toasters

toasters@lists.teaparty.net

13515 discussions

RE: "Case survey" stuff from NetApp; Comments on NOW page
by La Londe, Renee 26 Apr '01

26 Apr '01

Hi Todd, Thanks for sharing your candid thoughts on the recent changes to the NOW site. Making the Service and Support home page one of the customizable options is an awesome idea and we will put it on the roadmap and let you know when we have it in place. We created the new Service and Support home page because there are other sections on NOW (such as Reseller Corner, etc) and some customers have complained that these sections were taking away valuable real-estate from the Service and Support tools on NOW. So we created the new (one-stop-shop) page that is 100% totally dedicated to Service and Support. This was done to make your life easier on the NOW site-- so your feedback is key to making sure we get it right. We will definitely make this new home page one of the customizable options and continue to minimize the marketing and use of frames,etc on this page. FYI, within Case Status Tool [http://now.netapp.com/Self-Service/FORMS/frmSearch.asp?ObjType=NA_WEB_PPAGE…] , you can check the status of a Netapp case(s) by Entering the following: Netapp serial number Netapp case number OR Selecting the following: Last 7 days by location (ALL for your location) Last 7 days by Company (ALL for your company) Last 30 days by location (ALL for your location) Last 30 days by Company (ALL for your company) Open cases by location Open cases by company All by location All by company Just my cases (just the ones you have submitted) Makes me think that our UI may not be that clear if you weren't aware of these options... If you have any feedback on how we can make it better let me know-- but we will definitely look into it. Thanks again, Renee Renee La Londe Director, E-service Customer Facing Web Programs Network Appliance, Inc. 495 E. Java Sunnyvale CA 94089 Get Answers on NOW (Netapp on the Web)! http://now.netapp.com -----Original Message----- From: Todd C. Merrill [mailto:tmerrill@mathworks.com] Sent: Thursday, April 26, 2001 5:53 AM To: Sullivan, Justin Cc: toasters(a)mathworks.com Subject: RE: "Case survey" stuff from NetApp On Wed, 25 Apr 2001, Sullivan, Justin wrote: > We would certainly like to have more surveys returned - we should like to see EVERY survey returned. I have to admit, I used to fill these out, thinking NetApp was using some random sampling of cases in order to generate their metrics. But, it became quickly apparent that *every* call seems to generate a survey. Now I just delete them, unless the service was extremely good or extremely bad. More often than not, it's just "okay." Filling out a survey saying "you guys did a middle-of-the-road job" is like watching a newscast that report on a plane on a routine flight that landed successfully at the airport. <yawn> Might I suggest the suvey's include at least a descriptive ...ah ... description of the case? The last one I got said "Failure Error Message." And, which of the half-dozen cases I've entered in the past few weeks was that? Looking up the details in NOW revealed the subject there says "RBCLTO:Cluster Notification from filername (REBOOT (CLUSTER TAKEOVER))." Oh, yeah, now I remember. And, while I'm at it, the NOW pages have become way more cluttered, and slower, than they used to be. There are loads of icons/images "advertising" features of NetApps and NOW that are just getting in the way. It took me 2-3 minutes after logging into NOW just now to figure out where TF I could look back at my previous cases. It was buried under "Services and Support." Isn't that what NOW *is*? Didn't that used to be the "main" NOW page? And, why can't I look up a case solely by case number? I have to remember which filer it was associated with, too? Well, give me all the cases in the last month, then... Can the personal customization of NOW include an option "Expert mode - avoid icons and marketing crap" or allow me to set my "home" NOW page to http://now.netapp.com/Self-Service/Forms/SupportHome.asp instead? Sure, I could bookmark it, but when I'm in the machine room and need to grab a random machine and login not under my own account... Uh-oh. Looks like somebody is cranky this morning. Somebody hasn't had their juice box yet. Until next time... The Mathworks, Inc. 508-647-7000 x7792 3 Apple Hill Drive, Natick, MA 01760-2098 508-647-7001 FAX tmerrill(a)mathworks.com http://www.mathworks.com ---

