toasters

toasters@lists.teaparty.net

13531 discussions

Backup Help
by Alan R. White 01 Dec '99

01 Dec '99

With the recent slew of mails about backups this question is timely. Problem 1 - we're an ADSM shop. We have all the infrastructure set up to run ADSM but until now we've not had filers. Pretty soon, all things being equal, we're going to start a project which might end up as 5TB of filers over 10 heads, in 5 clusters. At the remote site we're thinking of 5 heads with 1TB each as a snapmirror destination. There's plentiful network bandwidth available between the sites. OK, snapshots will take the bulk of our restore work but there will be the usual 'keep monthly backup for 12 months, yearly for ever (= 7 years in my book)'. Then there's what to do if one breaks (double disk hit / reconstruct failure etc etc - not likely but I'm not betting the bank on it). Checking with the ADSM folks they think they will have a pretty wholesome NetApp integration by end *next* year. Timely as usual (not). So what to do? When and if ADSM native support becomes a reality we should use it if possible so its an interim thing we need. How about backups over CIFS (because I will need the security info - NFS doesn't back it up apparently)? I didn't think local tape drives was an option due to the size of each filer (500GB) and then the number of filers (10). I reckon I'd need 4 drives on each filer and then bodies running round changing them. BTW the business requirement will be to get them a service back soonest in case of outage - snapmirror looks like a last resort because it seems a tad awkward to fail back when the primary is repaired. I've read the NetApp white papers but there doesn't seem to be an ideal solution. All help gratefully received. Regards Alan

1 0

FC-AL: Onboard vs. PCI Adapter Card
by Norman, Paul 01 Dec '99

01 Dec '99

Over the last couple days, there has been some discussion about on-board FC-AL in our filers. This summer, NetApp started shipping filers with an FC-AL adapter card rather than the on-board FC-AL to improve reliability and performance. We did this because we found errors which, though recoverable, potentially effect performance and loop stability. The problem effected a very small fraction, just a few percent, of the installed base. As for the installed base, we've been monitoring Autosupport logs each week to identify Filers that are having these types of errors and arranging for installation of an FC-AL adapter card in cases that warrant it. Our customer support organization is fully aware of this issue and if a customer calls with an FC-AL problem we review their logs for the soft-errors, and arrange for installation of an adapter card where appropriate. Since it effects a very small number of installed systems, it doesn't make sense to upgrade the entire installed base. Leave stable systems lie or if it ain't broke, don't fix it. Most filers will never see this problem and the recoverable errors indicative of the problem are easily identified --- so we are approaching this problem on a case-by-case basis. For more information, or if you have concerns about your system, contact Network Appliance customer support. There will also be more technical information posted on the NOW site before the end of the day tomorrow. Paul Norman, Product Manager Direct: (408) 822-6288 Network Appliance E-Mail: pnorman(a)netapp.com 495 East Java Drive Corp: (408) 822-6000 Sunnyvale, CA 94089 Web: WWW.NetApp.Com

4 3

NOW update?
by Pete Ehlke 01 Dec '99

01 Dec '99

Folks: Six weeks or so ago, there was extensive discussion here about the use of javascript on NOW, and the inability of people in colo cages to get OnTap updates when no craphics capable console is available. NetApp made a fair bit of noise about wanting to address the issue, but since that time, the silence has been deafening. What's happening? -P. -- Pete Ehlke Sys Admin type @ Sony Music entertainment "Once is happenstance, twice is coincidence, three times is enemy action." -- Ian Fleming

1 0

RE: Backup solutions
by Jim Cozens 01 Dec '99

01 Dec '99

We've been using Workstation Solutions Quick Restore to backup an F740(DOT5.2.3) via NDMP to an Exabyte 220 Mammoth library for a couple of months now. I've found it to be an excellent combination. One of the nice things about WS is that if you do find a bug they'll fix it quick. I haven't had any problems with the filer crashing while backing up. Jim Cozens CAD Systems Manager Imagination Technologies Ltd Home Park Estate Kings Langley Herts UK -----Original Message----- From: mgx(a)spruce.lsd.ornl.gov [mailto:mgx@spruce.lsd.ornl.gov] Sent: Tuesday, November 30, 1999 10:30 PM To: lpaton(a)cfa.harvard.edu Cc: toasters(a)mathworks.com Subject: Re: Backup solutions hi lisa ... are you a happy budtool user ;-) i'd really like to here about the demo. a reliable, affordable NDMP backup solution would be great! -- michael On Tue, Nov 30, Lisa Paton wrote: > > Actually Workstation Solutions has an NDMP client too. > They seem to be a bit cheaper than Veritas, but less > scalable for very large installations. For me, that's > fine. Especially considering it's about 1/3 the price. > > I'm demo'ing the Workstation Solutions product next > week and will post the results if folks are interested. > We're also a current Budtool customer. > > Lisa

