toasters

toasters@lists.teaparty.net

13515 discussions

RE: NAS solutions from Sun?
by howie.wilcox＠netapp.com 05 Jun '00

05 Jun '00

Hi Folks, There seems to be not very much that would be considered "filer" or "appliance" in SUN's new N8200. A closer loo reveals that SUN's new "filer" is apparently a SUN server and A1000 storage array bundled into one marketing code. They have been shipping the A1000 technology in various forms for quite a while now. This is the stuff that they OEM from Symbios Logic/LSI/MetaStor. Its pretty much a standard SUN server and direct attached storage that the SUN marketing guys are calling a "filer". Howie -----Original Message----- From: Ishankov, Alex [mailto:Alex.Ishankov@BMO.com] Sent: Thursday, June 01, 2000 10:13 AM To: 'toasters(a)mathworks.com' Subject: NAS solutions from Sun? Hi - Does anybody know anything about recently announced NAS solution from Sun Sun StorEdge N8200 filer (http://www.sun.com/smi/Press/sunflash/2000-05/sunflash.20000530.1.html) and if it is just an adopted version of Network Appliance filer? Thanks

4 3

looking at performance data
by Gregory T Rotunda 05 Jun '00

05 Jun '00

We have F720. I clocked the filer with statit and wafl_susp commands and I'm looking at the output. Is there somewhere I can get some documentation to help me understand what I'm looking at? I know what some of the different things are, i.e. CP from CP, but I'm wondering if there are some detailed docs out there somewhere. I took a brief look at the NOW site but couldn't find anything... Greg

1 0

RE: Filer Question
by David.Bulfer＠netapp.com 05 Jun '00

05 Jun '00

Why? The FC specification allows the "funky" HSSDC and the DB-9. When we started shipping FC, the DB-9 was by far the most prevalent and it is a good reliable connector. We had also heard rumor that the HSSDC was not as reliable. (We have never seen any real data, including our own experience to date, to back that up.) We have stayed with the DB-9 for consistency (i.e., less confusion in the field). We use the HSSDC on the adapter because that is what is on the adapter. David Bulfer Director of Systems Architecture Network Appliance, Inc. -----Original Message----- From: Jay Orr [mailto:orrjl@stl.nexen.com] Sent: Monday, June 05, 2000 7:41 AM To: toasters(a)mathworks.com Subject: Filer Question Not that serious a question, but we just got a new F720 and was wondering why the Fibre card has the funky connector on it, but the filer and the trays have a 9-pin connector? I would think as much as the box was idiot-proofed they would of at least used a different connector for the shelves then from the serial devices.... Anyone know? Just curious... ----------- Jay Orr Systems Administrator Fujitsu Nexion Inc. St. Louis, MO

1 0

RE: UK Customs problems
by abond＠netapp.com 05 Jun '00

05 Jun '00

Hi Dave, The normal process for replacement parts is that they are shipped from NetApp's European Support Centre in the Netherlands (CSEURO), and so no VAT should be payable. If you are in Europe and need any replacment parts, please ask that they be shipped from CSEURO. If parts are shipped from the USA, it is possible to avoid paying the VAT if the correct import processes are followed and the paperwork for the replaced goods when exported are tied up with that for the imported ones - however, this is much more complex and doesn't always work. Hopefully your reseller will be able to resolve this. Regards, Andrew > -----Original Message----- > From: owner-dl-toasters(a)netapp.com > [mailto:owner-dl-toasters@netapp.com]On Behalf Of Dave Atkin > Sent: 05 June 2000 09:53 > To: toasters(a)mathworks.com > Subject: UK Customs problems > > > We just received some replacement LRC cards for our FC8 > shelves, but I've > had endless conversations with Federal Express about VAT. > > Apparently because they are new parts, UK Customs require VAT > to be paid > on them (Universities can't generally reclaim VAT). The fact > that they are > warranty replacements seems to make no difference. > > I'm trying to get our reseller to sort this out but it would be really > helpful if Netapp could do someting with the paperwork to > avoid this in > the future when they ship replacement parts to us. > > Dave Atkin > -- > Dave Atkin, Head of Technical Services > Computing Service, University of York, YORK YO10 5DD > Phone: +44-1904-433804 (ddi) Fax: +44-1904-433740 > Email: D.Atkin(a)york.ac.uk > > >