1 0

RE: Adding a 36gb shelf to F740 with 18gb shelves
by Knight, Graham 26 Apr '01

26 Apr '01

I have added mixed sized disks into the same volume, but different raid groups using this method *many* times in the field - it works like a charm. You can bet my life on it too. :-) The parity disk functionality has been there for a long time. It worked that way when I put the just released 18 GB drives into a 9 GB drive system way back when...... Graham -----Original Message----- From: Sam Rafter [mailto:rafter@netapp.com] Sent: Wednesday, April 25, 2001 9:36 PM To: toasters(a)mathworks.com Subject: Re: Adding a 36gb shelf to F740 with 18gb shelves A funny thing happened to me on the way to the lab. I went to ask the lab manager if I could do some vol destroys on a few filers to get some mixed disk sizes. Our lab manager, Jeff Mohler, is a reformed PSE, and he'd done the very experiment I was about to conduct at customer sites, many times. Rest assured, you don't need to create a new volume. Look at your sysconfig -r output presently. Since everything's in one volume, the last raid group listed (raid group 1, if you have two raid groups like you say you do) is the raid group that's subject to change in size. This is controlled by the vol option raidsize. Set the raid size to whatever this raid group size is presently by 'vol options <volname> raidsize <n>'. Add your disks. If the number of disks you are adding is greater than <n>, add some number of 36G drives less than n, and change the vol option to the number of 36G disks you intend to add. I had fears that the raid group size would be stored in the raid group by some pernicious machinations, but Jeff assuaged any such trepidations. I'll bet Jeff's life on it. If you have one 18G spare, and one 36G spare, ONTAP now has the smarts to pick the right sized spare. If you are using mixed raid group sizes, I recommend you run ONTAP 6.x to take advantage of the spacemap, and avoid some unpleasant endgame scenarios if you do manage to fill up your disks. -- Sam Rafter Escalations Jerk Network Appliance rafter(a)netapp.com Sam Rafter wrote: > > This used to be the case. Back in the sad days of bug 13880. > > http://now.netapp.com/NOW/cgi-bin/bol?Type=Detail&Display=13880 > > This issue is resolved with the whiz-bang spacemap as implemented in 6.0 > and later, where we have a much better idea of where all the space is, > and won't paint ourselves into a corner if we don't have to. > > As to the parity disk question, to quote our own dogfood: > > http://now.netapp.com/NOW/knowledge/docs/ontap/rel601r3/html/sag/disks4.htm > > "Parity disk determination: > If an added disk is larger than the existing parity disk, the added disk > becomes the parity disk, and the former parity disk becomes a data > disk." > > We'll bring Justin back to the lab for reprogramming. > > Now, a reasonable follow up question would be: can I make a new raid > group out of all 36G drives, and not waste any 36G drives as parity > disks on 18G raid groups? My understanding is that, if you change the > volume's raid group size to whatever the size of the 'last' 18G disk > raid group is, we'll make a new raid group out of the 36G drives. I'm > going to test this now. > > -- > Sam Rafter Escalations Jerk > Network Appliance rafter(a)netapp.com > > "Sullivan, Justin" wrote: > > > > Yes, you're going to have a problem.. :( > > > > If you add 36GB drives to an existing RAID group of 18GB disks, the 36GB disks will be reported and used as 18GB drives. > > > > Once a RAID group is established with a parity drive of xxGB, any disks added to that RAID group will only be used to the same capacity (xxGB) as the parity drive. > > > > If you reverse the situation, and add 18GB drives to an existing 36GB drive RAID group, all drives will be used to their full capacity, but you will run into performance troubles as the volume fills up and the system is forced to write only to the larger disks, thereby reducing the number of physical spindles working for you. > > > > You will definitely want to create a new RAID group (or a new volume) for your 36GB drives to take advantage of the higher capacity. > > > > --- > > Justin Sullivan > > Network Appliance, Technical Support Engineer > > Network Appliance Certified Associate > > justins(a)netapp.com > > Get answers NOW! - NetApp On the Web - http://now.netapp.com > > Tech Support Hotline: 1-888-4NETAPP > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Jeff Bryer [mailto:bryer@sfu.ca] > > Sent: Wednesday, April 25, 2001 6:26 PM > > To: toasters(a)mathworks.com > > Subject: Adding a 36gb shelf to F740 with 18gb shelves > > > > We have an F740 with 3 shelves of 18GB disks. It's config'd > > as two volumes (two raid sets). We've almost outgrown the > > capacity (we're down to one hot spare and a free disk). > > > > We want to add a new disk shelf to the system, but we're wondering > > if we're going to lose anything by going to a shelf of 36gb disks. > > We don't have any intention of adding new volumes (or new raid > > sets), just growing the existing volumes. > > > > Can we add a shelf of 36gb disks and then switch our 2 existing 18gb parity > > disks over to 36gb disks? We'd keep a 36gb disk as a hot spare and > > use all of the 18gb disks in the volumes (including the 2 freed up > > parity disks and the freed up hot spare). Are we going to run > > into problems with this? Or do we need to keep an 18gb disk around > > as a hot spare as well (ie when an 18gb disks dies and uses a 36gb > > disks as a hot spare, can we force it to go back to the 18gb disk > > once the faulty 18gb disk has been replaced?). > > > > Are the 36gb disks going to be used at full capacity in this situation > > (when mixed with the 18gb)? Or is there a better way to do this? > > > > Thanks, > > > > -- > > Jeff Bryer bryer(a)sfu.ca > > Systems Administrator (604) 291-4935 > > Academic Computing, Simon Fraser University

