toasters

toasters@lists.teaparty.net

13515 discussions

Re: Exchange 2k (long)
by Colm Buckley 15 Nov '00

15 Nov '00

Folks - I'm sure most of us would really appreciate it if the personalisation and bizarre "I know who you *really* are!" comments were kept off the toasters list. Most of us are experienced systems administrators and integrators, and you don't last long in those positions without being able to detect when someone is being genuine and when they're talking shite. Accusing someone of being a secret agent for EMC, or whatever other company, is completely off the wall. This is a discussion list not an advocacy list, and the only significant blip on the signal-to- noise ratio are these bizarre trips into ad-hominem land. Take it to personal mail, FFS. Colm (woo! accidental bricktext!) -- Colm Buckley BA BF | NewWorld Commerce, 44 Westland Row, Dublin 2, Ireland colm(a)tuatha.org (personal) | colm.buckley(a)nwcgroup.com (business) +353 87 2469146 | whois cb3765 | http://www.tuatha.org/~colm/ If there's nothing wrong with me, here's something wrong with the universe.

1 0

RE: Exchange 2k (long)
by Bercovici, Val 15 Nov '00

15 Nov '00

Hi Supak et al, Please let me clarify your support statement below. Microsoft does not currently support NAS for Exchange Server 5.5 or 2000. Network Appliance fully supports Exchange 5.5 on filers via our SnapManager 1.x for Exchange software. We have engaged IBM Global Services' highly-regarded Enterprise Services for Microsoft Technologies Practice for our escalation path regarding Exchange-specific issues that we cannot resolve. Please refer to the two press releases on this topic for more details: http://www.netapp.com/news/press/news_rel_20000207.html http://www.netapp.com/news/press/news_rel_20000207a.html Network Appliance is actively working with the Microsoft Exchange group in order to comply with their requirements for certification of our unique leading-edge technology in an Exchange 2000 environment. In the meantime, NetApp has had tremendous success with our SnapManager 1.x product line for Microsoft Exchange 5.5. To date, over 100 SnapManager customers in the ASP, Financial, Networking Equip. Providers, Telecom, State & Federal Govt, E-Commerce and Healthcare sectors (among others) have enjoyed the benefits of the industry's ONLY online Snapshot Backup and Recovery technology for Microsoft Exchange Server. A couple of SnapManager for Exchange case-studies are available online: ASP - UNITED MESSAGING http://www.netapp.com/case_studies/ftp/united_mess.pdf FINANCIAL - BANK OF OKLAHOMA http://www.netapp.com/case_studies/ftp/bok.pdf Finally, some excellent technical whitepapers discussing the architecture and deployment of Exchange 5.5 on NetApp filers with SnapManager (demonstrating excellent performance at high users loads such 599ms response time for 9600 users) are available at: http://www.netapp.com/tech_library/3067.html http://www.netapp.com/tech_library/3054.html http://www.netapp.com/tech_library/3074.html Should you have any further questions, I would be happy to talk with anyone on this list regarding our Microsoft Exchange-related offerings at any time. Thanks, -Val. Manager, Collaborative Strategy Network Appliance Inc. WHO STORES MORE THAN HALF THE WORLD'S E-MAILBOXES? FIND OUT AT: www.netapp.com 613.724.8674 - Phone 847.589.6510 - Fax 800.489.6924 - Pager E-Mail: valb(a)netapp.com -----Original Message----- From: Supak backup e-mail account [mailto:supaklailert@yahoo.com] Sent: Friday, November 03, 2000 10:31 PM To: Martin Hannigan; rdobbins(a)netmore.net Cc: toasters(a)mathworks.com Subject: Re: Exchange 2k NetApp filer is fully supported for use with MS Exchange. I don't see how this could lead to a problem more than any direct-attaced storage. NetApp choking on lots of small files? I don't think so. WAFL handles small files far better than most file systems notably UFS. Waste of space? Maybe. NetApp uses 4K blocks so if you have lots of really small files <4K then you'll waste quite a bit of space. Supak --- Martin Hannigan <hannigan(a)world.std.com> wrote: > > > > > > For both performance and supportability reasons, > it is extremely inadvisable > > to put Exchange mailboxes/private stores/public > stores on anything other > > than a filesystem which is directly-connected to > the NT server in question. > > > > People do all sorts of odd things with NetApps > just because they can - and > > don't get me wrong, I love my F740 - but this is > just plain crazy. For your > > own peace of mind, don't do it. > > > So the netapp still chokes on lots of active small > files i.e. like > usenet news, etc? We were thinking about turning > ours into a hardcore > news spool..but I remember a few years ago there was > some issue with the > millions of < 64KB file sizes.. > > -M > __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Thousands of Stores. Millions of Products. All in one Place. http://shopping.yahoo.com/

