toasters

toasters@lists.teaparty.net

13515 discussions

Re: Permission denied
by MikeBall＠datalink.com 04 Jun '01

04 Jun '01

Srikanth, Telnet to the Netapp and type "exportfs". See if you have given root and rw access to only certain machines, etc.. Mike "A, Srikanth (Srikanth)" To: toasters(a)mathworks.com <asrikanth@lucent. cc: com> Subject: Permission denied Sent by: owner-toasters@mat hworks.com 06/04/2001 02:09 AM Hello all, We have Netapps 760 with NetApp Release 5.3.6R2. On netapp only NFS is enabled and it has quad Ethernet card all are 100 MBPS full duplex. Clients are sun and hp machines. now a days we have a problem on clients it says NFS write error on host filer: Permission denied Can someone tell me what could the problem. - Best Regards, Srikanth A. Lucent Technologies O Phone: +91-80-505 2060

1 0

RE: Exchange 5.5 on Filer
by Waters, G Scott DSTI 04 Jun '01

04 Jun '01

You need to rephrase that statement ... Microsoft does not recommend or support Exchange 5.5 or 2K on any NAS. We are in the process of upgrading our entire Exchange site. We currently run very old multi-processor servers and serve about 400 - 500 users on each machine. I was tasked to recommend an upgrade path ... after hearing Microsoft's recommendations and taking into account that we are Microsoft Premier Support customer, I recommended a SAN solution. My recommendations were ignored and as the Exchange Admin, I am now being forced to implement a NAS solution. I have nothing against the Filer or NetApp. The product is wonderful. I do however, realize that the Exchange database sucks and when you talk to it through the Windows "redirector" you are asking for trouble. The decision should be based on how comfortable you are with Exchange and the Filer and also if you are willing to run Exchange in an unsupported mode (from Microsoft - NetApp has some arrangement with IBM Global for Exchange support if you need it after putting your system into an unsupported mode). I talked to several references and they all had nothing but good things to say. I'll have some personal stories to share in the next month or two. In all the meetings and arguing that lead up to the decision there was one statement that just floored me. It was at a meeting where I am defending my position to use SAN technology and not NAS. Someone in the meeting turns to me and says "I can't believe you are going to let Microsoft dictate your hardware requirements". I was floored and replied "a.) As the author of the software in question, I figured they would have the best knowledge on where to run it and more importantly b.) we (as an organization) let Microsoft dictate the software that we run (we only run Microsoft products, we can only develop in Microsoft languages, etc) so I figured if we follow like lambs in one case ... why not the other??" Remember, before you flame, I am in no way slamming the NetApp or the Filer in general ... I was just trying to keep the site "supportable". Scott Waters US Army HQ Soldier and Biological Chemical Command (USAHQSBCCOM) scott.waters(a)sbccom.apgea.army.mil -----Original Message----- From: Rafi Mimon [mailto:rmimon@vyyo.co.il] Sent: Monday, June 04, 2001 9:12 AM To: toasters(a)mathworks.com Subject: Exchange 5.5 on Filer Hello all, I'm thinking of using the Filer with Exchange 5.5. I have one F740 with ONTAP 6.0.2R1. Microsoft does not recommend to use any NAS system for the exchange database files, so I would like to hear from you guys, did you encountered any problems? should I connect the Exchange server and the Filer Back to back or to the LANs backbone? Rafi Mimon VYYO.LTD. E-mail :rmimon@vyyo.co.il ********************************************************************** The information transmitted is intended only for the person or entity to which it is addressed and may contain confidential and/or privileged material. Any review, retransmission, dissemination or other use of, or taking of any action in reliance upon, this information by persons or entities other than the intended recipient is prohibited. If you received this in error (whether inadvertently addressed to you, or if forwarded to you by a recipient), please contact the sender and delete the material from any computer. This footnote also confirms that this email message has been swept by Vyyo's Virus Scan Systems for the presence of computer viruses. **********************************************************************

1 0

Exchange 5.5 on Filer
by Rafi Mimon 04 Jun '01

04 Jun '01

Hello all, I'm thinking of using the Filer with Exchange 5.5. I have one F740 with ONTAP 6.0.2R1. Microsoft does not recommend to use any NAS system for the exchange database files, so I would like to hear from you guys, did you encountered any problems? should I connect the Exchange server and the Filer Back to back or to the LANs backbone? Rafi Mimon VYYO.LTD. E-mail :rmimon@vyyo.co.il ********************************************************************** The information transmitted is intended only for the person or entity to which it is addressed and may contain confidential and/or privileged material. Any review, retransmission, dissemination or other use of, or taking of any action in reliance upon, this information by persons or entities other than the intended recipient is prohibited. If you received this in error (whether inadvertently addressed to you, or if forwarded to you by a recipient), please contact the sender and delete the material from any computer. This footnote also confirms that this email message has been swept by Vyyo's Virus Scan Systems for the presence of computer viruses. **********************************************************************