5 6

RE: Backup solutions
by Jim Cozens 01 Dec '99

01 Dec '99

According to the release notes QR does support 3-way NDMP backup and recovery. -----Original Message----- From: Brian Tao [mailto:taob@risc.org] Sent: Wednesday, December 01, 1999 3:18 PM To: Jim Cozens Cc: 'mgx(a)spruce.lsd.ornl.gov'; lpaton(a)cfa.harvard.edu; toasters(a)mathworks.com Subject: RE: Backup solutions On Wed, 1 Dec 1999, Jim Cozens wrote: > > We've been using Workstation Solutions Quick Restore to backup an > F740(DOT5.2.3) via NDMP to an Exabyte 220 Mammoth library for a > couple of months now. Does QR support 3-way NDMP dumps where the tape library is located on a Solaris host (i.e., does QR come with an ndmpd for Solaris)? Veritas also does 3-way, but only to a tape drive attached to another filer. I need something that can efficiently handle over a dozen filers dumping to a couple of Solaris boxes sharing a single stacker (like an X200 Mammoth2 library or something). -- Brian Tao (BT300, taob(a)risc.org) "Though this be madness, yet there is method in't"

3 2

RE: FTP uploads from the UK
by Sam Schorr 01 Dec '99

01 Dec '99

Don't feel alone...the US ftp site does not handle large core dumps very well either. I am constantly getting "connection closed by remote" while trying to send a core of approx. 730 meg (F760 with gig of memory). I've been "hearing" about an upgrade for months. Maybe their ftp process has "feature creep" so they can't do what has been going on for years by others quite successfully. -----Original Message----- From: Dave Atkin [mailto:dla1@york.ac.uk] Sent: Wednesday, December 01, 1999 1:00 AM To: toasters(a)mathworks.com Subject: FTP uploads from the UK I'm having awful trouble uploading core dumps these days from the UK. Very often it goes slowly and then the ftp times out with a "broken pipe". Access to everwhere else (including the Netapp web site) is quite fast so I don't think our UK academic network is to blame. At the moment the mean time between crashes on one of our 740s is less than the mean time to get an upload to work!! Is there any chance that Netapp could look at this or alternatively perhaps provide a European ftp site? Or maybe a web-based upload facility might be provided as an alternative to ftp (dunno if that would be more reliable or not..). 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

SnapMirror
by Gilles TOURPE 01 Dec '99

01 Dec '99

Hello, Get a question regarding SnapMirror ... Did someone is using it to replicate 2 filers ( na1, na2 ) to 1 guy on a remote site ( nahots ). The idea is to backup all datas ( no REAL TIME ) using the snapMirror software. Do you know if it integrates reporting functions ? Volumes transfered over Time it took, Errors, What are the way to get those reports ( MAIL, update HTML pages on the FilerView ... ). Well, basically, what I like to get is a nice successful story :-) Thanx Gilles ------------------------------------------------------------ Gilles TOURPE - System and Network Administrator APS BNP ARBITRAGE - Salle des marches ACTIONS - PARIS - France Phone : (33)-1-40-14-24-03 e-mail : gilles(a)bnpcn.com

2 1

RE: FTP uploads from the UK
by Garrett Burke 01 Dec '99

01 Dec '99

Hi Dave, I was told by Netapp about 2 months ago that they were upgrading their pipe and server. The SE I was dealing with found it a complete pain as well. Hopefully it will happen sooner rather than later. GB > -----Original Message----- > From: Dave Atkin [SMTP:dla1@york.ac.uk] > Sent: Wednesday, December 01, 1999 9:00 AM > To: toasters(a)mathworks.com > Subject: FTP uploads from the UK > > I'm having awful trouble uploading core dumps these days from the UK. > Very often it goes slowly and then the ftp times out with a "broken > pipe". Access to everwhere else (including the Netapp web site) is quite > fast so I don't think our UK academic network is to blame. > ------------------------------------------------------ ******************************************************************* This email and any files transmitted with it are confidential and are solely for the use of the individual or organisation to whom they are addressed. If you have received this mail in error please notify the system administrator at +353 1 6399700 or by email to hostmaster(a)msc.ie This email message has been swept for computer viruses. Managed Solutions Corporation, Enterprise Customer Relationship Management, Workflow and Contract Administration. Tel: 353 1 639 9700 Fax: 353 1 639 9701 Don't forget to visit our website at http://www.msc.ie ********************************************************************

1 0

FTP uploads from the UK
by Dave Atkin 01 Dec '99

01 Dec '99

I'm having awful trouble uploading core dumps these days from the UK. Very often it goes slowly and then the ftp times out with a "broken pipe". Access to everwhere else (including the Netapp web site) is quite fast so I don't think our UK academic network is to blame. At the moment the mean time between crashes on one of our 740s is less than the mean time to get an upload to work!! Is there any chance that Netapp could look at this or alternatively perhaps provide a European ftp site? Or maybe a web-based upload facility might be provided as an alternative to ftp (dunno if that would be more reliable or not..). 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