5 6

RE: Exchange 2k (long)
by Supak backup e-mail account 15 Nov '00

15 Nov '00

Peter, The fact about your employment is relevant for the reader to evaluate your comment. I give more credibility to comment from "neutral" party. Comment from competitor gets lowest credibility. If you work for a company which is not a NetApp competitor, I wouldn't care. Since you work for EMC, you should disclose that fact somewhere in the message. Supak --- Peter Bodifee <bodif36772(a)yahoo.com> wrote: > Brian, > > Congratulations. You passed IP network tracing 101. > > Has it crossed your mind that people who receive > 100+ messages/day > have multiple accounts? To separate message flow > between public and company > private? Probably not. > So it would not make any sense to you either why I > posted my comment on > "MSFT Exchange not supporting NAS" using my yahoo > account. > > BTW, you are also an "expert" in hiding your > employer's identity (AT&T > Canada) by using some obscure > domain (risc.org), so what are you busting me for? > For giving my personal > opinion to serve > the IT user community without showing who pays my > salary? Have a life.... > > Peter > -----Original Message----- > X-Apparently-To: bodif36772(a)yahoo.com via > web4505.mail.yahoo.com > X-Track: 1: 40 > Received: from tor-smtp2.netcom.ca (207.181.101.101) > by mta411.mail.yahoo.com with SMTP; 10 Nov 2000 > 20:00:40 -0800 (PST) > Received: from tor-dev1 (tor-dev1.nbc.netcom.ca > [207.181.89.12]) > by tor-smtp2.netcom.ca (8.8.7-s-4/8.8.7) with ESMTP > id XAA04411; > Fri, 10 Nov 2000 23:00:10 -0500 (EST) > Date: Fri, 10 Nov 2000 23:00:09 -0500 (EST) > From: Brian Tao <taob(a)risc.org> > X-Sender: taob(a)tor-dev1.nbc.attcanada.ca > To: Peter Bodifee <bodif36772(a)yahoo.com> > cc: "'Bercovici, Val'" > <Valentin.Bercovici(a)netapp.com>, > toasters(a)mathworks.com > Subject: RE: Exchange 2k (long) > In-Reply-To: > <000a01c04993$1d0e7200$acab9fa8@bodifeexxxxL> > Message-ID: > <Pine.GSO.4.21.0011102258290.10980-100000(a)tor-dev1.nbc.attcanada.ca> > MIME-Version: 1.0 > Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII > > On Wed, 8 Nov 2000, Peter Bodifee wrote: > > > > Received: from unknown (HELO bodifeexxxxL) > (168.159.171.172) > > by smtp.mail.vip.suc.yahoo.com with SMTP; 8 Nov > 2000 14:50:15 -0000 > [...] > > Busted. :) > > % whois -h whois.arin.net 168.159.171.172 > EMC Corporation (NET-EMC-B1) > 171 South Street > Hopkinton, MA 01748-9103 > > Netname: EMC-B1 > Netnumber: 168.159.0.0 > > Coordinator: > Chambers, Paul A (PAC15-ARIN) pac(a)EMC.COM > (508)435-1000 X1276 (FAX) (508)435-2649 > > Domain System inverse mapping provided by: > > GW.EMC.COM 168.159.1.2 > NS0.EMC.COM 168.159.3.1 > > Record last updated on 24-Apr-1997. > Database last updated on 10-Nov-2000 18:12:36 > EDT. > > > _________________________________________________________ > Do You Yahoo!? > Get your free @yahoo.com address at > http://mail.yahoo.com > __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Yahoo! Calendar - Get organized for the holidays! http://calendar.yahoo.com/

1 0

Anyone seen this? .snapshot missing from readdir() even for mount point
by Chris Thompson 14 Nov '00

14 Nov '00

I was prompted by trawling over Bugs Online to open a call with NetApp about the following problem, which I've known about for a year or more. The call isn't making much progress (we won't go into whose fault that is ...) and as the whole thing was really a request for information ("did you know about this infelicity? is it going to be fixed some year?") I can't conscientiously exert much pressure. But I can waste your time asking whether you've observed the same effect, can't I? :) As I am sure you are all aware, although ".snapshot" can be looked up in any directory, it is only visible to readdir() in NFS mount points (5.3 System Administrator's Guide, p.406: "Actually, the .snapshot in the mount point is "real" to make the pwd command work ..."). The problem is that sometimes ".snapshot" isn't visible to readdir() *even* in mount point directories. This seems to happen only in directories with more than one 4K block (it's notable that "ls -f" shows .snapshot coming after the first block's worth in such directories, if it shows up at all), and rather rarely even then (2 out of over 150 user home directories of >4K that I looked at today), but as long as the directory isn't tinkered with the state remains the same. I've observed this with several OnTap 5.2.x & 5.3.x releases, and several different Solaris releases as clients. It *could* be an NFS client implementation problem, I suppose, but I don't think I believe that. Does this sound familiar to anyone? 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