1 0

Permission denied
by A, Srikanth (Srikanth) 04 Jun '01

04 Jun '01

Hello all, We have Netapps 760 with NetApp Release 5.3.6R2. On netapp only NFS is enabled and it has quad Ethernet card all are 100 MBPS full duplex. Clients are sun and hp machines. now a days we have a problem on clients it says NFS write error on host filer: Permission denied Can someone tell me what could the problem. - Best Regards, Srikanth A. Lucent Technologies O Phone: +91-80-505 2060

1 0

filer-MRTG on Linux/Windows
by Roger Bonine 01 Jun '01

01 Jun '01

I'm trying to install filer-MRTG on Linux, and I'm running into a problem. When I edit the Makefile as listed in the docs and type make, the makefile creates the directories, gets to the "Doing make in bin..." prompt, and just sits there. I'm not very fluent in Linux (we have a Windows-only environment), and I'm having trouble figuring out why the make is not finishing. Does anyone have any ideas? System is Red Hat 7.1. Alternatively (and preferably), has anyone successfully set up filer-MRTG on NT? I'm familiar with MRTG - our routers are monitored with it on NT now - but I haven't been sucessful in setting the filers up so far. --Roger _________________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com

1 0

Re: EMC IP4700 vs NetApp F740
by Chris_Van_Genderen＠NexFlash.com 31 May '01

31 May '01

Bruce, One of the items that I did not mention was that we are a start up company that is using the back-end infrastructure of our parent company. I have been given the task of not only buying a NAS device for company wide storage, but also to build the entire network infrastructure and server infrastructure for our new location. So, what ever we purchase will need to go online immediately and support the company in a new location. I don't have the "test-bed" to test anything. As you can also guess, via my title, I am not a MIS person either. So, I've been going through a fairly steep learning curve in many areas. I am weary about compatibility issues with NFS and our engineering/CAD Sun machines. In this area, I feel because of their industry experience, NetApp has the edge. I've talked with EMC on this issue, and they re-assure me that the IP4700 will not have compatibility problems. However, this is much different than having users of the product claim that their are no compatibility problems. My gut feeling is to go with the F740 because of the existing installation base, and the maturity of the product. I'm just a little miffed that NetApp has been trying to use my inexperience and limited knowledgebase against me during the sales process; it doesn't give me the feeling that I can trust them. Chris Van Genderen Software Engineer & Applications Manager NexFlash Technologies, Inc. chris_van_genderen(a)nexflash.com "Bruce Sterling To: <toasters(a)mathworks.com>, <Chris_Van_Genderen(a)NexFlash.com> Woodcock" cc: (bcc: Chris Van Genderen/Santa Clara/ISSIHQ) <sirbruce(a)ix.n Subject: Re: EMC IP4700 vs NetApp F740 etcom.com> 05/09/01 03:45 PM Most of what you seem to be weighing are nebulous issues of who says what. Why don't you just find out for yourself? Ask Netapp for an F760 to try out for 2 weeks. Ask EMC for an IP4700 *at the equivalent price and disk capacity, with RAID* to try out for 2 weeks. See which has better performance for your users and which you can administer easier. Build large RAID groups, test simultaneous file sharing from NFS and CIFS, fail drives, do rebuilds, etc. Bruce

9 11

RE: NetApp NDMP Veritas NetBackup SunStoredge L1000
by Cormier, Darleen 31 May '01