Backup solutions
by Paul Taylor 01 Dec '99

01 Dec '99

Hi. We have two netapps, an f630 and an f760. We are currently using Budtool to back up everything, but we are less than pleased with performance, and the fact that the product is getting EOL'd by Leggato. What is everyone's opinion on what they use for backups? We are considering Workstation Solutions, and Legatto, among others. Thanks, Paul Taylor Sr. Systems Engineer Connectria 215-841-5540

4 4

Y2k test on Filer F720 with OnTap 5.2.2
by Amy Cheng 01 Dec '99

01 Dec '99

I plan to change date to December 31th 1999 on our filer F720 with ONTAP 5.2.2 and see whether it is smoothly rollover to Year 2000 or not. Is there anybody have test it? I would like get some experience from you. Thank you in advance!!! Best Regards Amy

3 2

Sage AU Paper
by Graydon Dodson 30 Nov '99

30 Nov '99

I have heard that Rex Walkers (of NetApp) presented a paper at a "SAGE AU" meeting in Australia discussing where NetApp is going with metadata (NT Registry, options, etc.) issues. Anyone know where the paper can be found? I have been unable to locate it. Thanks. Graydon Dodson grdodson(a)lexmark.com Lexmark International Inc.

1 0

Re: Backup solutions
by Mark D Fowle 30 Nov '99

30 Nov '99

With the NFS mount we are seeing 8-14 MB/s transfer rate. I could never get NDMP to work the way I wanted it too -- This is how we ended up with the solution we did. The dump data we get from the netapps (Done nightly) is used only if we have a disaster -- else all other data is either reovered from the tape backups (or from the snapshot data) We keep about 3 weeks worth of snapshots (8 daily, nightly, weekly) -- then rotate it again- so far this has worked pretty nicely now for about a year an a half --- Mark mgx(a)spruce.lsd.ornl.gov on 11/30/99 05:09:00 PM To: Fowle_Mark_D@cat.com@INTERNET cc: toasters@mathworks.com@INTERNET (bcc: Mark D. Fowle/0V/Caterpillar) Subject: Re: Backup solutions Retain Until: 12/30/99 Retention Category: G90 - Information and Reports mark ... what sort of backup rate do you get over nfs? to my single DLT7000 Q2.15 i regularly get 4-4.5MB/s (if its not crashed :-P ) backing up two F520's via NDMP. -- michael On Tue, Nov 30, Mark D Fowle wrote: > We use an nfs mount to each root of our F720 and F740 from our backup server > and just backup from that using our backup software (Alexandria) - We use a > Breece-Hill Q2.15 (with 2 DLT 7000's) to backup > the netapps, it works ok for us. > > Mark Fowle > Unix/Oracle/Metaphase Administration > Cateripllar BCP > Cary, NC

1 0

Re: Backup solutions
by Graham C. Knight 30 Nov '99

30 Nov '99

This is probably a good time to mention the archives. This topic goes around quite often and lots of good information can be found in the archives: http://teaparty.mathworks.com:1999/toasters/ Graham[using veritas with very good results]

1 0

Re: Backup solutions
by mgx＠spruce.lsd.ornl.gov 30 Nov '99

30 Nov '99

mark ... what sort of backup rate do you get over nfs? to my single DLT7000 Q2.15 i regularly get 4-4.5MB/s (if its not crashed :-P ) backing up two F520's via NDMP. -- michael On Tue, Nov 30, Mark D Fowle wrote: > We use an nfs mount to each root of our F720 and F740 from our backup server > and just backup from that using our backup software (Alexandria) - We use a > Breece-Hill Q2.15 (with 2 DLT 7000's) to backup > the netapps, it works ok for us. > > Mark Fowle > Unix/Oracle/Metaphase Administration > Cateripllar BCP > Cary, NC

1 0

RE: Backup solutions
by Dani Tal 30 Nov '99

30 Nov '99

We use legato networker. We backup up the snapshots. There is also new tool called "Legato NetWorker ClientPak for Network Appliance" Check with legato or write to me to get the legato presentation. Dani Tal Manager Information Systems Siemens Data Communication ltd. Tel. +972-4-9953200 X 0403 FAX. +972-4-9888097 Mobile +972-53797814 -----Original Message----- From: mgx(a)spruce.lsd.ornl.gov [SMTP:mgx@spruce.lsd.ornl.gov] Sent: Tue, 30 November, 1999 21:01 To: Paul Taylor Cc: toasters(a)mathworks.com; dhug(a)connectria.com Subject: Re: Backup solutions good question. i'm in the same boat (two F520's, crashing all the time due too ontap/budtool bad interactions). if you use ndmp for backups, my understanding is that veritas netbackup is the only option. -- michael On Tue, Nov 30, Paul Taylor wrote: > > Hi. We have two netapps, an f630 and an f760. We are currently using > Budtool to back up everything, but we are less than pleased with > performance, and the fact that the product is getting EOL'd by Leggato. > What is everyone's opinion on what they use for backups? We are > considering Workstation Solutions, and Legatto, among others. Thanks, >