CIFS connections
by Todd C. Merrill 14 Nov '00

14 Nov '00

Upgraded to an F840 running 5.3.7 this weekend. messages file keeps showing oplock break timeouts, and a very tenuous connection to *any* domain controller it tries to connect to. Clients seem fine; DC's seem fine; no apparent problems elsewhere. Thoughts? Tue Nov 14 13:44:49 EST [filer: GbE-e4]: Connection with DC \\DC1 terminated Tue Nov 14 13:44:51 EST [filer: CIFSAdmin]: oplock break timed out to station BAT57NT for file \\filer\HUB\bat\share\bin\clusterx.pm Tue Nov 14 13:45:26 EST [filer: CIFSAdmin]: oplock break timed out to station BAT57NT for file \\filer\HUB\bat\share\environ\R12 Tue Nov 14 13:45:26 EST [filer: CIFSAdmin]: oplock break timed out to station BAT57NT for file \\filer\HUB\bat\share\bin\batlib.pm Tue Nov 14 13:45:34 EST [filer: CIFSAdmin]: oplock break timed out to station BAT57NT for file \\filer\HUB\bat\nt\bin\batnt_start.pl Tue Nov 14 13:46:01 EST [filer: CIFSAdmin]: oplock break timed out to station BAT57NT for file \\filer\HUB\bat\share\bin\batswim.pm Tue Nov 14 13:46:02 EST [filer: CIFSAdmin]: oplock break timed out to station BAT57NT for file \\filer\HUB\bat\share\bin\BatVars2.pm Tue Nov 14 13:47:19 EST [filer: CIFSAuthen]: Connection with DC \\DC2 established Tue Nov 14 13:51:04 EST [filer: CIFSAdmin]: oplock break timed out to station BAT59NT for file \\filer\HUB\bat\nt\bin\OkeyDokey.pl Tue Nov 14 13:51:40 EST [filer: CIFSAdmin]: oplock break timed out to station BAT59NT for file \\filer\HUB\bat\share\bin\pc2unix.pm Tue Nov 14 13:51:50 EST [filer: CIFSAdmin]: oplock break timed out to station BAT59NT for file \\filer\HUB\bat\share\environ\R12student 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: LSA Errors
by lella.r.bennett＠lmco.com 10 Nov '00

10 Nov '00

We are running 5.3.6R2 on this filer. We were seeing the errors before we upgraded and we are continuing to see them after upgrading to 5.3.6R2. Also, the errors will start on a particular filer, I'll see a ton of them for a number of days, and then they disappear just as quickly as they started. I've looked on the logs on the Domian Controllers that the filer is connecting to, but they aren't reporting any errors. ??? -Lella -----Original Message----- From: Paul Lupa [mailto:ra5507@email.sps.mot.com] Sent: Friday, November 10, 2000 3:40 PM To: lella.r.bennett(a)lmco.com Cc: toasters(a)mathworks.com Subject: Re: LSA Errors Check your version of OnTap, I believe this was corrected in 5.3.6 (be sure to go to 5.3.6R2). I had the error for a long time, (along with "access denied" errors from the clients) and it went away with an upgrade. Paul Lupa lella.r.bennett(a)lmco.com wrote: Has anyone ever seen these errors before? We are seeing them consistently after the filer disconnects from its resource domain controller. [CIFSAuthen]: LsaLookupNames: Exception rpc_s_connection_closed caught. [CIFSAuthen]: LsaClose: Exception rpc_s_connection_closed caught. -Lella Bennett Lockheed Martin EIS 303-971-1055 -- ---------------------------- Paul Lupa Motorola (512) 933-6542 Voice (512) 933-6331 Fax Paul.Lupa(a)Motorola.com Pager 1168616(a)skytel.com or 1800759-8352 Pin:1168616

1 0

LSA Errors
by lella.r.bennett＠lmco.com 10 Nov '00

10 Nov '00

Has anyone ever seen these errors before? We are seeing them consistently after the filer disconnects from its resource domain controller. [CIFSAuthen]: LsaLookupNames: Exception rpc_s_connection_closed caught. [CIFSAuthen]: LsaClose: Exception rpc_s_connection_closed caught. -Lella Bennett Lockheed Martin EIS 303-971-1055