31 May '01

Hi Ahmed, I'm not sure I understand exactly how you have the drives connected to the filer, but you might want to check that your drives and HBA are the same type. For example, If the drives and library are LVD/SE SCSI, make sure you're not plugging them into an HVD SCSI Host Bus Adapter, on the filer. And of course if the library is FCAL, your HBA must be FCAL. -----Original Message----- From: Ahmed Fayek [mailto:ahmed_fayek@mentorg.com] Sent: Wednesday, May 30, 2001 1:32 PM To: toasters(a)mathworks.com Subject: NetApp NDMP Veritas NetBackup SunStoredge L1000 Hello all, i know it's a long email but i had to describe the system to give you a clear idea. My system contains: *A robot library: Sun Storedge L1000, with 2 tape drives in it. *2 NDMP hosts to be connected physically to this library, they are NetApp filers , ONTAP 5.3.6R2 , *On the same LAN i got an Ultra10 solaris 7 machine on which installed Veritas NetBackup 3.4 data center with NDMP option installed, this will be my master/media server. What i'm wondering about now is: 1.The filer connected to the library detects it as mc0 but does not detect the drives in the library. is there a reconfiguration reboot to do in netapp ? i did reboot it but no change. 2.On adding the robot to NetBackup configuration, it requires: device host = master/media server (NetBackup for NDMP server). volume database host = master/media server (NetBackup for NDMP server). robot device = logic name of robot NDMP host name = ?? ex: toaster1 Here i need to specify an NDMP host name . So will i create a robot entry for each NDMP host? though they r both connected to same robot ?? 3.On adding the drive, it depends also on the NDMP host name: ex: toaster1:nrst0a will the other drive be toaster1:nrst1a , or toaster2:nrst1a ??? 4.Then on adding the storage unit: it also needs NDMP host name, will i add 2 storage units with the same configuration but differ in NDMP hostname only ?? I know it's a complex configuration, i'm planning for it from about 6 weeks ago and still doing search on it Have you got any idea about such configuration? Is it ok to connect both netapp filers to same library? Best Regards , -- Ahmed.

2 1

NetApp NDMP Veritas NetBackup SunStoredge L1000
by Ahmed Fayek 30 May '01

30 May '01

Hello all, i know it's a long email but i had to describe the system to give you a clear idea. My system contains: *A robot library: Sun Storedge L1000, with 2 tape drives in it. *2 NDMP hosts to be connected physically to this library, they are NetApp filers , ONTAP 5.3.6R2 , *On the same LAN i got an Ultra10 solaris 7 machine on which installed Veritas NetBackup 3.4 data center with NDMP option installed, this will be my master/media server. What i'm wondering about now is: 1.The filer connected to the library detects it as mc0 but does not detect the drives in the library. is there a reconfiguration reboot to do in netapp ? i did reboot it but no change. 2.On adding the robot to NetBackup configuration, it requires: device host = master/media server (NetBackup for NDMP server). volume database host = master/media server (NetBackup for NDMP server). robot device = logic name of robot NDMP host name = ?? ex: toaster1 Here i need to specify an NDMP host name . So will i create a robot entry for each NDMP host? though they r both connected to same robot ?? 3.On adding the drive, it depends also on the NDMP host name: ex: toaster1:nrst0a will the other drive be toaster1:nrst1a , or toaster2:nrst1a ??? 4.Then on adding the storage unit: it also needs NDMP host name, will i add 2 storage units with the same configuration but differ in NDMP hostname only ?? I know it's a complex configuration, i'm planning for it from about 6 weeks ago and still doing search on it Have you got any idea about such configuration? Is it ok to connect both netapp filers to same library? Best Regards , -- Ahmed.

1 0

DS14 disk shelves
by Scott Mikusko 29 May '01

29 May '01

Anyone out there in toasterland have any of the new DS14 disk shelves? Trying to get some idea of performance and impressions on the new units with people. These are the new fibre channel disk shelves that house 14 drives from Netapp. Seen some basic spcs on them, but wondered if anyone has installed and run these on any F700/800 series units. -Scott

1 0

FS: NetApp Hardware System Cabinets - $2,180.00
by ScottUCE＠aol.com 29 May '01

29 May '01

We've got several of NetApp's 36U Hardware System Cabinets - Item No. X851A-C (Item Description: Cabinet 36U 220V NEMA L6-20P). NetApp lists the cabinets for $5,450.00; we would like to get $2,180.00. Scott Fischmann Union Computer Exchange, Inc. 6233 Idylwood Lane Minneapolis, MN 55436 Phone: 952 935 7282 FAX: 952 935 5056 scott(a)unioncomputer.com

1 0

Filer drops off the Network
by Kennard, Dave M SSI-ISEL-31 29 May '01

29 May '01

List, Anyone ever seen a filer drop off the network (single gigabit card) for a while (10 minutes or so) symptoms are: Cant connect to cifs shares (we only use cifs). cant remote shell to the filer. cant ping the filer. can connect via the console port filer looks fine from there the interface is up and not generating errors. cant ping any devices from the filer. can ping the filer from the filer can ping the loopback address from the filer. after 10 minutes or so the filer comes back as if nothing had happened (this only started to happen after we upgraded to OnTAP 6.0.1r3.) any ideas? Dave M. Kennard