1 0

re: FW: NAS solutions from Sun?
by erhard.raible＠netapp.com 05 Jun '00

05 Jun '00

Sun's N8xxx is a repackaged NetraNFS and a great advertisement for NetApp nothing else: please see att web side: http://www.sun.com/storage/n8200/specs.html Hardware/Software Specifications N8200: ======================================== Operating environment Solaris(tm) Operating Environment 7 Standard software Integrated RAID Manager with hot-spare support; Telnet, NIS, NIS+, DNS, SNMP, Web browser preconfigured Installation time 10 minutes or less Network protocol support NFS v2/v3 over UDP or TCP, CIFS ECC memory 2048 MB Nonvolatile memory 64 MB (per storage controller) PCI expansion capacity Two Slots Optional PCI connectivity Single 10/100 Base-T Ethernet, Gigabit Ethernet Disk drives 18-GB UltraSCSI RAID storage capacity Minimum 18-GB SCSI drives 12 (10,000 rpm) Maximum 18-GB SCSI drives 48 (10,000 rpm) Storage capacity 800 GB File systems One per Sun StorEdge N8200 NAS array RAID level Hardware RAID 5 Maximum RAID group size 11 data/1 parity Erhard -----Original Message----- From: Bruce Sterling Woodcock [mailto:sirbruce@ix.netcom.com] Sent: Montag, 5. Juni 2000 06:24 To: Brian Tao; Wilcox, Howie Cc: Alex.Ishankov(a)BMO.com; toasters(a)mathworks.com Subject: Re: NAS solutions from Sun? ----- Original Message ----- From: "Brian Tao" <taob(a)risc.org> To: <howie.wilcox(a)netapp.com> Cc: <Alex.Ishankov(a)BMO.com>; <toasters(a)mathworks.com> Sent: Thursday, June 01, 2000 6:51 PM Subject: RE: NAS solutions from Sun? > On Thu, 1 Jun 2000 howie.wilcox(a)netapp.com wrote: > > > > There seems to be not very much that would be considered "filer" or > > "appliance" in SUN's new N8200. A closer loo reveals that SUN's new > > "filer" is apparently a SUN server and A1000 storage array bundled > > into one marketing code. > > So basically another kick at the Netra NFS bucket (Ultra-1 + > integrated multipack)? I see they mention Network Appliance > specifically too... about time they noticed. ;-) Don't forget Netra NFS was supposed to "eat Netapp's lunch", or so they said. Bruce

1 0

RE: 18G disk and 36G disk coexist on Netapp 720 Filer ?
by Anissa.Mohler＠netapp.com 05 Jun '00

05 Jun '00

Amy, In a word, yes. You can use both 18 and 36G drives in a F720. The 36G drives require the FC9 shelf (which can also hold 18G drives). You can check the System Configuration guide on NOW http://now.netapp.com/ for part numbers and disks and shelves supported. As far as feasibiltiy is concerned... what do you want to do with it? what is your existing configuration? You won't be able to exceed 504 GB no matter what types of disks you use. Anissa -----Original Message----- From: Amy Cheng [mailto:amy.cheng@motorola.com] Sent: Sunday, June 04, 2000 9:22 PM To: toasters(a)mathworks.com Cc: Mandy Meng (r47701); Simon Zhao (r42552) Subject: 18G disk and 36G disk coexist on Netapp 720 Filer ? Hi forks, I wondor whether it is feasible to use 18G disks and 36G disks on a F720 filer. Does anybody have experience on it ? Thanks Best Regards Amy

1 0

18G disk and 36G disk coexist on Netapp 720 Filer ?
by Amy Cheng 05 Jun '00

05 Jun '00

Hi forks, I wondor whether it is feasible to use 18G disks and 36G disks on a F720 filer. Does anybody have experience on it ? Thanks Best Regards Amy

1 0

HELP
by Ebru Bayýndýr 02 Jun '00

02 Jun '00

Hello there, I am the system administrator for the Earth Sciences Research Institute of TUBITAK. I am in need of urgent help to bring up our main computing server. We have a Sun enterprise 450 NIS server sytem that operates under Solaris 2.6. We have a vital problem about our Raid Disk system, which contains valuable earthquake data from the recent earthquakes in Turkey. Here is the story; I had successfully install 6 disks (9gb) into a single 54 GB file system using Solstice Disk Suite 4.1 tool. We have used this file system for about a year now. We had each disk unit taken out from its slot during a maintanence of the system. Now, we have mixed up the order of disks i.e. which disk belongs to which slot is unknown!!... Naturally, the system will not reboot successfully. I am wondering if there is anyone out there has come across such a problem and been able to fix it... I would greatly appreciate your comments and help on this matter... -- ------------------------ Ebru TAN E-Mail : bebru(a)mam.gov.tr TUBITAK MAM Is tel :(262) 646 63 55/391 Yer Bilimleri Arastirma Enstitüsü Is tel :(262) 641 23 00/4300 PK 21 41470 Gebze/KOCAELI

1 0

RE: NAS solutions from Sun?
by erhard.raible＠netapp.com 02 Jun '00

02 Jun '00

it seems, this is "old staff in a new packing" > a tuned solaris server plus low cost scsi disks an other name for the "netraNFS" servers from 1996 season -----Original Message----- From: Ishankov, Alex [mailto:Alex.Ishankov@BMO.com] Sent: Donnerstag, 1. Juni 2000 19:13 To: 'toasters(a)mathworks.com' Subject: NAS solutions from Sun? Hi - Does anybody know anything about recently announced NAS solution from Sun Sun StorEdge N8200 filer (http://www.sun.com/smi/Press/sunflash/2000-05/sunflash.20000530.1.html) and if it is just an adopted version of Network Appliance filer? Thanks