2 1

LSA errors
by Lella Bennett 10 Nov '00

10 Nov '00

1 0

LSA errors
by lella.r.bennett＠lmco.com 10 Nov '00

10 Nov '00

1 0

RE: Veritas NetBackup backup hangs
by Kelly Wyatt 10 Nov '00

10 Nov '00

Have you looked to see if the drives are down? We are running NetApp Release 5.3.4R3P2 on our filers, NBU 3.2+latest patches. There is a bug in this version of ontap that causes the tape drives to be downed at, we think, the end of jobs when it comes time to unload the tape or at the change of tapes on a job that needs to span tapes. I understand that 5.3.4 (base) does not have that problem. The thing is, we see this consistently on some filers and rarely on others. As a work around, we ended up having a cron job up the drives hourly. This took care of the problem. Look in the archives around 5/2/00, subject "Network Appliance Upgrade to ONTAP 5.3.4R3P2 and Backups" and you should see more on this problem. Kelly -- Kelly Wyatt, Kelly.Wyatt(a)SAS.com Senior Systems Programmer Strategic Recovery SAS Institute Inc. / SAS Campus Drive / Cary, NC 27513 http://www.sas.com SAS... The Power to Know -----Original Message----- From: Jeffrey Krueger [mailto:jkrueger@qualcomm.com] Sent: Tuesday, November 07, 2000 10:18 PM To: toasters(a)mathworks.com Subject: Veritas NetBackup backup hangs We have recently cut-over to using Veritas NetBackup with NDMP to perform a mixture of backups to filer-attached-tape and 3-way backups to other filers with tape. We are running DOT 5.3.4R3P2 on a mixture of 630's and 760's against NBU 3.2 with a recent patch set (one that includes the 3-way fix). In both instance, we have found that sometimes a filer completes a dump (ndmp session goes away, backup snapshot is deleted, /etc/dumpdates is updates), but the backup job hangs in Veritas-land. This job hangs indefiately until manually killed, at which point it does not record the file history making the backup un-restore-able. We're growing very frustrated with this issue. BudTool has been backing these filers up for 2 years with NDMP and relatively few problems. So far, NBU support has been disappointing to say the least. Has anyone seen this? Is there a workaround or fix? Also, does anyone know the mechanics of the "/etc/ndmpdlog.*" files? They are poorly documented in the DOT manuals. All of ours are zero length, but its unclear whether this is supposed to be the case (no news is good news). Does anyone know what they are supposed to look like? -- Jeff -- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Jeff Krueger E-Mail: jeff(a)qualcomm.com Senior Engineer Phone: 858-651-6709 NetApp Filers / UNIX Infrastructure Fax: 858-651-6627 QUALCOMM, Inc. IT Engineering Web: www.qualcomm.com

1 0

Recall:
by Kissel, Rich 09 Nov '00

09 Nov '00

Kissel, Rich would like to recall the message, "".

1 0

Recall:
by Kissel, Rich 09 Nov '00

09 Nov '00

Kissel, Rich would like to recall the message, "".

1 0

(no subject)
by Kissel, Rich 09 Nov '00

09 Nov '00

rkissel(a)netapp.com unsubscribe Rich -------------------------------------- Rich Kissel-----------Account Manager Network Appliance 100 N. El Segundo Blvd. Suite 1802, 18th Floor El Segundo, CA 90245 310-426-1717 Office 310-426-1701 Fax 310-739-6577 Mobile 877-5-NETAPP Pager rich.kissel(a)netapp.com www.netapp.com "NTAP could be next Cisco" CBS MarketWatch http://cbs.marketwatch.com/archive/19991207/news/current/smith.htx?source=ht