2 1

RE: "Case survey" stuff from NetApp
by Sullivan, Justin 26 Apr '01

26 Apr '01

After Mr. Thompson's excellent suggestion of yesterday, we are already working on integrating the customer surveys with the case information on our NOW site. For example.. You receive a message about a survey, click on the link, login to NOW, and the case information is there and a place where you can fill out the survey with your comments. Customer feedback is EXTREMELY important to us. I really can't stress how vital it really is. You should *NEVER* get "okay" support from Network Appliance.. It should always be AT LEAST "good". Regrettably, if you only get "okay" support, we have no way of knowing if you don't fill out the survey. :) But it is our mission to "Simplify the Customer Experience," and this is an excellent point. Click.. Fill out survey.. Click.. <makes sense to me..> - Justin -----Original Message----- From: Stuart Lefort [mailto:slefort@broadcom.com] Sent: Thursday, April 26, 2001 11:46 AM To: 'Mohler, Jeff'; 'Sullivan, Justin'; 'Chris Thompson'; toasters(a)mathworks.com Subject: RE: "Case survey" stuff from NetApp Not true Jeff. I discard the surveys - always. Reason. Insufficient information to describe what this case is about. I would prefer the email had a link I could click on that would take me back to the case so I could be recall the case - then allow a rating right then and there. Alternatively, the email could have MORE case information in it - and I would reply to that. But I won't reply to something where I no longer recall the facts. ...Stu -----Original Message----- From: owner-toasters(a)mathworks.com [mailto:owner-toasters@mathworks.com]On Behalf Of Mohler, Jeff Sent: Wednesday, April 25, 2001 3:44 PM To: Sullivan, Justin; 'Chris Thompson'; toasters(a)mathworks.com Subject: RE: "Case survey" stuff from NetApp I would think that it would take more of my time, to load up the WWW browser to work it there, than to insert five numbers between the ()'s. -----Original Message----- From: Sullivan, Justin [mailto:Justin.Sullivan@netapp.com] Sent: Wednesday, April 25, 2001 1:22 PM To: 'Chris Thompson'; toasters(a)mathworks.com Subject: RE: "Case survey" stuff from NetApp Capital idea.. We would certainly like to have more surveys returned - we should like to see EVERY survey returned. You have an excellent point - why not have a web-based survey form? Easy, friendly, quick.. Back in the days when I was a NetApp customer, I admit, I threw them away too - too much trouble to fill out the e-mail form; who has that kind of time anymore? I have passed your idea along to the folks in Customer Satisfaction who can make this happen. Cheers! --- Justin Sullivan Network Appliance, Technical Support Engineer Network Appliance Certified Associate justins(a)netapp.com Get answers NOW! - NetApp On the Web - http://now.netapp.com Tech Support Hotline: 1-888-4NETAPP -----Original Message----- From: Chris Thompson [mailto:cet1@cus.cam.ac.uk] Sent: Wednesday, April 25, 2001 3:04 PM To: toasters(a)mathworks.com Subject: "Case survey" stuff from NetApp What do you do with the the e-mail that arrives from Quality.Manager(a)netapp.com after a problem is closed with NetApp, inviting you to fill in a "5 STARS Survey" form? I admit I throw them in the e-wastebin. It seems to me that providing only a method of returning these (probably only marginally meaningful) answers by e-mail is absolutely pessimal. If they really want to increase the response rate, surely NetApp should provide a method using forms at now.netapp.com? My vague recollection is that at one time a WWW-browser-based method was offered, but this doesn't seem to be the case now. Chris Thompson University of Cambridge Computing Service, Email: cet1(a)ucs.cam.ac.uk New Museums Site, Cambridge CB2 3QG, Phone: +44 1223 334715 United Kingdom.

3 2

RE: legato ndmp
by Chitre, Amol 26 Apr '01

26 Apr '01

So you did a jb config? configured the jukebox as an NDMP jukebox? if so, then did you inventory the jukebox? can you see the concerned drives as NDMP drives within the jukebox ( there is a (J) besides those drives in the devices window )? do you see something like a rd=filer:nrst0a .... as the drive? If all of that is done, and yet you see problems then I will need more information. Please let me know what the networker messages are when you try to label the tapes. Amol. >-----Original Message----- >From: neil lehrer [mailto:nlehrer@ibb.gov] >Sent: Thursday, April 26, 2001 1:30 PM >To: Chitre, Amol >Cc: toasters; John Ederma; Curt Huyser >Subject: Re: legato ndmp > > >solaris 2.6, networker 6.0.1 patch 001. it will not label blank >ait2 tapes. >the tapes are good, other sw can label them on same hw. it will >label tapes >that already have data on them. > >filer is f760 ontap 5.36r2. tape lib is spectalogic treefrog. > >"Chitre, Amol" wrote: >> >> hi neil, >> what problems are you facing exactly? maybe i can help. >> Amol. >> >> >-----Original Message----- >> >From: neil lehrer [mailto:nlehrer@ibb.gov] >> >Sent: Thursday, April 26, 2001 10:46 AM >> >To: toasters >> >Cc: John Ederma; Curt Huyser >> >Subject: legato ndmp >> > >> > >> >hi, >> > >> >does anybody know an engineer at legato that really >> >understands ndmp and how it >> >is implemented in networker? we can't get it to work[with the >> >correct version, >> >patch, and enablers] and their customer service/techsupport >> >has been very poor. >> >since we already use legato for other things, management would >> >prefer to stay >> >with it. >> > >> >thanks. >> > > >-- > > >regards > >+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ >+ Neil Lehrer >+ >+ United States International Broadcasting Bureau >+ System Development Division >+ >+ voice 202 619-2524 >+ fax 202 619-3576 >+ nlehrer(a)ibb.gov >+ >+ " is this crisis an opportunity or just >+ another grab the fire extinguisher moment?" >+ >+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ >

3 2

RE: "Case survey" stuff from NetApp
by Sullivan, Justin 26 Apr '01

26 Apr '01

Capital idea.. We would certainly like to have more surveys returned - we should like to see EVERY survey returned. You have an excellent point - why not have a web-based survey form? Easy, friendly, quick.. Back in the days when I was a NetApp customer, I admit, I threw them away too - too much trouble to fill out the e-mail form; who has that kind of time anymore? I have passed your idea along to the folks in Customer Satisfaction who can make this happen. Cheers! --- Justin Sullivan Network Appliance, Technical Support Engineer Network Appliance Certified Associate justins(a)netapp.com Get answers NOW! - NetApp On the Web - http://now.netapp.com Tech Support Hotline: 1-888-4NETAPP -----Original Message----- From: Chris Thompson [mailto:cet1@cus.cam.ac.uk] Sent: Wednesday, April 25, 2001 3:04 PM To: toasters(a)mathworks.com Subject: "Case survey" stuff from NetApp What do you do with the the e-mail that arrives from Quality.Manager(a)netapp.com after a problem is closed with NetApp, inviting you to fill in a "5 STARS Survey" form? I admit I throw them in the e-wastebin. It seems to me that providing only a method of returning these (probably only marginally meaningful) answers by e-mail is absolutely pessimal. If they really want to increase the response rate, surely NetApp should provide a method using forms at now.netapp.com? My vague recollection is that at one time a WWW-browser-based method was offered, but this doesn't seem to be the case now. Chris Thompson University of Cambridge Computing Service, Email: cet1(a)ucs.cam.ac.uk New Museums Site, Cambridge CB2 3QG, Phone: +44 1223 334715 United Kingdom.