1 0

Sybase on a Filer
by Steven.Boyer Steven.Boyer 28 May '01

28 May '01

We are looking to put Sybase data on a filer. We have several servers running different versions of Sybase, but only wish to put the data on the filer leaving the engine on the server. Has anyone been successful with such a configuration? -- Steven N. Boyer UNIX/NT/NetApp Support General Dynamics --

1 0

RE: upgrade to 6.1R1
by Traitel, Eyal 28 May '01

28 May '01

This is probably as of revert process which is a one time event. Please open a case and we will follow up to verify my answer. Eyal. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- eTraitel - I'm the new eBuzzword around !!! ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Filer Escalation Engineer CNA, MCSE, CSA, LCA, NetApp CA Network Appliance BV Hoofddorp, The Netherlands Office: +31 23 567 9685 Cellular: +31 6 5497 2568 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Get answers NOW! - NetApp On the Web - http://now.netapp.com ---------------------------------------------------------------------- -----Original Message----- From: Reinoud Reynders [mailto:Reinoud.Reynders@uz.kuleuven.ac.be] Sent: Sun, May 27, 2001 22:53 To: Steven.Boyer(a)GD-WTS-CENTCOM.COM; toasters(a)mathworks.com Subject: Re: upgrade to 6.1R1 Dear Steven, Last week, i have upgraded my F740 (14 x 72 GB disks) from 5.3.7R1 to 6.1R1 without any problems. On this moment i have discovered just one problem: All my disks are in one volume (vol0). On my F820, (also running 6.1R1), I snapmirror the vol0 of the F740. After the ONTAP update from the F740, the sheduled snapmirror takes a lot of time (serveral houres, while with the version 5.3.7 just a few minutes). I think that it is the difference in disks and the extra parity check in 6.1 that causes the problem. My F740 has "old disks" (zone parity checking thanks 6.1R1) and my F820 has new disks with blok parity checking. Maybe he's confused in what is changed between de snapmirror. I will open a call by netapp for this tomorrow. Maybe it's just a stupid mistake of me, because snapmirror is new for me. Reinoud UZ-Leuven Belgium ----- Original Message ----- From: "Steven.Boyer Steven.Boyer" <Steven.Boyer(a)GD-WTS-CENTCOM.COM> To: <toasters(a)mathworks.com> Sent: Saturday, May 26, 2001 3:57 PM Subject: upgrade to 6.1R1 > I currently have three filers in a mixed environment, NT and SOLARIS, two at 1.4TB the other is 2.5TB. I plan on using them in a cascading mirror configuration. Does anyone have experience with upgrading to 6.1R1 and its operation? Since 6.1R1 is still in "First Customer Shipment Releases" I was wondering if anyone has experienced operational problems with 6.1R1?? > > > Steven > UNIX/NetApp Support > General Dynamics > >

1 0

upgrade to 6.1R1
by Steven.Boyer Steven.Boyer 27 May '01

27 May '01

I currently have three filers in a mixed environment, NT and SOLARIS, two at 1.4TB the other is 2.5TB. I plan on using them in a cascading mirror configuration. Does anyone have experience with upgrading to 6.1R1 and its operation? Since 6.1R1 is still in "First Customer Shipment Releases" I was wondering if anyone has experienced operational problems with 6.1R1?? Steven UNIX/NetApp Support General Dynamics

2 1

RE: Why is root not root?
by Knight, Graham 27 May '01

27 May '01

Probably because the file has an NT ACL that has been set so tightly that the root user cannot access it without taking ownership first, which cannot be done very easily from the command line. Setting this (hidden) option will make this type of problem a thing of the past: options cifs.nfs_root_ignore_acl on I used this extensively at my last position with very good results. Graham -----Original Message----- From: Chuck Ross [mailto:chuck.ross@signiant.com] Sent: Thursday, May 24, 2001 3:06 PM To: Net App List (E-mail) Subject: Why is root not root? Hi all, Why is root on a Unix admin host for a filer in a mixed env not really root? By that I mean why is it possible to create directories on the NetApp via a Cifs share that root has no access to? Chuck Ross SIGNIANT - A Nortel Networks Venture 1550 Carling Avenue, Suite 101 Ottawa, ON K1Z 8S8 email: Chuck.Ross(a)signiant.com tel: (613) 761-3605 fax: (613) 761-3629