1 0

(no subject)
by Kissel, Rich 09 Nov '00

09 Nov '00

rich.kissel(a)netapp.com unsubscribe

1 0

SUMMARY: Finding who is pounding your NetApp
by John Stoffel 09 Nov '00

09 Nov '00

Hi all, I'd like to give a big thanks to all who showed me the option for turning on NFS stats on a per-client basis. The NetApp 5.2 SysAdmin manual doesn't mention this at all in the trouble shooting section. They should update their docs better. I'd also like to thank Darren for the hint on using 'prex' on solaris to get more info on processes and which are doing what. And another big thanks to Mike Horwath <drechsau(a)tiny.net> for sending the 'netapp-top' script. I haven't used it yet, but it looks like just the thing to help us out in the future. The script is at the end of this message. John John Stoffel - Senior Unix Systems Administrator - Lucent Technologies stoffel(a)lucent.com - http://www.lucent.com - 978-952-7548 --------------------------snip here--------------------------------- #!/usr/local/bin/perl # netapp-top - display current top NFS clients for a NetApp # Copyright (C) 1998 Daniel Quinlan # # This program is free software; you can redistribute it and/or modify # it under the terms of the GNU General Public License as published by # the Free Software Foundation; either version 2 of the License, or # (at your option) any later version. # # This program is distributed in the hope that it will be useful, # but WITHOUT ANY WARRANTY; without even the implied warranty of # MERCHANTABILITY or FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE. See the # GNU General Public License for more details. # # You should have received a copy of the GNU General Public License # along with this program; if not, write to the Free Software # Foundation, Inc., 675 Mass Ave, Cambridge, MA 02139, USA. $default_interval = 60; $prog = $0; $prog =~ s@.*/@@; require "getopts.pl"; &Getopts("hi:"); if (defined $ENV{"LINES"} && $ENV{"LINES"} ne "") { $lines = $ENV{"LINES"}; } else { $lines = 24; } if ($opt_h) { &usage; exit 0; } if ($opt_i && $opt_i > 0) { $interval = $opt_i; } else { $interval = $default_interval; } if ($ARGV[0]) { $host = $ARGV[0]; } else { &usage; exit 1; } sub usage { print <<EOF; usage: $prog [options] filer -h print this help -i n report filer statistics every n seconds ($default_interval is default) The NetApp must have the "nfs.per_client_stats.enable" option "on" for this to work at all. This program must be run this from an admin host as root. EOF } sub print_top { my $total = 0; my $diff; my %recent; foreach $key (keys %nfs_ops_last) { $diff = $nfs_ops{$key} - $nfs_ops_last{$key}; $recent{$key} = $diff; $total += $diff; } $total = int ($total / $interval); system("clear"); printf "%6s\t%s\n", "NFS/s", "total NFS/s = $total | interval = $interval"; printf "%6s\t%s\n", "------", "----------------------------------------"; $i = 0; foreach $key (sort {$recent{$b} <=> $recent{$a} } keys %recent) { printf "%6d\t%s\n", int ($recent{$key} / $interval + 0.5), $ip_name{$key}; last if ($i++ > ($lines - 5)); } } $first = 1; for (;;) { $time_0 = time(); open(NFSSTAT, "rsh $host nfsstat -l|"); while (<NFSSTAT>) { @tmp = split; # ip_address = tmp[0] # ip_name = tmp[1] # nfs_ops = tmp[4] $ip_name{$tmp[0]} = $tmp[1]; $nfs_ops{$tmp[0]} = $tmp[4]; } close(NFSSTAT); if (! $first) { &print_top; } else { $first = 0; } %nfs_ops_last = %nfs_ops; $time_1 = time(); sleep ($interval - ($time_1 - $time_0)); }

1 0

Finding who is pounding your NetApp
by John Stoffel 09 Nov '00

09 Nov '00

Hi all, Just to drag this conversation back to a purely NetApp, purely NFS scenario, I'd like to get some help and pointers on how I can solve a problem I had this morning in a more general and useful way. Let me give you the background details here. We have a bunch of toasters here, various old F330s, an F520 (soon to be retired) and some F740s. This morning a bunch of people were complaining that their workstations were slow, that home directories were timing out, etc. These people all had their home directories on an F330 running OnTap 5.2.1. It has 192Mb of RAM, four shelves, each with 7 x 4gb disks. The poor system was simply pinned to the wall by a client. The CPU was hovering between 85% and 100%, it was reading and writing around 2.3Mb/s to the disks constantly. The nfsstats told me that about 23% of the traffic was writes, the rest was attr lookups and reads. The usual mix of NFS traffic. The cache age was down around 4-5 (it's normally much higher), so I knew it was getting hit hard with writes. But since the system was on a direct link back to a switch, and since I don't run the network at all and don't have access to it, I couldn't tell which system(s) were beating it up. We ended up putting in a PC on a repeater to sniff the link between the switch and the NetApp to try and figure out which host(s) was the bad boy. Once we figured that out, it still didn't help since the two hosts didn't look loaded at all, nor were there any runaway processes sucking up IO that I could find. The clients were both quad processor Suns running Solaris 2.5.1 or 2.6. I use the following tools to try and figure out what was going on here, and failed. We had to reboot the two systems to solve the problem. Now as a Unix admin, this really pained me, since I should have been able to find the culprits and just kill them off. We used these on the solaris side: snoop tcpdump lsof top ps (in all kinds of variations). ethereal (found after the fact, will be used in the future). And on the NetApp side I used: nfsstat netstat -n netstat -r sysstat 4 And while they all showed me something, none of them could show me what I needed. On the NetApp side I needed something to show me the top 10 NFS hosts but IP address, but I couldn't get it to work. The output of 'netstat -r' wasn't a help at all. On the Solaris side, tcpdump showed me the traffic, but didn't give me a way to relate it back to a specific process. And while lsof showed me processes, it didn't show me which one was writing data and at what rate. Does anyone have any hints? I'm thinking of upgrading to 5.3.6 at some point, just to bring the F330s upto date with the F740s, but I'm not in a rush really. Ideally, something on the NetApp side to show me the top NFS clients in terms of Data Rate, or anything would be a god-send. Then something on the Client side to figure out which process(es) were the NFS hogs would also be good. Thanks, John John Stoffel - Senior Unix Systems Administrator - Lucent Technologies stoffel(a)lucent.com - http://www.lucent.com - 978-952-7548