3 2

SecureShare Quota Manager
by Chuck Ross 26 Apr '01

26 Apr '01

Quick question to those who have used SSQM. I've looked thru the manual and see that you can set "soft" quotas for users in order to get an idea about disk usage. My question is does SSQM have the ability to notify me when a user has exceeded their "soft" quota? Thanks Chuck

1 0

RE: legato ndmp
by Chitre, Amol 26 Apr '01

26 Apr '01

hi neil, what problems are you facing exactly? maybe i can help. Amol. >-----Original Message----- >From: neil lehrer [mailto:nlehrer@ibb.gov] >Sent: Thursday, April 26, 2001 10:46 AM >To: toasters >Cc: John Ederma; Curt Huyser >Subject: legato ndmp > > >hi, > >does anybody know an engineer at legato that really >understands ndmp and how it >is implemented in networker? we can't get it to work[with the >correct version, >patch, and enablers] and their customer service/techsupport >has been very poor. >since we already use legato for other things, management would >prefer to stay >with it. > >thanks. >

2 1

Anybody using Solid State Disks for DB I/O intensive activities?
by Art Hebert 26 Apr '01

26 Apr '01

We currently have all of our database components on a f760 which is in a netapp cluster. Another set of redo logs is on the other filer. Has anybody used solid state disks to move their redo logs off of a filer to improve performance? If so what brand and what kind of improvement did you see? Thanks Art Hebert Email: art(a)arzoon.com <mailto:art@arzoon.com> Arzoon IT Dept. Phone: 650 522-6125 Mobile: 650 444-8667

1 0

RE: "Case survey" stuff from NetApp
by Tom "Mad Dog" Yergeau 26 Apr '01

26 Apr '01

After reading the other responses to this thread I'd like to reiterate some points others have made that I agree with: (1) A better description of the case would be helpful. Some of us open a lot of cases. (2) A survey for every case is too much. If it's just a drive replacement or a simple administrative task like updating the location of a filer, a survey is really not necessary. I tend to ignore all the surveys I get now just because I get ones for cases that don't justify a survey, and without a detailed description its not worth my time to go to NOW to figure out which case was which. (3) NOW is much more confusing and harder to use since the last redesign. It's also too slow. Also, PLEASE please please MAKE THE COOKIES PERSISTENT. Especially since it is so slow, it is a major PITA to have to sign in EVERY TIME I GO TO THE PAGE. WHY IS THIS NECESSARY? (Sorry about yelling but this bothers me a lot.) Haha. Venting. Thanks for listening. Thanks, Tom -----Original Message----- From: Chris Thompson [mailto:cet1@cus.cam.ac.uk] Sent: Wednesday, April 25, 2001 3:04 PM To: toasters(a)mathworks.com Subject: "Case survey" stuff from NetApp What do you do with the the e-mail that arrives from Quality.Manager(a)netapp.com after a problem is closed with NetApp, inviting you to fill in a "5 STARS Survey" form? I admit I throw them in the e-wastebin. It seems to me that providing only a method of returning these (probably only marginally meaningful) answers by e-mail is absolutely pessimal. If they really want to increase the response rate, surely NetApp should provide a method using forms at now.netapp.com? My vague recollection is that at one time a WWW-browser-based method was offered, but this doesn't seem to be the case now. Chris Thompson University of Cambridge Computing Service, Email: cet1(a)ucs.cam.ac.uk New Museums Site, Cambridge CB2 3QG, Phone: +44 1223 334715 United Kingdom.

1 0

RE: Input/output errors from Linux clients?
by Hubbard, Dan 26 Apr '01

26 Apr '01

Ditto here. Have 5 machines all in production working for 4+ months now..all 2.2 kernels. -----Original Message----- From: Colm Buckley [mailto:colm@tuatha.org] Sent: Thursday, April 26, 2001 10:29 AM To: toasters(a)mathworks.com Subject: Re: Input/output errors from Linux clients? > Is anyone surprised that linux and NFS still do not play nice together? Ooh, *baguette*! Linux's NFS has been "okay" since the mid-2.2 kernels, and I've had no problems whatsoever with it as of 2.4. Yes, things were Bad in the past, but truly, honestly, surely, everything's okay now. Colm (de-bitching lists since 1995...) -- Colm Buckley, NewWorld Commerce, 16 South Cumberland St., Dublin 2, Ireland. Personal: +353 87 2469146 / colm(a)tuatha.org / http://www.tuatha.org/~colm/ Business: +353 1 4334334 / colm(a)nwcgroup.com / http://www.nwcgroup.com/ No conductor in recorded history has ever asked for "less tenor".

1 0

legato ndmp
by neil lehrer 26 Apr '01

26 Apr '01

hi, does anybody know an engineer at legato that really understands ndmp and how it is implemented in networker? we can't get it to work[with the correct version, patch, and enablers] and their customer service/techsupport has been very poor. since we already use legato for other things, management would prefer to stay with it. thanks.