2 1

RE: bogus LCD messages ...
by Haynes, Tom 26 May '01

26 May '01

At some point the disks were broken and there is a piece of code in some releases that does not properly update the status of the disk once a new one is inserted. This has since been fixed. The real fix is to upgrade to a newer version of OnTap, but a temporary fix is to reboot your filer. While the message is annoying, there is nothing wrong with your system. I have seen filers sit in this state for over a month. -----Original Message----- From: Waters, G Scott DSTI [SMTP:scott.waters@SBCCOM.APGEA.ARMY.MIL] Sent: Saturday, May 26, 2001 12:52 PM To: 'toasters(a)mathworks.com' Subject: bogus LCD messages ... Hi! I've been following this list for about a month now ... I heard about it while at NetApp Admin training. I needed to ask a question about some strange behavior coming from my 760 filer. My filer has some bogus "disk broken" messages flashing on it. The messages are there because some of the disks were inserted and removed ... but they were never brought online. The OS recognizes the disks and they have been added to a volume ... but the messages still continue to cycle on the LCD display. I hope I explained this thoroughly ... if you don't understand what I am saying or need more info, please let me know. Any ideas??

1 0

bogus LCD messages ...
by Waters, G Scott DSTI 26 May '01

26 May '01

Hi! I've been following this list for about a month now ... I heard about it while at NetApp Admin training. I needed to ask a question about some strange behavior coming from my 760 filer. My filer has some bogus "disk broken" messages flashing on it. The messages are there because some of the disks were inserted and removed ... but they were never brought online. The OS recognizes the disks and they have been added to a volume ... but the messages still continue to cycle on the LCD display. I hope I explained this thoroughly ... if you don't understand what I am saying or need more info, please let me know. Any ideas??

1 0

display _all_ options?
by Marion Hakanson 26 May '01

26 May '01

Folks, Is there some secret way to display _all_ available options and their settings? The documentation I've been able to find doesn't list all options which show up in the "options" command's output, and some options which _are_ documented don't always show up in that output either. For example, on both our new (v6.1R1) and old (v5.3.6R2) filers, cifs.save_case (which _is_ documented) won't show up in the complete listing, although you can query its value specifically. The recently discussed "cifs.nfs_root_ignore_acl" option doesn't seem show up in the show-all listing until you change it from "off" to "on" (and the latter doesn't even show up in a search of NOW). So how the heck can I be sure that my new filer has all the same option settings as my old one, if I can't even get a listing of all the old option settings? Suggestions are welcome.... Regards, -- Marion Hakanson <hakanson(a)cse.ogi.edu> CSE Computing Facilities

4 3

RE: upgrade to 6.1R1
by Sam Schorr 26 May '01

26 May '01

Steven, I have upgraded 4 of our F760's from 5.3.7 to 6.1R1. These 4 have 8 shelves of 18 gb drives in 2 volumes each (1 online, 1 snapmirror). The only issue is that older disks are VERY sensitive under 6.1. There is a specific reference to possible problems spinning up older drives in the docs for 6.1 - definitely read it. We had a number of disks refuse to spin up after the disk firmware upgrade step - almost lost a volume. Be prepared to power cycle the entire filer and disk shelves - this helped us get past a multi-disk failure that almost lost a volume. We ended up with a couple of drives in a broken state, but sparing took care of those. Also, there are annoying messages about configuration issues that do not show under earlier versions. In our case, 6.1 complains about the placement of our gigE NICs in certain slots. We've known about this "issue" for some time, but did not choose to take downtime to optimize it. Haven't figured out how to shut them up yet. --sam -----Original Message----- From: Steven.Boyer Steven.Boyer [mailto:Steven.Boyer@GD-WTS-CENTCOM.COM] Sent: Saturday, May 26, 2001 6:57 AM To: toasters(a)mathworks.com Subject: upgrade to 6.1R1 I currently have three filers in a mixed environment, NT and SOLARIS, two at 1.4TB the other is 2.5TB. I plan on using them in a cascading mirror configuration. Does anyone have experience with upgrading to 6.1R1 and its operation? Since 6.1R1 is still in "First Customer Shipment Releases" I was wondering if anyone has experienced operational problems with 6.1R1?? Steven UNIX/NetApp Support General Dynamics