7 6

Re: Finding who is pounding your NetApp
by Ketil Kirkerud Elgethun 08 Nov '00

08 Nov '00

John Stoffel <stoffel(a)casc.com> writes: > On the NetApp side I needed something to show me the top 10 NFS hosts > but IP address, but I couldn't get it to work. The output of 'netstat > -r' wasn't a help at all. nfsstat -l will give you (almost) what you need. For 'nfsstat -l' to work you'll have to enable it first, though. (options nfs.per_client_stats.enable on) nfsstat -l will give you nfs ops per host. A small script to do something like #!/bin/sh rsh filer nfsstat -z sleep 60 rsh filer nfsstat -l (or -h) will give you the traffic (in nfs ops) for all clients active during the last 60 seconds. You might want to sort the output, though. Have a look at the manpage (available in /etc/man on your filer) for na_nfsstat for more info. (running with nfs.per_client_stats.enable on will possibly impair performance slightly, you might want to enable it just for this purpose, then disable it when you don't need it. Does anyone know how much of a performance hit this could generate ?) regards, -- ---Ketil Kirkerud Elgethun, Infostream ASP Marcus Thranesgate 6, N-0473 Oslo Phone: +47 22 70 45 00, Direct: +47 22 70 47 16, Mobile: +47 934 11 394

2 1

250K NFS ops/sec, eh?
by Brian Tao 08 Nov '00

08 Nov '00

http://www.spec.org/osg/sfs97/results/res2000q3/sfs97-20000905-00200.html What's special about a "scalable storage cluster", or is that just a new marketing name given to a bunch of independent F840's? A quarter million ops per second... sweet. :) -- Brian Tao (BT300, taob(a)risc.org) "Though this be madness, yet there is method in't"

3 5

RE: Exchange 2k (long)
by Whitfield, Charlie 08 Nov '00

08 Nov '00

Best be honest Peter why don't you use your usual email address. ;-) FYI, Peter can be contacted at work on bodifee_peter(a)emc.com (if I'm not mistaken). Cheers, your old friend from a previous life, CAW Charlie Whitfield Network Appliance UK email: caw(a)netapp.com voice: +44 20 8756 6762 mobile: +44 7718 160954 -----Original Message----- From: Peter Bodifee [mailto:bodif36772@yahoo.com] Sent: 08 November 2000 14:50 To: 'Bercovici, Val'; supak.lailert(a)yipintsoi.com Cc: toasters(a)mathworks.com; 'Martin Hannigan'; rdobbins(a)netmore.net Subject: RE: Exchange 2k (long) Dear Val, Please be honest and open to the user community and add " and has no plans to do so in the future" to the second sentence. See http://support.microsoft.com/support/kb/articles/q250/3/48.asp Peter -----Original Message----- From: owner-toasters(a)mathworks.com [mailto:owner-toasters@mathworks.com]On Behalf Of Bercovici, Val Sent: dinsdag 7 november 2000 21:14 To: 'supak.lailert(a)yipintsoi.com' Cc: toasters(a)mathworks.com; Martin Hannigan; rdobbins(a)netmore.net Subject: RE: Exchange 2k (long) Hi Supak et al, Please let me clarify your support statement below. Microsoft does not currently support NAS for Exchange Server 5.5 or 2000. Network Appliance fully supports Exchange 5.5 on filers via our SnapManager 1.x for Exchange software. We have engaged IBM Global Services' highly-regarded Enterprise Services for Microsoft Technologies Practice for our escalation path regarding Exchange-specific issues that we cannot resolve. [ ... marketing stuff removed for clarity ...] Thanks, -Val. Manager, Collaborative Strategy Network Appliance Inc. WHO STORES MORE THAN HALF THE WORLD'S E-MAILBOXES? FIND OUT AT: www.netapp.com 613.724.8674 - Phone 847.589.6510 - Fax 800.489.6924 - Pager E-Mail: valb(a)netapp.com -----Original Message----- From: Supak backup e-mail account [mailto:supaklailert@yahoo.com] Sent: Friday, November 03, 2000 10:31 PM To: Martin Hannigan; rdobbins(a)netmore.net Cc: toasters(a)mathworks.com Subject: Re: Exchange 2k NetApp filer is fully supported for use with MS Exchange. I don't see how this could lead to a problem more than any direct-attaced storage. NetApp choking on lots of small files? I don't think so. WAFL handles small files far better than most file systems notably UFS. Waste of space? Maybe. NetApp uses 4K blocks so if you have lots of really small files <4K then you'll waste quite a bit of space. Supak --- Martin Hannigan <hannigan(a)world.std.com> wrote: > > > > > > For both performance and supportability reasons, > it is extremely inadvisable > > to put Exchange mailboxes/private stores/public > stores on anything other > > than a filesystem which is directly-connected to > the NT server in question. > > > > People do all sorts of odd things with NetApps > just because they can - and > > don't get me wrong, I love my F740 - but this is > just plain crazy. For your > > own peace of mind, don't do it. > > > So the netapp still chokes on lots of active small > files i.e. like > usenet news, etc? We were thinking about turning > ours into a hardcore > news spool..but I remember a few years ago there was > some issue with the > millions of < 64KB file sizes.. > > -M > __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Thousands of Stores. Millions of Products. All in one Place. http://shopping.yahoo.com/ _________________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com