1 0

Defragging / Balancing
by Andrew Siegel 26 Apr '01

26 Apr '01

Here's something that I've been curious about for a while: how does WAFL deal with fragmentation and balancing? For example, when you add a new disk to a volume, does DataONTAP/WAFL do any shifting of data to the new disk in the background in order to balance out disk usage across the volume? Does any kind of defragmentation take place automagically? (Is fragmentation even an issue with WAFL?) I ask because we are having just these issues with another manufacturer's journaling file system, requiring us to spend significant time and effort to stay on top of. -- Andrew Siegel, Head of Systems Blue Sky Studios, Inc. White Plains, NY 914-259-6336 direct abs(a)blueskystudios.com

1 0

More info on Input/Output errors...
by Nick's Lists 26 Apr '01

26 Apr '01

A bit more info I forgot to include in the first place along with responses to some other folks: We're using 2.2.16-21.7.1smp - We're holding off on 2.4 for now, as our vendor, VA Linux doens't feel comfortable with us moving up to 2.4 yet (I know, we are pushing it, but we don't want to go against their recommendations for now). If this problem is resolved in 2.4, then that'll be another thing to push us towards 2.4. Network wise - Transport is UDP This is occuring on clients in multiple sites, against 7 different filers as well. I don't see how it could be a network problem tho, but I'll go over the configuration of the filers. In all cases, the clients and servers are all on the same subnet, and in some cases, on the sames switch. I've verified that we are getting 100 mbit full duplex negotiation to the switch. Andrew - good suggestion on the soft vs hard. I'll go over my logic for that, and try to figur eout why we're doing that. It may be ahold over from when I had a <insert name of compeditors product here> that was heavily loaded and was responding very slowly. The thing is - other OS's aren't experiencing this problem in this environment, just the Linux boxes. That leads me to think its not a common problem like network of filer config. Thanks! - Nick ----- Original Message ----- From: "Traitel, Eyal" <eyal(a)netapp.com> To: "'Nick's Lists'" <mrlist(a)noid.org> Sent: Thursday, April 26, 2001 12:08 AM Subject: RE: Input/output errors from Linux clients? > Might be unrelated, and not exactly hitting your problem, but from all we know and hear and encounter, move up to kernels 2.4 and up for real use of NFS in Linux. > > What's your kernel version then ? > > Eyal. > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > eTraitel - I'm the new eBuzzword around !!! > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > Eyal Traitel - Filer Escalation Engineer > CNA, MCSE, CSA, LCA, NetApp CA > > Network Appliance BV > Holland Office Center > Kruisweg 799b > 2132 NG, Hoofddorp > The Netherlands > Office: +31 23 567 9685 > Cellular: +31 6 5497 2568 > Email: eyal(a)netapp.com > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > Get answers NOW! - NetApp On the Web - http://now.netapp.com > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > > > -----Original Message----- > From: Nick's Lists [mailto:mrlist@noid.org] > Sent: Thursday, April 26, 2001 8:18 AM > To: toasters(a)mathworks.com > Subject: Input/output errors from Linux clients? > > > I've been getting some strange errors from my Linux clients... > > cp: Input/output error > and > cat: write Input/output error > > They occur randomly when I try to copy or cat 20 - 40mb sized files to and > from a filer. Solaris (x86 and Sparc) servers copying the same size files > around are not experiencing the same problem. > > The file systems are all mounted with nfs2, soft, bg, intr. > > Has anyone else seen this before? > > TIA! > > - Nick > > >

2 1

FW: More info on Input/Output errors...
by Mark Baenziger 26 Apr '01

26 Apr '01

We had nearly identical problems with our Linux boxen (various kernels 2.2.5-2.2.14) running off of our filer. We tried dozens of different NFS settings without any luck. The only thing that finally got all of our NFS problems under control was going with a custom kernel with all of trond's various NFS patches in place. RFC compliance is a wonderful thing. Go ahead and compile new kernels with patches in place. Patches for various kernels are at http://www.fys.uio.no/~trondmy/src/. Additional information is (of course) at http://nfs.sourceforge.net/. You do not need to go with a 2.4 kernel for this; these patches can be applied (with varying levels of success) for kernels from 2.2.14 on up. Mark -----Original Message----- From: owner-toasters(a)mathworks.com [mailto:owner-toasters@mathworks.com]On Behalf Of Nick's Lists Sent: Thursday, April 26, 2001 8:58 AM To: toasters(a)mathworks.com Subject: More info on Input/Output errors... A bit more info I forgot to include in the first place along with responses to some other folks: We're using 2.2.16-21.7.1smp - We're holding off on 2.4 for now, as our vendor, VA Linux doens't feel comfortable with us moving up to 2.4 yet (I know, we are pushing it, but we don't want to go against their recommendations for now). If this problem is resolved in 2.4, then that'll be another thing to push us towards 2.4. Network wise - Transport is UDP This is occuring on clients in multiple sites, against 7 different filers as well. I don't see how it could be a network problem tho, but I'll go over the configuration of the filers. In all cases, the clients and servers are all on the same subnet, and in some cases, on the sames switch. I've verified that we are getting 100 mbit full duplex negotiation to the switch. Andrew - good suggestion on the soft vs hard. I'll go over my logic for that, and try to figur eout why we're doing that. It may be ahold over from when I had a <insert name of compeditors product here> that was heavily loaded and was responding very slowly. The thing is - other OS's aren't experiencing this problem in this environment, just the Linux boxes. That leads me to think its not a common problem like network of filer config. Thanks! - Nick ----- Original Message ----- From: "Traitel, Eyal" <eyal(a)netapp.com> To: "'Nick's Lists'" <mrlist(a)noid.org> Sent: Thursday, April 26, 2001 12:08 AM Subject: RE: Input/output errors from Linux clients? > Might be unrelated, and not exactly hitting your problem, but from all we know and hear and encounter, move up to kernels 2.4 and up for real use of NFS in Linux. > > What's your kernel version then ? > > Eyal. > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > eTraitel - I'm the new eBuzzword around !!! > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > Eyal Traitel - Filer Escalation Engineer > CNA, MCSE, CSA, LCA, NetApp CA > > Network Appliance BV > Holland Office Center > Kruisweg 799b > 2132 NG, Hoofddorp > The Netherlands > Office: +31 23 567 9685 > Cellular: +31 6 5497 2568 > Email: eyal(a)netapp.com > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > Get answers NOW! - NetApp On the Web - http://now.netapp.com > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > > > -----Original Message----- > From: Nick's Lists [mailto:mrlist@noid.org] > Sent: Thursday, April 26, 2001 8:18 AM > To: toasters(a)mathworks.com > Subject: Input/output errors from Linux clients? > > > I've been getting some strange errors from my Linux clients... > > cp: Input/output error > and > cat: write Input/output error > > They occur randomly when I try to copy or cat 20 - 40mb sized files to and > from a filer. Solaris (x86 and Sparc) servers copying the same size files > around are not experiencing the same problem. > > The file systems are all mounted with nfs2, soft, bg, intr. > > Has anyone else seen this before? > > TIA! > > - Nick > > >