1 0

None
by Steven.Boyer Steven.Boyer 26 May '01

26 May '01

1 0

incremental ndmpcopy doesn't work
by Reinoud Reynders 25 May '01

25 May '01

Hello, I try to copy 150 GB from F740:vol0 to F820:vol1. The level0 frma ndmpcopy works fine. No errors. When i start the level 1, i get the following error: DstFiler: mei 25 09:51:02 [ndmpd:0]: RESTORE IS ABORTED mei 25 09:51:02 [ndmpd:0]: DstFiler just halted. mei 25 09:51:02 [ndmpd:0]: Reason: ndmp_data_halted_internal_error : Dump aborted I have also used the level i, but the same result: 1 time ok, incremental no go. The filers run both 6.1R1 Have someone a good idea? Reinoud Reynders UZ Kuleuven Herestraat 49 B- 3000 Leuven Belgium The complete log-file: S:\Informatiesystemen\nas>ndmpcopy toaster1:/vol/vol0/groepen/WebTeam mixer1:/vol/vol1/groepen/WebTeam -sa root:XXX -da root:XXX -level 1 setting everything to version 3 mei 25 09:45:38 [ndmpd:0]: Now waiting for source and destination to finish. SrcFiler: mei 25 09:45:39 [ndmpd:0]: DUMP: SrcFiler: mei 25 09:45:39 [ndmpd:0]: creating "/vol/vol0/../snapshot_for_backup. 19" snapshot. SrcFiler: mei 25 09:46:01 [ndmpd:0]: DUMP: SrcFiler: mei 25 09:46:01 [ndmpd:0]: Using subtree dump SrcFiler: mei 25 09:46:49 [ndmpd:0]: DUMP: SrcFiler: mei 25 09:46:49 [ndmpd:0]: Date of this level 1 dump: Fri May 25 09:44 :58 2001. SrcFiler: mei 25 09:46:49 [ndmpd:0]: DUMP: SrcFiler: mei 25 09:46:49 [ndmpd:0]: Date of last level 0 dump: Fri May 25 09:35 :38 2001. SrcFiler: mei 25 09:46:49 [ndmpd:0]: DUMP: SrcFiler: mei 25 09:46:49 [ndmpd:0]: Dumping /vol/vol0/groepen/WebTeam to NDMP c onnection SrcFiler: mei 25 09:46:49 [ndmpd:0]: DUMP: SrcFiler: mei 25 09:46:49 [ndmpd:0]: mapping (Pass I)[regular files] SrcFiler: mei 25 09:46:49 [ndmpd:0]: DUMP: SrcFiler: mei 25 09:46:49 [ndmpd:0]: mapping (Pass II)[directories] SrcFiler: mei 25 09:50:23 [ndmpd:0]: DUMP: SrcFiler: mei 25 09:50:23 [ndmpd:0]: estimated 12 KB. SrcFiler: mei 25 09:50:23 [ndmpd:0]: DUMP: SrcFiler: mei 25 09:50:23 [ndmpd:0]: dumping (Pass III) [directories] DstFiler: mei 25 09:50:45 [ndmpd:0]: RESTORE: DstFiler: mei 25 09:50:45 [ndmpd:0]: Fri May 25 09:50:05 2001: Begin incremental restore SrcFiler: mei 25 09:50:59 [ndmpd:0]: DUMP: SrcFiler: mei 25 09:50:59 [ndmpd:0]: dumping (Pass IV) [regular files] DstFiler: mei 25 09:51:02 [ndmpd:0]: RESTORE: DstFiler: mei 25 09:51:02 [ndmpd:0]: Cannot run an incremental backup because th e previous restore did not complete. DstFiler: mei 25 09:51:02 [ndmpd:0]: RESTORE: DstFiler: mei 25 09:51:02 [ndmpd:0]: RESTORE IS ABORTED mei 25 09:51:02 [ndmpd:0]: DstFiler just halted. mei 25 09:51:02 [ndmpd:0]: Reason: ndmp_data_halted_internal_error : Dump aborte d mei 25 09:51:02 [ndmpd:0]: jndmpcopy finished