1 0

RE: Exchange 2k (not very long)
by mds＠gbnet.net 08 Nov '00

08 Nov '00

*ding*ding* End of round two. Before we go much further, can anyone explain what DaFS or however it's spelt might change the situation, if at all? > Please be honest and introduce yourself to the others as an employee of EMC. Teehee. > Please be honest and open to the user community and add " and has no plans > to do so in the future" to the second sentence. Nothing dishonest in leaving out information - I mean we're deep into the mire of marketecture here as it is. Caveat Emptor all Ye Who Enter Here, or something. > See http://support.microsoft.com/support/kb/articles/q250/3/48.asp Very well justified though. I believe anyone who wants Exchange, and wants the advantages of NetApp or any other decently managed storage is not going down a dark and perilous alley. In fact they'll probably be getting better support from all the vendors involved than most Unix email system customers ever get from any vendors. But whether you or whether you don't want to use them together, well, gee, is it really worth the bruises arguing about it? -- -Mark ... an Englishman in Derby ...

1 0

RE: Exchange 2k (long)
by Traitel, Eyal 08 Nov '00

08 Nov '00

Dear Peter, Please be honest and introduce yourself to the others as an employee of EMC. Microsoft is making business on selling Windows NT/2000 as file serving as well, and in this case, it is a competitor to the NAS market, hence its running away from supporting it. It does not support also any specific driver a customer might use, which all of us use everyday, so support declaration are "touchy" issues always. This is also not a secret that Network Appliance filers are performing more than well on CIFS benchmarks, and it is a competition here too. It is interesting too to see that anyway EMC is trying to imitate our well regarded Exchange-related products as well, but no market presence yet... Eyal. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- eTraitel - I'm the new eBuzzword around !!! ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Eyal Traitel - Filer Escalation Engineer CNA, MCSE, CSA, NACA 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: Peter Bodifee [mailto:bodif36772@yahoo.com] Sent: Wednesday, November 08, 2000 3:50 PM To: 'Bercovici, Val'; supak.lailert(a)yipintsoi.com Cc: toasters(a)mathworks.com; 'Martin Hannigan'; rdobbins(a)netmore.net Subject: RE: Exchange 2k (long) Dear Val, Please be honest and open to the user community and add " and has no plans to do so in the future" to the second sentence. See http://support.microsoft.com/support/kb/articles/q250/3/48.asp Peter -----Original Message----- From: owner-toasters(a)mathworks.com [mailto:owner-toasters@mathworks.com]On Behalf Of Bercovici, Val Sent: dinsdag 7 november 2000 21:14 To: 'supak.lailert(a)yipintsoi.com' Cc: toasters(a)mathworks.com; Martin Hannigan; rdobbins(a)netmore.net Subject: RE: Exchange 2k (long) Hi Supak et al, Please let me clarify your support statement below. Microsoft does not currently support NAS for Exchange Server 5.5 or 2000. Network Appliance fully supports Exchange 5.5 on filers via our SnapManager 1.x for Exchange software. We have engaged IBM Global Services' highly-regarded Enterprise Services for Microsoft Technologies Practice for our escalation path regarding Exchange-specific issues that we cannot resolve. [ ... marketing stuff removed for clarity ...] Thanks, -Val. Manager, Collaborative Strategy Network Appliance Inc. WHO STORES MORE THAN HALF THE WORLD'S E-MAILBOXES? FIND OUT AT: www.netapp.com 613.724.8674 - Phone 847.589.6510 - Fax 800.489.6924 - Pager E-Mail: valb(a)netapp.com -----Original Message----- From: Supak backup e-mail account [mailto:supaklailert@yahoo.com] Sent: Friday, November 03, 2000 10:31 PM To: Martin Hannigan; rdobbins(a)netmore.net Cc: toasters(a)mathworks.com Subject: Re: Exchange 2k NetApp filer is fully supported for use with MS Exchange. I don't see how this could lead to a problem more than any direct-attaced storage. NetApp choking on lots of small files? I don't think so. WAFL handles small files far better than most file systems notably UFS. Waste of space? Maybe. NetApp uses 4K blocks so if you have lots of really small files <4K then you'll waste quite a bit of space. Supak --- Martin Hannigan <hannigan(a)world.std.com> wrote: > > > > > > For both performance and supportability reasons, > it is extremely inadvisable > > to put Exchange mailboxes/private stores/public > stores on anything other > > than a filesystem which is directly-connected to > the NT server in question. > > > > People do all sorts of odd things with NetApps > just because they can - and > > don't get me wrong, I love my F740 - but this is > just plain crazy. For your > > own peace of mind, don't do it. > > > So the netapp still chokes on lots of active small > files i.e. like > usenet news, etc? We were thinking about turning > ours into a hardcore > news spool..but I remember a few years ago there was > some issue with the > millions of < 64KB file sizes.. > > -M > __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Thousands of Stores. Millions of Products. All in one Place. http://shopping.yahoo.com/ _________________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com