1 0

NAS solutions from Sun?
by Ishankov, Alex 01 Jun '00

01 Jun '00

Hi - Does anybody know anything about recently announced NAS solution from Sun Sun StorEdge N8200 filer (http://www.sun.com/smi/Press/sunflash/2000-05/sunflash.20000530.1.html) and if it is just an adopted version of Network Appliance filer? Thanks

1 0

RE: NT + Unix access rights
by mark.muhlestein＠netapp.com 01 Jun '00

01 Jun '00

As explained in the security guide, access to files with NT security is based on the NT account, while access to files with UNIX security is based on the UNIX account. You can review http://now.netapp.com/NOW/knowledge/docs/olio/guides/53_troubleshooting/ind… tml to understand multi-protocol security. This is described in the "Concepts" section. Mark > -----Original Message----- > From: Michael van Elst [mailto:mlelstv@xlink.net] > Sent: Thursday, June 01, 2000 4:07 AM > To: Muhlestein, Mark > Cc: mlelstv(a)xlink.net; toasters(a)mathworks.com > Subject: Re: NT + Unix access rights > > > On Wed, May 31, 2000 at 04:54:56PM -0700, > mark.muhlestein(a)netapp.com wrote: > > > I see your problem: WEBMAILER\Administrator is not a member of > > BUILTIN\Administrators on the filer. You should add > "WEBMAILER\Domain Admins" as > > a member of BUILTIN\Administrators on the filer using User > Manager for Domains. > > By default, only the "Domain Admins" group from the domain > the filer is > > installed into is placed as a member of the filer's > BUILTIN\Administrators > > group. > > > Would this give the WEBMAILER\Domain Admins full authority over > the files that use the UNIX security model or just over those > files that use the NT security model ? > > > > > > > > After fixing this, you're going to want to do a "wcc -x" to > force a remapping. > > > > Mark > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > From: Michael van Elst [mailto:mlelstv@xlink.net] > > > Sent: Wednesday, May 31, 2000 4:20 PM > > > To: Muhlestein, Mark > > > Cc: mlelstv(a)xlink.net > > > Subject: Re: NT + Unix access rights > > > > > > > > > On Wed, May 31, 2000 at 04:02:42PM -0700, > > > mark.muhlestein(a)netapp.com wrote: > > > > > > Hi, > > > > > > > This is a mixed qtree, right? Can you send the output of > > > "wcc -dvv" after > > > > attempting to do the "chown"? The mapped user doing the > > > "chown" has to be a > > > > member of builtin\administrators. > > > > > > here is the relevant part: > > > > > > root (UID 0) from 123.45.67.89 => WEBMAILER\Administrator > > > *************** > > > UNIX uid = 0 > > > > > > NT membership > > > WEBMAILER\Administrator > > > WEBMAILER\Domain Users > > > WEBMAILER\Domain Admins > > > User is also a member of Everyone, Network Users, > > > Authenticated Users > > > *************** > > > > > > Michael van Elst > > > > > > > > > > > Mark > > > > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > > > From: Michael van Elst [mailto:mlelstv@xlink.net] > > > > > Sent: Wednesday, May 31, 2000 2:56 PM > > > > > To: Muhlestein, Mark > > > > > Cc: mlelstv(a)xlink.net; toasters(a)mathworks.com > > > > > Subject: Re: NT + Unix access rights > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Tue, May 30, 2000 at 01:34:03PM -0700, > > > > > mark.muhlestein(a)netapp.com wrote: > > > > > > > Apparently the file uses the NT security model in the > > > mixed qtree > > > > > > > and the file owner has locked himself and others out. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > If this is the case, you should be able to take > > > ownership from NT. > > > > > > > > > > This was unsuccessful so far. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > There was a > > > > > > bug with take ownership (#21325), which is fixed in 5.3.5R2. > > > > > > > > > > I have to check with other people if upgrading the > > > current production > > > > > system to, what I was told is an early-access release, is > > > an option. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > You should also be > > > > > > able to do a "chmod" or "chown" from NFS root and get > > > > > control of the file. > > > > > > > > > > This is not possible. Both fail with the error "Not owner". > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > If > > > > > > that fails, you should do the rc_toggle_basic command > > > > > "lock_dump -f" and see if > > > > > > your file is locked. > > > > > > > > > > The files are not locked according to lock_dump -f. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > > > > i.A. Michael van Elst / phone: +49 > > > > > 721 9652 330 > > > > > Xlink - Network Information Centre \/ fax: +49 > > > > > 721 9652 349 > > > > > Emmy-Noether-Strasse 9 /\ link > > http://nic.xlink.net/ > > > > D-76131 Karlsruhe, Germany /_______ email: > > > > hostmaster(a)xlink.net > > > > [ KPNQwest Germany GmbH, Sitz Karlsruhe > > > > ] > > > > [ Amtsgericht Karlsruhe HRB 8161, Geschaeftsfuehrer: Koen > > > > Bertoen ] > > > > > > -- > > i.A. Michael van Elst / phone: +49 > 721 9652 330 > > Xlink - Network Information Centre \/ fax: +49 > 721 9652 349 > > Emmy-Noether-Strasse 9 /\ link > http://nic.xlink.net/ > > D-76131 Karlsruhe, Germany /_______ email: > hostmaster(a)xlink.net > > [ KPNQwest Germany GmbH, Sitz Karlsruhe > ] > > [ Amtsgericht Karlsruhe HRB 8161, Geschaeftsfuehrer: Koen > Bertoen ] > -- > i.A. Michael van Elst / phone: +49 > 721 9652 330 > Xlink - Network Information Centre \/ fax: +49 > 721 9652 349 > Emmy-Noether-Strasse 9 /\ link http://nic.xlink.net/ > D-76131 Karlsruhe, Germany /_______ email: > hostmaster(a)xlink.net > [ KPNQwest Germany GmbH, Sitz Karlsruhe > ] > [ Amtsgericht Karlsruhe HRB 8161, Geschaeftsfuehrer: Koen > Bertoen ] >