1 0

More Info - Re: Input/output errors from Linux clients?
by Nick's Lists 26 Apr '01

26 Apr '01

A bit more info I forgot to include in the first place - We're using 2.2.16-21.7.1smp - We're holding off on 2.4 for now, as our vendor, VA Linux doens't feel comfortable with us moving up to 2.4 yet (I know, we are pushing it, but we don't want to go against their recommendations for now). If this problem is resolved in 2.4, then that'll be another thing to push us towards 2.4. Network wise - Transport is UDP This is occuring on clients in multiple sites, against 7 different filers as well. I don't see how it could be a network problem tho, but I'll go over the configuration of the filers. In all cases, the clients and servers are all on the same subnet, and in some cases, on the sames switch. I've verified that we are getting 100 mbit full duplex negotiation to the switch. Andrew - good suggestion on the soft vs hard. I'll go over my logic for that, and try to figur eout why we're doing that. It may be ahold over from when I had a <insert name of compeditors product here> that was heavily loaded and was responding very slowly. The thing is - other OS's aren't experiencing this problem in this environment, just the Linux boxes. That leads me to think its not a common problem like network of filer config. Thanks! - Nick ----- Original Message ----- From: "Traitel, Eyal" <eyal(a)netapp.com> To: "'Nick's Lists'" <mrlist(a)noid.org> Sent: Thursday, April 26, 2001 12:08 AM Subject: RE: Input/output errors from Linux clients? > Might be unrelated, and not exactly hitting your problem, but from all we know and hear and encounter, move up to kernels 2.4 and up for real use of NFS in Linux. > > What's your kernel version then ? > > Eyal. > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > eTraitel - I'm the new eBuzzword around !!! > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > Eyal Traitel - Filer Escalation Engineer > CNA, MCSE, CSA, LCA, NetApp CA > > Network Appliance BV > Holland Office Center > Kruisweg 799b > 2132 NG, Hoofddorp > The Netherlands > Office: +31 23 567 9685 > Cellular: +31 6 5497 2568 > Email: eyal(a)netapp.com > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > Get answers NOW! - NetApp On the Web - http://now.netapp.com > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > > > -----Original Message----- > From: Nick's Lists [mailto:mrlist@noid.org] > Sent: Thursday, April 26, 2001 8:18 AM > To: toasters(a)mathworks.com > Subject: Input/output errors from Linux clients? > > > I've been getting some strange errors from my Linux clients... > > cp: Input/output error > and > cat: write Input/output error > > They occur randomly when I try to copy or cat 20 - 40mb sized files to and > from a filer. Solaris (x86 and Sparc) servers copying the same size files > around are not experiencing the same problem. > > The file systems are all mounted with nfs2, soft, bg, intr. > > Has anyone else seen this before? > > TIA! > > - Nick > > >

1 0

More Info - Re: Input/output errors from Linux clients?
by Nick S 26 Apr '01

26 Apr '01

1 0

RE: "Case survey" stuff from NetApp
by Mohler, Jeff 26 Apr '01

26 Apr '01

I would think that it would take more of my time, to load up the WWW browser to work it there, than to insert five numbers between the ()'s. -----Original Message----- From: Sullivan, Justin [mailto:Justin.Sullivan@netapp.com] Sent: Wednesday, April 25, 2001 1:22 PM To: 'Chris Thompson'; toasters(a)mathworks.com Subject: RE: "Case survey" stuff from NetApp Capital idea.. We would certainly like to have more surveys returned - we should like to see EVERY survey returned. You have an excellent point - why not have a web-based survey form? Easy, friendly, quick.. Back in the days when I was a NetApp customer, I admit, I threw them away too - too much trouble to fill out the e-mail form; who has that kind of time anymore? I have passed your idea along to the folks in Customer Satisfaction who can make this happen. Cheers! --- Justin Sullivan Network Appliance, Technical Support Engineer Network Appliance Certified Associate justins(a)netapp.com Get answers NOW! - NetApp On the Web - http://now.netapp.com Tech Support Hotline: 1-888-4NETAPP -----Original Message----- From: Chris Thompson [mailto:cet1@cus.cam.ac.uk] Sent: Wednesday, April 25, 2001 3:04 PM To: toasters(a)mathworks.com Subject: "Case survey" stuff from NetApp What do you do with the the e-mail that arrives from Quality.Manager(a)netapp.com after a problem is closed with NetApp, inviting you to fill in a "5 STARS Survey" form? I admit I throw them in the e-wastebin. It seems to me that providing only a method of returning these (probably only marginally meaningful) answers by e-mail is absolutely pessimal. If they really want to increase the response rate, surely NetApp should provide a method using forms at now.netapp.com? My vague recollection is that at one time a WWW-browser-based method was offered, but this doesn't seem to be the case now. Chris Thompson University of Cambridge Computing Service, Email: cet1(a)ucs.cam.ac.uk New Museums Site, Cambridge CB2 3QG, Phone: +44 1223 334715 United Kingdom.

