1 .. active directory, DFS, etc,etc... -----Original Message----- From: Blake Folgner [mailto:blake@webrunners.com] Sent: Monday, October 22, 2001 2:22 PM To: toasters(a)mathworks.com Cc: Blake Folgner Subject: Windows 2000 and DataONTap 5.3.4 Is DataONTap 5.3.4.r3 compatible with Windows 2000?

2 1

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