1 0

RE: NT + Unix access rights
by mark.muhlestein＠netapp.com 01 Jun '00

01 Jun '00

I see your problem: WEBMAILER\Administrator is not a member of BUILTIN\Administrators on the filer. You should add "WEBMAILER\Domain Admins" as a member of BUILTIN\Administrators on the filer using User Manager for Domains. By default, only the "Domain Admins" group from the domain the filer is installed into is placed as a member of the filer's BUILTIN\Administrators group. After fixing this, you're going to want to do a "wcc -x" to force a remapping. Mark > -----Original Message----- > From: Michael van Elst [mailto:mlelstv@xlink.net] > Sent: Wednesday, May 31, 2000 4:20 PM > To: Muhlestein, Mark > Cc: mlelstv(a)xlink.net > Subject: Re: NT + Unix access rights > > > On Wed, May 31, 2000 at 04:02:42PM -0700, > mark.muhlestein(a)netapp.com wrote: > > Hi, > > > This is a mixed qtree, right? Can you send the output of > "wcc -dvv" after > > attempting to do the "chown"? The mapped user doing the > "chown" has to be a > > member of builtin\administrators. > > here is the relevant part: > > root (UID 0) from 123.45.67.89 => WEBMAILER\Administrator > *************** > UNIX uid = 0 > > NT membership > WEBMAILER\Administrator > WEBMAILER\Domain Users > WEBMAILER\Domain Admins > User is also a member of Everyone, Network Users, > Authenticated Users > *************** > > Michael van Elst > > > > > Mark > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > From: Michael van Elst [mailto:mlelstv@xlink.net] > > > Sent: Wednesday, May 31, 2000 2:56 PM > > > To: Muhlestein, Mark > > > Cc: mlelstv(a)xlink.net; toasters(a)mathworks.com > > > Subject: Re: NT + Unix access rights > > > > > > > > > On Tue, May 30, 2000 at 01:34:03PM -0700, > > > mark.muhlestein(a)netapp.com wrote: > > > > > Apparently the file uses the NT security model in the > mixed qtree > > > > > and the file owner has locked himself and others out. > > > > > > > > > > If this is the case, you should be able to take > ownership from NT. > > > > > > This was unsuccessful so far. > > > > > > > > > > There was a > > > > bug with take ownership (#21325), which is fixed in 5.3.5R2. > > > > > > I have to check with other people if upgrading the > current production > > > system to, what I was told is an early-access release, is > an option. > > > > > > > > > > You should also be > > > > able to do a "chmod" or "chown" from NFS root and get > > > control of the file. > > > > > > This is not possible. Both fail with the error "Not owner". > > > > > > > > > > If > > > > that fails, you should do the rc_toggle_basic command > > > "lock_dump -f" and see if > > > > your file is locked. > > > > > > The files are not locked according to lock_dump -f. > > > > > > > > > -- > > > i.A. Michael van Elst / phone: +49 > > > 721 9652 330 > > > Xlink - Network Information Centre \/ fax: +49 > > > 721 9652 349 > > > Emmy-Noether-Strasse 9 /\ link http://nic.xlink.net/ > > D-76131 Karlsruhe, Germany /_______ email: > > hostmaster(a)xlink.net > > [ KPNQwest Germany GmbH, Sitz Karlsruhe > > ] > > [ Amtsgericht Karlsruhe HRB 8161, Geschaeftsfuehrer: Koen > > Bertoen ] > > -- i.A. Michael van Elst / phone: +49 721 9652 330 Xlink - Network Information Centre \/ fax: +49 721 9652 349 Emmy-Noether-Strasse 9 /\ link http://nic.xlink.net/ D-76131 Karlsruhe, Germany /_______ email: hostmaster(a)xlink.net [ KPNQwest Germany GmbH, Sitz Karlsruhe ] [ Amtsgericht Karlsruhe HRB 8161, Geschaeftsfuehrer: Koen Bertoen ]