2 1

RE: Adding a 36gb shelf to F740 with 18gb shelves
by Sullivan, Justin 26 Apr '01

26 Apr '01

So, my apologies.. Sam corrected me. This changed with the new blockmap structure in ONTAP 6.0 and above (all my testing was with 5.3.7R3). I do not need "reprogramming" - I don't live in California. :) I was not saying create a new volume. I was saying create a new RAID group in the existing volume. This is where the 'raidsize' volume option comes in. You can do it manually, of course, but 'raidsize' is set for each volume (not the whole filer), and it's less error-prone to change 'raidsize' to the desired value. You can mix drive sizes within volumes without any problem, but all the drives in a given RAID group in the volume should be the same size. Set 'raidsize' on the volume in question to the size of the existing 18GB drive RAID group, run 'sysconfig -r' for details. When you go to add the 36GB drives - you will have to add at least two if the RAID group is already at 'raidsize' - it will automatically create a new RAID group with your spiffy new 36GB drives. You will lose one drive to parity, but it could avoid performance woes down the road. Lacking ASCII artistic skills, imagine having ten small juice glasses and two big ice tea glasses all lined up in a row. This is where your water (essential for all life, also known as "data") goes. As you fill up the small juice glasses, you can only keep pouring into the two big ice tea glasses, but you won't be able to pour it nearly as fast as you could if you were filling up more glasses. It is still a bad idea to mix drive sizes within a RAID group, because of what can happen to performance as things start to fill up. Creating a new RAID group is still (in my opinion), the way to go, but of course it's your data, your way. If capacity is more important than performance, you don't want to use a precious 36GB drive for parity. - Justin -----Original Message----- From: Jeff Bryer [mailto:bryer@sfu.ca] Sent: Wednesday, April 25, 2001 9:48 PM To: Justin.Sullivan(a)netapp.com Cc: toasters(a)mathworks.com Subject: Re: Adding a 36gb shelf to F740 with 18gb shelves Thanks Justin. So we can't change the parity disk from an 18gb disk to a 36gb disk kind of on the fly. We'd have to create a new volume and do a vol copy or some such thing. Not sure where we got the idea we could 'upgrade the parity disk'. So we either have to buy 18gb shelves or re-architect our layout. (or waste half a disk adding a 36gb to an 18gb set but that's not a great option as our volume is growing quickly). > > Yes, you're going to have a problem.. :( > > If you add 36GB drives to an existing RAID group of 18GB disks, the 36GB disks will be reported and used as 18GB drives. > > Once a RAID group is established with a parity drive of xxGB, any disks added to that RAID group will only be used to the same capacity (xxGB) as the parity drive. > > If you reverse the situation, and add 18GB drives to an existing 36GB drive RAID group, all drives will be used to their full capacity, but you will run into performance troubles as the volume fills up and the system is forced to write only to the larger disks, thereby reducing the number of physical spindles working for you. > > You will definitely want to create a new RAID group (or a new volume) for your 36GB drives to take advantage of the higher capacity. > > --- > Justin Sullivan > Network Appliance, Technical Support Engineer > Network Appliance Certified Associate > justins(a)netapp.com > Get answers NOW! - NetApp On the Web - http://now.netapp.com > Tech Support Hotline: 1-888-4NETAPP > -- Jeff Bryer bryer(a)sfu.ca Systems Administrator (604) 291-4935 Academic Computing, Simon Fraser University

1 0

"Case survey" stuff from NetApp
by Chris Thompson 26 Apr '01

26 Apr '01

What do you do with the the e-mail that arrives from Quality.Manager(a)netapp.com after a problem is closed with NetApp, inviting you to fill in a "5 STARS Survey" form? I admit I throw them in the e-wastebin. It seems to me that providing only a method of returning these (probably only marginally meaningful) answers by e-mail is absolutely pessimal. If they really want to increase the response rate, surely NetApp should provide a method using forms at now.netapp.com? My vague recollection is that at one time a WWW-browser-based method was offered, but this doesn't seem to be the case now. Chris Thompson University of Cambridge Computing Service, Email: cet1(a)ucs.cam.ac.uk New Museums Site, Cambridge CB2 3QG, Phone: +44 1223 334715 United Kingdom.

3 2

Client Pak Restore Problems
by David C Baumgardner 26 Apr '01

26 Apr '01

Is anyone using Legato's Client Pak backing up to a windows system? I have been having on going problems getting restores from tape for the last four months. Each release they issue seems to work fine for a while then quits working(as far as the restore is concerned). The only recovery that works now is the SSID recover with the "-a" option for single file or directory. That can take up to 6 to 7 hours by the time it runs through the save set. I would like to hear from anyone having troubles with Client Pak . David Baumgardner CAD/CAM Administrator Container Engineering Owens Brockway Glass Containers Voice 419-247-8274 Fax 419-247-7608 Email David.Baumgardner(a)owens-ill.com