1 0

RE: Sharing Filers among different user groups
by Clawson, Simon 08 Nov '00

08 Nov '00

We run an F760 here, and it is accessed by two different groups. The data held by one group cannot be accessed by another. This is achived by using CIFS Shares under NT, and by using the UNIX file permission on the directories themselves, and by setting the NFS export up to have the correct Anon UID. You may need to alter your infrestructure to achive what you want though. We have made the whole sharing scenario possible by implementing it in a single NFS environment. We have one NIS master that servers the whole office, along with local slaves in each department. The only area where the Netapps has a single access point is in the NT domain, where it has to bind to a domain controller on one of the three subnets we have. All you need to do in this situation is establish trust relationships between the other NT subnets and map the Netapps accross these. Bit confusing all that..but it is do-able... Hope that helps Simon >With the advent of the F840, we are thinking of doing some massive server >consolidation: using a F840 to replace many existing nfs/cifs servers among >different user groups. >What are the issues with sharing a filer among different user groups? I can >see: >1) uid issues: Dept A is already using uid 101 for user smith, and Dept B >has a different smith, or has a 101 for a different users ... etc. >2) security issues: we want to make absolutely sure Dept A cannot see or >mount or share Dept B's data. >3) what if Dept A is using a different DNS than Dept B's? I don't think we >can run 2 different resolvers, one per exported volumes ... >3) similarly, for NIS, and NT domains. >Any insights, comments are appreciated. Xt _________________________________________________________________________ Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com. Share information about yourself, create your own public profile at http://profiles.msn.com.

1 0

Veritas NetBackup backup hangs
by Jeffrey Krueger 08 Nov '00

08 Nov '00

We have recently cut-over to using Veritas NetBackup with NDMP to perform a mixture of backups to filer-attached-tape and 3-way backups to other filers with tape. We are running DOT 5.3.4R3P2 on a mixture of 630's and 760's against NBU 3.2 with a recent patch set (one that includes the 3-way fix). In both instance, we have found that sometimes a filer completes a dump (ndmp session goes away, backup snapshot is deleted, /etc/dumpdates is updates), but the backup job hangs in Veritas-land. This job hangs indefiately until manually killed, at which point it does not record the file history making the backup un-restore-able. We're growing very frustrated with this issue. BudTool has been backing these filers up for 2 years with NDMP and relatively few problems. So far, NBU support has been disappointing to say the least. Has anyone seen this? Is there a workaround or fix? Also, does anyone know the mechanics of the "/etc/ndmpdlog.*" files? They are poorly documented in the DOT manuals. All of ours are zero length, but its unclear whether this is supposed to be the case (no news is good news). Does anyone know what they are supposed to look like? -- Jeff -- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Jeff Krueger E-Mail: jeff(a)qualcomm.com Senior Engineer Phone: 858-651-6709 NetApp Filers / UNIX Infrastructure Fax: 858-651-6627 QUALCOMM, Inc. IT Engineering Web: www.qualcomm.com

1 0

Looking for customers who want to use FrontPage and/or pass-throu gh authentication with filers
by Benn, Paul 08 Nov '00

08 Nov '00

Hi Gang, I'm looking for a few customers who are interested in using FrontPage server extensions (now called "Office 2000 server extensions") and/or IIS pass-through authentication with filers. Please reply privately. Regards, Paul Benn Network Appliance

1 0

rsh return code
by Brian Tao 08 Nov '00

08 Nov '00

Probably a dumb question, but I just had a gigantic Sunday brunch buffet, so my brain is halfway into a food coma. ;-) Is it possible to have rsh return 0 or 1 depending on the success of a command executed on a filer? For instance, I want my backup scripts to kick off a "snap create" before they proceed, but I want to check the exit status of the rsh so I have a chance to abort and notify the operator if the snapshot is not created. -- Brian Tao (BT300, taob(a)risc.org) "Though this be madness, yet there is method in't"

4 5

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