2 1

Ait2 Robots supported?
by Brian Hostetter 01 Jun '00

01 Jun '00

Has anyone hooked up an AIT2 drive to their filers? I had two 760's shipped out today and am going to need a nice large tape system to back them up. I plan on using the time manager ndmp solution for backups and would like to use a Qualstar 4400 series tape library. Anyone have any luck with them or can anyone suggest a 4-8 tape DLT system? --Brian

4 3

Looking for ST15150W
by Stephen C. Woods 31 May '00

31 May '00

Does anyone here have some 4 GB Wide (ST15150W) drives that are: (1) netapp qualified and (2) you are interested in selling? We have a partially populated shelf that we'd like to fill or at least add to. <scw> ----- Stephen C. Woods; UCLA SEASnet; 2567 Boelter hall; LA CA 90095; (310)-825-8614 Finger for public key scw(a)cirrus.seas.ucla.edu,Internet mail:scw@SEAS.UCLA.EDU

1 0

Raid scrubbing overloading a 540
by Stephen C. Woods 31 May '00

31 May '00

We have discovered an interesting feature on our toasters, and after some consideration have come to the conclusion that it is a misfeature. As many of you are aware the raid.reconstruct_speed number determines how much CPU to use in raid reconstruction. This directly controls how long it takes to reconstruct a missing disk. If you are concerned about double disk failure, you set this number higher. Unfortunately this number also controls how much CPU is to be used in raid scrubbing, to make things worse if you have multiple raid volumes they seem to be scrubbed in parallel not sequentially. These are the numbers that we obtained, 540 2 raid groups 0 (20X4GB Wide) 1 (12 X 4GB Narrow) no scrubbing CPU = 6% raid.reconstruct_speed =1 CPU = 11-12% raid.reconstruct_speed =2 CPU = 29-33% raid.reconstruct_speed =3 CPU = 59-65% With raid.reconstruct_speed = 8 the filler didn't seem to be responding to nfs requests, which is how discovered this. Now clearly this affects lower end machines (540) more than faster machines. But since scrubbing seems to be very CPU bound it would seem to us that almost any machine could be brought to its knees by this condition. Our question is this: Would it be reasonable to ask Netapp for one or both of the following: (1) Separate raid reconstruct speed from raid scrub speed. (2) Add an option to force raid scrubbing to be sequential. perhaps raid.scrub_parallel == off Clearly for those concerned about dual disk failures a high raid.reconstruct_speed is important. Equally clearly moderatly high raid.reconstruct_speed can bring a 540 to its knees with 2 Raid groups. Spliting the speeds or, running raid scrubbing sequentially might avoid this. ----- Stephen C. Woods; UCLA SEASnet; 2567 Boelter hall; LA CA 90095; (310)-825-8614 Finger for public key scw(a)cirrus.seas.ucla.edu,Internet mail:scw@SEAS.UCLA.EDU

1 0

RE: Ait2 Robots supported?
by Parker, Michael 31 May '00

31 May '00

I have been researching AIT2. FYI please look at http://www.spectralogic.com/NetApp/ which describes a SAN solution for multiple filer environments. Michael Parker Director Information Services Rosetta Inpharmatics 12040 115th Ave NE Kirkland, WA 98034 425-823-7333 mparker(a)rii.com -----Original Message----- From: Marcus Kamenzin [mailto:kamenzin@netapp.com] Sent: Wednesday, May 31, 2000 9:41 AM To: Brian Hostetter Cc: toasters(a)mathworks.com Subject: Re: Ait2 Robots supported? Brian, I made some small test with AIT2 last week and it works great (up to 13,5MB/sec)?? Marcus Brian Hostetter wrote: > Has anyone hooked up an AIT2 drive to their filers? I had two 760's shipped out today and am going to need a nice large tape system to back them up. I plan on using the time manager ndmp solution for backups and would like to use a Qualstar 4400 series tape library. Anyone have any luck with them or can anyone suggest a 4-8 tape DLT system? > > --Brian