1 0

RE: Adding a 36gb shelf to F740 with 18gb shelves
by Sullivan, Justin 26 Apr '01

26 Apr '01

Yes, you're going to have a problem.. :( If you add 36GB drives to an existing RAID group of 18GB disks, the 36GB disks will be reported and used as 18GB drives. Once a RAID group is established with a parity drive of xxGB, any disks added to that RAID group will only be used to the same capacity (xxGB) as the parity drive. If you reverse the situation, and add 18GB drives to an existing 36GB drive RAID group, all drives will be used to their full capacity, but you will run into performance troubles as the volume fills up and the system is forced to write only to the larger disks, thereby reducing the number of physical spindles working for you. You will definitely want to create a new RAID group (or a new volume) for your 36GB drives to take advantage of the higher capacity. --- Justin Sullivan Network Appliance, Technical Support Engineer Network Appliance Certified Associate justins(a)netapp.com Get answers NOW! - NetApp On the Web - http://now.netapp.com Tech Support Hotline: 1-888-4NETAPP -----Original Message----- From: Jeff Bryer [mailto:bryer@sfu.ca] Sent: Wednesday, April 25, 2001 6:26 PM To: toasters(a)mathworks.com Subject: Adding a 36gb shelf to F740 with 18gb shelves We have an F740 with 3 shelves of 18GB disks. It's config'd as two volumes (two raid sets). We've almost outgrown the capacity (we're down to one hot spare and a free disk). We want to add a new disk shelf to the system, but we're wondering if we're going to lose anything by going to a shelf of 36gb disks. We don't have any intention of adding new volumes (or new raid sets), just growing the existing volumes. Can we add a shelf of 36gb disks and then switch our 2 existing 18gb parity disks over to 36gb disks? We'd keep a 36gb disk as a hot spare and use all of the 18gb disks in the volumes (including the 2 freed up parity disks and the freed up hot spare). Are we going to run into problems with this? Or do we need to keep an 18gb disk around as a hot spare as well (ie when an 18gb disks dies and uses a 36gb disks as a hot spare, can we force it to go back to the 18gb disk once the faulty 18gb disk has been replaced?). Are the 36gb disks going to be used at full capacity in this situation (when mixed with the 18gb)? Or is there a better way to do this? Thanks, -- Jeff Bryer bryer(a)sfu.ca Systems Administrator (604) 291-4935 Academic Computing, Simon Fraser University

5 5

RE: Input/output errors from Linux clients?
by Bond, Andrew 26 Apr '01

26 Apr '01

Soft mounts are not recommended if you are writing to the filesystem. Use hard mounts. The errors are likely caused by network problems, which could be a simple misconfiguration. You should open a call with NetApp Customer Support. Regards, Andrew > -----Original Message----- > From: Nick's Lists [mailto:mrlist@noid.org] > Sent: 26 April 2001 07:18 > To: toasters(a)mathworks.com > Subject: Input/output errors from Linux clients? > > > I've been getting some strange errors from my Linux clients... > > cp: Input/output error > and > cat: write Input/output error > > They occur randomly when I try to copy or cat 20 - 40mb sized > files to and > from a filer. Solaris (x86 and Sparc) servers copying the > same size files > around are not experiencing the same problem. > > The file systems are all mounted with nfs2, soft, bg, intr. > > Has anyone else seen this before? > > TIA! > > - Nick > > > > >

1 0

Fwd: Re: OT - swag (fwd)
by Jeff Innis 26 Apr '01

26 Apr '01

3 2

RE: "Case survey" stuff from NetApp
by Mike Sphar 25 Apr '01

25 Apr '01

It depends on how you open the browser. If it's just a pre-defined URL that takes you right to the survey form where you just type your answers and submit it, that would likely be faster for me. But it depends on your email client and your work habits, how long your machine takes to bring up a browser, etc. Ideally, if it were up to me, both options would work. There would be a URL at the top of the message and also the ability to reply with your answers. -- Mike Sphar - Sr Systems Administrator - Engineering Support Services - Remedy Corporation BOFH, GWP, MCP, MCP+I, MCSE, BFD -----Original Message----- From: Mohler, Jeff [mailto:jeff.mohler@netapp.com] Sent: Wednesday, April 25, 2001 3:44 PM To: Sullivan, Justin; 'Chris Thompson'; toasters(a)mathworks.com Subject: RE: "Case survey" stuff from NetApp I would think that it would take more of my time, to load up the WWW browser to work it there, than to insert five numbers between the ()'s. -----Original Message----- From: Sullivan, Justin [mailto:Justin.Sullivan@netapp.com] Sent: Wednesday, April 25, 2001 1:22 PM To: 'Chris Thompson'; toasters(a)mathworks.com Subject: RE: "Case survey" stuff from NetApp Capital idea.. We would certainly like to have more surveys returned - we should like to see EVERY survey returned. You have an excellent point - why not have a web-based survey form? Easy, friendly, quick.. Back in the days when I was a NetApp customer, I admit, I threw them away too - too much trouble to fill out the e-mail form; who has that kind of time anymore? I have passed your idea along to the folks in Customer Satisfaction who can make this happen. Cheers! --- Justin Sullivan Network Appliance, Technical Support Engineer Network Appliance Certified Associate justins(a)netapp.com Get answers NOW! - NetApp On the Web - http://now.netapp.com Tech Support Hotline: 1-888-4NETAPP -----Original Message----- From: Chris Thompson [mailto:cet1@cus.cam.ac.uk] Sent: Wednesday, April 25, 2001 3:04 PM To: toasters(a)mathworks.com Subject: "Case survey" stuff from NetApp What do you do with the the e-mail that arrives from Quality.Manager(a)netapp.com after a problem is closed with NetApp, inviting you to fill in a "5 STARS Survey" form? I admit I throw them in the e-wastebin. It seems to me that providing only a method of returning these (probably only marginally meaningful) answers by e-mail is absolutely pessimal. If they really want to increase the response rate, surely NetApp should provide a method using forms at now.netapp.com? My vague recollection is that at one time a WWW-browser-based method was offered, but this doesn't seem to be the case now. Chris Thompson University of Cambridge Computing Service, Email: cet1(a)ucs.cam.ac.uk New Museums Site, Cambridge CB2 3QG, Phone: +44 1223 334715 United Kingdom.

1 0

Seeking ONTAP version information
by John Jetmore 25 Apr '01

25 Apr '01

My company is potentially needing to upgrade the OS on one of our Filers (760). I believe that 6.0.1R3 is the latest in the 6.* family. Is it fairly stable? We are running 5.3.6R1 right now. Does anyone see any potential problems with that upgrade path? Any information or shared experiences would be appreciated. Thanks, --John Jetmore

2 1

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