4 5

RE: Locking of Files and server clusters
by Basiji, Maryam 25 May '01

25 May '01

Just saw Lance's response. Lance elaborates on how to implement the solution that is discussed in the paper I just sent over. Thanks, Maryam -----Original Message----- From: White, Lance [mailto:Lance.White@netapp.com] Sent: Friday, May 25, 2001 8:16 AM To: 'Morgan, Joshua'; 'toasters(a)mathworks.com' Subject: RE: Locking of Files and server clusters One of the steps required to ensure proper failover of SQL Server via Legato Cluster is the creation of a Resource Group (RG)connecting the application to the two nodes. The RG must include a script that gets executed as one of the first steps in bringing up the RG. The script was designed to be a workaround for the filer's normally necessary CIFS file-locking behavior. When an Legato Cluster node first fails, as far as the filer is concerned, the session between the filer and that node is still alive (the disconnect could be temporary). Because of this, it initially maintains the file locks originally established for that session. Without our script, these locks would prevent the other "takeover" node from accessing the required files during takeover. However, when our script is implemented, the file locks are terminated and the "takeover" node can access the files as necessary. In our case, the files the "takeover" node needs access to are the SQL Server database data and! log files. If the "takeover" node does not have access to these files, once the takeover is completed and the SQL Server is done recovering, the databases on the filer are declared "suspect". Following is the generic syntax for the script that must reside on each node: rsh filer_name -l cluster_admin_name cifs terminate -t 0 failed_node_name You can pass the name of the failed node via a &ft' environment variable (refer to the LCE docs for details), or you can create a nested if...then...else loop to determine which node you are starting up on, and how to terminate the CIFS session on the Filer. An example would be: if &ft'currentnode == 'failednode' then rsh Filer -l ClusterAdmin cifs terminate -t 0 failednode else rsh Filer -l ClusterAdmin cifs terminate -t 0 othernode end; Likely will be a little more coding than this, but you get the drift. Lance White Systems Engineer Network Appliance -----Original Message----- From: Morgan, Joshua [mailto:JMorgan@Trivergent.com] Sent: Friday, May 25, 2001 7:29 AM To: 'toasters(a)mathworks.com' Subject: Locking of Files and server clusters Here is the Scenario: We have SQL7 Server running with its Databases on an F760 We are using Legato Clustering Software If the main SQL Server dies and the cluster software tries to bring up the backup server, we get a message saying that the Database files are still locked by the downed server. Does anyone know of a way to script unlocking the files? We can manually do it through server manager but that is no good for Disater Recovery. Joshua Morgan PH: (864) 331-7939 jmorgan(a)trivergent.com

1 0

RE: Locking of Files and server clusters
by Basiji, Maryam 25 May '01

25 May '01

Josh, Take a look at: http://www.netapp.com/tech_library/3084.html <http://www.netapp.com/tech_library/3084.html> Similar issue and I believe Legato Clustering can use this method as well. Thanks, Maryam -----Original Message----- From: Morgan, Joshua [mailto:JMorgan@Trivergent.com] Sent: Friday, May 25, 2001 7:29 AM To: 'toasters(a)mathworks.com' Subject: Locking of Files and server clusters Here is the Scenario: We have SQL7 Server running with its Databases on an F760 We are using Legato Clustering Software If the main SQL Server dies and the cluster software tries to bring up the backup server, we get a message saying that the Database files are still locked by the downed server. Does anyone know of a way to script unlocking the files? We can manually do it through server manager but that is no good for Disater Recovery. Joshua Morgan PH: (864) 331-7939 jmorgan(a)trivergent.com

1 0

RE: Why is root not root?
by Yoder, Alan 25 May '01

25 May '01

> How about letting root delete files that are currently > locked open on the NT-side like they can with > NFS-locked files? This is burt 8500. It is fixed in 6.1; in a unix qtree you now get this behavior which is characteristic of Unix semantics. In mixed and ntfs qtrees, NTFS locking semantics still apply. Alan =============================================================== Alan G. Yoder agy(a)netapp.com ===============================================================