1 0

RE: NT + Unix access rights
by mark.muhlestein＠netapp.com 31 May '00

31 May '00

> Apparently the file uses the NT security model in the mixed qtree > and the file owner has locked himself and others out. If this is the case, you should be able to take ownership from NT. There was a bug with take ownership (#21325), which is fixed in 5.3.5R2. You should also be able to do a "chmod" or "chown" from NFS root and get control of the file. If that fails, you should do the rc_toggle_basic command "lock_dump -f" and see if your file is locked. These steps and others are all spelled out in the troubleshooter guide referred to earlier in this discussion. Let us know if you still can't solve this problem. Mark Muhlestein -- mmm(a)netapp.com > -----Original Message----- > From: Michael van Elst [mailto:mlelstv@xlink.net] > Sent: Monday, May 29, 2000 5:20 PM > To: Bruce Sterling Woodcock > Cc: Michael van Elst; toasters(a)mathworks.com > Subject: Re: NT + Unix access rights > > > On Mon, May 29, 2000 at 05:05:39PM -0700, Bruce Sterling > Woodcock wrote: > > > Is the mapping only for access, or only for ownership? > > > > I understand that if root creates a file, and you look at > it from NT, > > it will be owned by Administrator (with the mapping given above). > > But when Administrator tries to access it, he'll be mapped to > > ntadmin, which doesn't have access?? > > This is correct. > > But in this case an ordinary NT user (u12345) has created a file and > neither this user nor the NT administrator seems to have any > access rights. > > Unfortunately this is also true for the UNIX side. Neither root > nor the UNIX user to which u12345 is mapped (also called u12345 with > a uid of 12345) has access to the file despite the fact that it shows > up as > > -rwx------ 1 12345 1101 2215 May 8 17:48 structure.cnf > > in a listing. > > Apparently the file uses the NT security model in the mixed qtree > and the file owner has locked himself and others out. > > > -- > i.A. Michael van Elst / phone: +49 > 721 9652 330 > Xlink - Network Information Centre \/ fax: +49 > 721 9652 349 > Emmy-Noether-Strasse 9 /\ link http://nic.xlink.net/ > D-76131 Karlsruhe, Germany /_______ email: > hostmaster(a)xlink.net > [ KPNQwest Germany GmbH, Sitz Karlsruhe > ] > [ Amtsgericht Karlsruhe HRB 8161, Geschaeftsfuehrer: Koen > Bertoen ] >

2 1

RE: F740 and subnet problems
by Dennis.Haag＠netapp.com 31 May '00

31 May '00

Check your routing tables with 'netstat -rn' is there a route to the other subnet? Is there a default route? Can you ping the router? Does ifconfig show the expected netmask? -----Original Message----- From: Gregory T Rotunda [mailto:grotunda@brk.photronics.com] Sent: Wednesday, May 31, 2000 5:39 AM To: toasters(a)mathworks.com Subject: F740 and subnet problems what are you IP ranges? how many subnets are there? Double check your subnet mask. We had the same problem and it turned out to be the mask was incorrectly set on the filer. -----Original Message----- From: owner-toasters(a)mathworks.com [mailto:owner-toasters@mathworks.com]On Behalf Of Uros Lampret Sent: Wednesday, May 31, 2000 1:58 AM To: toasters(a)mathworks.com Subject: F740 and subnet problems Hi! I'm relatively new to this business and I have some problems. I recently installed F740 and everything works joust great. BUT I have some access problems. Filer is installed in subnet 10.0.1.XXX and everybody can see it and use it. But from subnet 10.0.2.XXX or 10.0.10.XXX the filer is not accessible. If I PING form Filer someone to 10.0.10.XXX everything is OK and also if I PING Filer from 10.0.10.XXX - OK. We use CIFS and this is single Domain. Any suggestions? Uros Lampret Our Space d.o.o. Malnarjeva 47 1000 Ljubljana EU - Slovenia

1 0

RE: Samba Vs CIFFS
by John.Davis＠netapp.com 31 May '00

31 May '00

Thank You, Todd..I much prefer customer testimonials to Netapp folk chiming in but I've seen lots of Enterprises disappointed that TAS and Samba don't scale out into the Enterprise..thanks again for the kind words. -----Original Message----- From: Todd C. Merrill [mailto:tmerrill@mathworks.com] Sent: Wednesday, May 31, 2000 9:41 AM To: Davis, John Cc: thomas(a)act.sps.mot.com; toasters(a)mathworks.com Subject: RE: Samba Vs CIFFS On Sat, 27 May 2000 John.Davis(a)netapp.com wrote: > Netapp glues the MS smb(cifs) code into our microkernel at the > protocol level; Samba and other bolt-ons sit above kernel > space as any other user app would and is subject to the > context switching and shufflings that go on in a general purpose > server; this (primarily) is why the Netapp CIFS solution both scales > well and performs well as we add hundreds of users(see our Netbench > results, for example); this is why the solution is not "free" Way back when, about 2-3 years ago, I came into an environment that had Syntax TAS servers doing our CIFS services. It's not free like SaMBa, and SaMBa was a bit faster than TAS, but comparable. Regardless, I had a dozen or so Sun Ultra2 boxes running as many different CIFS servers, which could each support one development build, one NFS development build, and one CIFS development build. It was a pain to keep each of these suckers up to date and running. The Sun server could barely keep up with one NFS and one CIFS client. One upgrade choice was an 8 - 16 processor Sun box, to keep up with running all those TAS or SaMBa servers and NFS. I converted the whole thing over to a single 400 MHz 21164A processor F740 filer. Lock, stock and barrel. And, today, I'm still sane. We needed consolidation and horsepower. WAFL and snapshots and the other features mentioned were just icing on the cake. The microkernel-level CIFS implementation is just so much *faster* than SaMBa, TAS, or anyone else's user-level implementation. A lot of companies will tell you they have NFS and CIFS multi-protocol file sharing. But, if you ask them if they do it "natively," there are only three players we found: NetApp, EMC, and Auspex. My biggest problems today are adding more disk to support even more development sandboxes, and worrying about now managing a bank of filers. "An 800, an 800, my kingdom for an 800-series filer!" 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: Samba Vs CIFFS
by John.Davis＠netapp.com 31 May '00

31 May '00

Many enterprises have tried employing "free" software like Samba and even some vendors like SGI have tried to incorporate it into a "product"; hopefully some of these folks on this list will respond to your request but from working with "some" of these enterprises I can tell you from experience that Samba neither "scales" in the enterprise nor does it perform beyond about 75 clients doing useful work in a medium to large domain structure..it also is not an easy beast to administer( as explained to me be by several admins); it is "free" , however... Netapp glues the MS smb(cifs) code into our microkernel at the protocol level; Samba and other bolt-ons sit above kernel space as any other user app would and is subject to the context switching and shufflings that go on in a general purpose server; this (primarily) is why the Netapp CIFS solution both scales well and performs well as we add hundreds of users(see our Netbench results, for example); this is why the solution is not "free" -----Original Message----- From: Philip Thomas [mailto:thomas@act.sps.mot.com] Sent: Friday, May 26, 2000 11:03 PM To: toasters(a)mathworks.com Subject: Samba Vs CIFFS Hi, Why should some one pay good money to buy CIFFS license from NetApp when apparently the similar functionality is available "free", Samba? I am hoping folks out there, with experience in both products would be willing to share their knowledge as much their internal policy allows. I am specifically looking for pros and cons with respect to (a) performance (what ever than means) (b) scalibility (500+ users) (c) reliability (d) functionality (e) coexistence with Windows Terminal Server (f) 'cost' (not just dollars) (g) administration (h) interaction or lack of it with commercial apps ...any thing else ?? Perhaps this list is biased to CIFFS, by definition of the mailing list. But I have seen folks willing to speak out in the past. [BTW, please don't shoot the messenger:-)] Thanks. Philip Thomas Motorola - DDL-ITG, M/S M360 2200 W. Broadway Rd Mesa, AZ 85202 rxjs80(a)email.sps.mot.com (480) 655-3678 (480) 655-3881 (fax)

2 1

RE: F740 and subnet problems
by Adam.Fox＠netapp.com 31 May '00

31 May '00

If ICMP (ping) traffic can cross subnets, but CIFS traffic can't, I might suspect an access list on a router between those subnets is blocking TCP traffic (or specific TCP ports). You may want to check with your networking folks to make sure that they don't have access lists that are blocking your traffic. Also check your subnet mask and your default gateways to make sure they are working as well. As a last resort, you could try to run a packet trace on the network to see if packets are reaching the filer. Hope this helps. -- Adam Fox NetApp Professional Services, NC adamfox(a)netapp.com -----Original Message----- From: Uros Lampret [mailto:uros.lampret@ourspace.si] Sent: Wednesday, May 31, 2000 1:58 AM To: toasters(a)mathworks.com Subject: F740 and subnet problems Hi! I'm relatively new to this business and I have some problems. I recently installed F740 and everything works joust great. BUT I have some access problems. Filer is installed in subnet 10.0.1.XXX and everybody can see it and use it. But from subnet 10.0.2.XXX or 10.0.10.XXX the filer is not accessible. If I PING form Filer someone to 10.0.10.XXX everything is OK and also if I PING Filer from 10.0.10.XXX - OK. We use CIFS and this is single Domain. Any suggestions? Uros Lampret Our Space d.o.o. Malnarjeva 47 1000 Ljubljana EU - Slovenia

1 0

CIFS Woes
by Gunn, Billy 31 May '00

31 May '00

Is there a file similar to LMHOSTS for the filer. In attempting to implement CIFS after running an initial setup the filer is able to find a domain controller. After stopping and restarting CIFS or after some period of time it becomes unable to find a domain controller in which case the shares are unavailable. NT systems on the same subnet however are able to find a DC with the help of LMHOSTS. There are no DC's on the subnet in question however broadcasts are forwarded. I assume the filer is simply broadcasting for a DC and timing out rather rapidly. TIA, Billy Gunn Interadnet, Inc