2 1

RE: incremental ndmpcopy doesn't work
by Knight, Graham 25 May '01

25 May '01

I think the key to the problem might be the line that says: >DstFiler: mei 25 09:51:02 [ndmpd:0]: Cannot run an incremental >backup because the previous restore did not complete. It looks like the level 0 might not have completed correctly. Do you have the logs from the level 0 dump? Graham -----Original Message----- From: Reinoud Reynders [mailto:Reinoud.Reynders@uz.kuleuven.ac.be] Sent: Friday, May 25, 2001 6:02 AM To: tmac(a)netapp.com Cc: toasters(a)mathworks.com Subject: Re: incremental ndmpcopy doesn't work Unfortunately, all the three checks are ok. (6.1R1; no other dumps and jnmpcopy) Reinoud ----- Original Message ----- From: "Timothy A. McCarthy" <tmac(a)netapp.com> To: "Reinoud Reynders" <Reinoud.Reynders(a)uz.kuleuven.ac.be> Cc: <toasters(a)mathworks.com> Sent: Friday, May 25, 2001 12:09 PM Subject: Re: incremental ndmpcopy doesn't work > Things to check: > > 1. Make sure you are running 5.3.7R3 or later on both system to avoid > ndmp bugs. > > 2. After you run the "-level 0" are you running any other dumps? If so > it interferes > with the information and may cause a failure. > > 3. The "-level i" only works with jnmpcopy. > > **notice the space between the word level and the number or "i" > > --tmac > > Reinoud Reynders wrote: > > > Hello, I try to copy 150 GB from F740:vol0 to F820:vol1. The level0 > > frma ndmpcopy works fine. No errors. When i start the level 1, i get > > the following error: DstFiler: mei 25 09:51:02 [ndmpd:0]: RESTORE > > IS ABORTED mei 25 09:51:02 [ndmpd:0]: DstFiler just halted. > > mei 25 09:51:02 [ndmpd:0]: Reason: ndmp_data_halted_internal_error : > > Dump aborted I have also used the level i, but the same result: 1 > > time ok, incremental no go.The filers run both 6.1R1 Have someone a > > good idea? Reinoud ReyndersUZ KuleuvenHerestraat 49B- 3000 Leuven > > Belgium The complete log-file: S:\Informatiesystemen\nas>ndmpcopy > > toaster1:/vol/vol0/groepen/WebTeam mixer1:/vol/vol1/groepen/WebTeam > > -sa root:XXX -da root:XXX -level 1setting everything to version 3 > > mei 25 09:45:38 [ndmpd:0]: Now waiting for source and destination to > > finish. > > SrcFiler: mei 25 09:45:39 [ndmpd:0]: DUMP: > > SrcFiler: mei 25 09:45:39 [ndmpd:0]: creating > > "/vol/vol0/../snapshot_for_backup. > > 19" snapshot. SrcFiler: mei 25 09:46:01 [ndmpd:0]: DUMP: > > SrcFiler: mei 25 09:46:01 [ndmpd:0]: Using subtree dump SrcFiler: > > mei 25 09:46:49 [ndmpd:0]: DUMP: > > SrcFiler: mei 25 09:46:49 [ndmpd:0]: Date of this level 1 dump: Fri > > May 25 09:44 > > :58 2001. SrcFiler: mei 25 09:46:49 [ndmpd:0]: DUMP: > > SrcFiler: mei 25 09:46:49 [ndmpd:0]: Date of last level 0 dump: Fri > > May 25 09:35 > > :38 2001. SrcFiler: mei 25 09:46:49 [ndmpd:0]: DUMP: > > SrcFiler: mei 25 09:46:49 [ndmpd:0]: Dumping > > /vol/vol0/groepen/WebTeam to NDMP c > > onnection SrcFiler: mei 25 09:46:49 [ndmpd:0]: DUMP: > > SrcFiler: mei 25 09:46:49 [ndmpd:0]: mapping (Pass I)[regular > > files] SrcFiler: mei 25 09:46:49 [ndmpd:0]: DUMP: > > SrcFiler: mei 25 09:46:49 [ndmpd:0]: mapping (Pass > > II)[directories] SrcFiler: mei 25 09:50:23 [ndmpd:0]: DUMP: > > SrcFiler: mei 25 09:50:23 [ndmpd:0]: estimated 12 KB. SrcFiler: mei > > 25 09:50:23 [ndmpd:0]: DUMP: > > SrcFiler: mei 25 09:50:23 [ndmpd:0]: dumping (Pass III) > > [directories] DstFiler: mei 25 09:50:45 [ndmpd:0]: RESTORE: > > DstFiler: mei 25 09:50:45 [ndmpd:0]: Fri May 25 09:50:05 2001: Begin > > incremental > > restore SrcFiler: mei 25 09:50:59 [ndmpd:0]: DUMP: > > SrcFiler: mei 25 09:50:59 [ndmpd:0]: dumping (Pass IV) [regular > > files] DstFiler: mei 25 09:51:02 [ndmpd:0]: RESTORE: > > DstFiler: mei 25 09:51:02 [ndmpd:0]: Cannot run an incremental > > backup because th > > e previous restore did not complete. DstFiler: mei 25 09:51:02 > > [ndmpd:0]: RESTORE: > > DstFiler: mei 25 09:51:02 [ndmpd:0]: RESTORE IS ABORTED mei 25 > > 09:51:02 [ndmpd:0]: DstFiler just halted. > > mei 25 09:51:02 [ndmpd:0]: Reason: ndmp_data_halted_internal_error : > > Dump aborte > > d > > mei 25 09:51:02 [ndmpd:0]: jndmpcopy finished > > -- > ******All New Numbers!!!****** > ************* ************* > > Timothy A. McCarthy --> System Engineer, Eastern Region > Network Appliance http://www.netapp.com > 240-268-2034 Office \ / Page Me at: > 240-268-2001 Fax \/ 888-971-4468 > > >

1 0

Jump to page:

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