1 0

F740 and subnet problems
by Uros Lampret 31 May '00

31 May '00

Hi! I'm relatively new to this business and I have some problems. I recently installed F740 and everything works joust great. BUT I have some access problems. Filer is installed in subnet 10.0.1.XXX and everybody can see it and use it. But from subnet 10.0.2.XXX or 10.0.10.XXX the filer is not accessible. If I PING form Filer someone to 10.0.10.XXX everything is OK and also if I PING Filer from 10.0.10.XXX - OK. We use CIFS and this is single Domain. Any suggestions? Uros Lampret Our Space d.o.o. Malnarjeva 47 1000 Ljubljana EU - Slovenia

2 1

RE: SQL Server 7 with data files on toaster?
by chris.hackett＠netapp.com 31 May '00

31 May '00

Colm, I was in charge of our Vantive database for the Sales department when we switched it over to a Filer for storage. Our internal sales group uses Vantive to track their contacts and leads. This application runs in an NT environment on a Dell Poweredge 6350 with four processors. Vantive itself runs on top of a MS SQL database. We connect all of the data files from this database out to a pair of clustered F760s. This has been in place since last December, and has been working great since. The system has only been down twice since we went to this configuration - both planned. Once to move the equipment to a different subnet, and a second time when we installed the CFO hardware. The Cluster Failover setup provides us with additional security and flexibility. Though, due to the stateful nature of CIFS, a successful failover requires some manual SQL Server intervention, we feel the overall configuration saves us time when we need to run scheduled maintenance on the Vantive Filer and provides us with availability should we experience unscheduled downtime of this Filer. As for the performance, it's great. In fact, I would say that if anything we have seen a slight performance increase due to the fact that many of the searches are repeated across many diffferent users (such as a search for all of the new leads from a particular tradeshow), in addition to all of the other normal reasons. Additionally, we have installed the SnapRestore software onto these machines and have snapshots running every hour. If something were to happen, we can recover from the snapshot taken at the top of the hour, instead of relying on the more manual process (where it has taken multiple hours to restore in the past). As you probably know, when we perform the SnapRestore, it's a simple reboot of the Filer, then we are working again. The value this provides to the Sales team is difficult to measure. If you have any other questions, please let me know. chris > > -----Original Message----- > From: Colm Buckley [mailto:colm@tuatha.org] > Sent: Friday, May 19, 2000 9:38 AM > To: toasters(a)mathworks.com > Subject: SQL Server 7 with data files on toaster? > > > > Hi - > > Another request for success or horror stories; does anyone on the list > have experience with running MS SQL Server 7 using a toaster to store > the data (as described in http://www.netapp.com/tech_library/3042.html > and http://www.netapp.com/tech_library/3044.html)? One possibility > being looked at here is to run a database from something like a Dell > PowerEdge 8450 with the data files on an F720 or F740. I'm > aware of the > advantages the toaster will bring in relation to backup, > snapshots etc, > but I'm interested in how the performance of such a setup > would compare > to, say, attaching a big LVD or Fibre RAID5 directly to the server. > > Any comments? > > Colm > > -- > 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/ > No, my powers can only be used for good. > >

1 0

RE: CIFS permissions
by rob.hawley＠netapp.com 30 May '00

30 May '00

The information below would imply that the user would get by the share permissions. It would still have to also get by the file permissions. You should also confirm the permissions assigned to your user by doing a cifs sessions -s. Here are two articles that will allow you to diagnose security problems: http://now.netapp.com/NOW/knowledge/docs/olio/guides/53_troubleshooting/ts2… l http://now.netapp.com/NOW/knowledge/docs/olio/guides/53_troubleshooting/ts1… l This is a more detailed article on the security model http://now.netapp.com/NOW/knowledge/docs/olio/guides/53_troubleshooting/con… .shtml If the answer does not fall out of the above troubleshooters (or you need access to NOW), please contact customer support. I would suggest having the qtree type, the output of cifs sessions -s, and the reported ACL for the directory you are trying to write to available when you call. You should also report the version of the filer and the version of the client. They should be able to solve this very quickly. -----Original Message----- From: Gunn, Billy [mailto:bgunn@InterAdNet.com] Sent: Tuesday, May 30, 2000 2:20 PM To: 'toasters(a)mathworks.com' Subject: CIFS permissions Hi. I have setup an CIFS share called htdocs. issuing the command 'cifs shares' on the filer returns: htdocs /vol/vol0/media/htdocs INTERADNET\bgunn / Full Control I set up the privaleges so that bgunn would have full control. I can browse the share with no problems however, when attempting to write to the share I get an Access denied error. This share has been mapped to a dirve letter. When viewing the NTFS permissions for the drive it indicates rwx across th board. Is there some other location where permissions are set? Thanks, Billy Gunn Interadnet, Inc.

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