1 0

Re: Backup solutions
by Mark D Fowle 30 Nov '99

30 Nov '99

We use an nfs mount to each root of our F720 and F740 from our backup server and just backup from that using our backup software (Alexandria) - We use a Breece-Hill Q2.15 (with 2 DLT 7000's) to backup the netapps, it works ok for us. Mark Fowle Unix/Oracle/Metaphase Administration Cateripllar BCP Cary, NC mgx(a)spruce.lsd.ornl.gov on 11/30/99 03:36:00 PM To: ptaylor@connectria.com@INTERNET cc: toasters@mathworks.com@INTERNET dhug@connectria.com@INTERNET (bcc: Mark D. Fowle/0V/Caterpillar) Subject: Re: Backup solutions Retain Until: 12/30/99 Retention Category: G90 - Information and Reports good question. i'm in the same boat (two F520's, crashing all the time due too ontap/budtool bad interactions). if you use ndmp for backups, my understanding is that veritas netbackup is the only option. -- michael On Tue, Nov 30, Paul Taylor wrote: > > Hi. We have two netapps, an f630 and an f760. We are currently using > Budtool to back up everything, but we are less than pleased with > performance, and the fact that the product is getting EOL'd by Leggato. > What is everyone's opinion on what they use for backups? We are > considering Workstation Solutions, and Legatto, among others. Thanks, >

1 0

ip and e0 problem
by Patrick Day 30 Nov '99

30 Nov '99

i have two 740's (dot 5.2.3) as a database file server setup with an NT4 box for Lotus Notes. on the nt box, there are two nic's. one is connected to the network and the other is cross-connected to the filer's e0 nic. whenever we reboot the filer, the e0 card does not accept the 192.168.10.20 address assigned to it in the RC file. once the filer is booted, however, i can copy the line from the RC file and paste it into a telnet session and it works. i have tried several things, such as changing the order (assigning other nic ports first) and even breaking the command down into several small functions verses one long command. nothing seems to get it to work from a boot/reboot. rc file entries: ifconfig e0 192.168.10.20 mediatype 100tx `hostname`-e0 netmask 255.255.255.0 -wins ifconfig e3a 140.250.110.23 mediatype 100tx-fd `hostname`-e3a netmask 255.255.255.0 This presents a major problem for the Notes server, because if for some reason filer is rebooted, the notes server (which is not that "robust") would fail and start bouncing all the mail going to it. any help on this would be appreciated. --patrick day Bayer Corp. Clayton, NC

1 0

Re: Y2k test on Filer F720 with OnTap 5.2.2
by Patrick Day 30 Nov '99

30 Nov '99

Hi, we have extensively tested the 5.2.2p1 (which i am sure is as compliant as 5.2.2) on several 740's and found no problems with the date rollover. There is an upper limit around 2037 that the filer can't handle correctly. it has passed all the major date tests such as 2/29/2000, 10/10/2000, 1/1/2001, etc... you shouldn't have any problems with the rollover. --patrick day bayer corp. mathworks owner-toasters <owner-toasters(a)mathworks.com> on 11/30/99 07:45:57 AM To: "DDA.RFC-822=toasters(a)mathworks.com/P=Internet/A= /C=us"@X400 cc: Subject: Y2k test on Filer F720 with OnTap 5.2.2 I plan to change date to December 31th 1999 on our filer F720 with ONTAP 5.2.2 and see whether it is smoothly rollover to Year 2000 or not. Is there anybody have test it? I would like get some experience from you. Thank you in advance!!! Best Regards Amy

1 0

RE: Problems with file dates
by Plawner, Marom 30 Nov '99

30 Nov '99

I don't know if there is any relation at all, but I was having a problem in the CIFS environment. If I used the resource kit's robocopy, when I copied files over, all the times looked right. Robocopy is supposed to copy only newer files; so when I used robocopy again on the same directory, I expected only changed files to update... but the weird thing was that it said some files were OLDER (very odd), some were NEWER (odd since they didn't change), etc. I spoke with a friend of mine who also has a file and experience the same problems. More dependant on robocopy, my friend did some serious investigation and found that the problem was that the filer doesn't work properly if it isn't set to UTC. (We use UTC +5.) He changed the time zone and the problems disappeared. I don't depend on robocopy, so I haven't yet done this. I don't know if it helps, but maybe this is related to the problem. Marom Plawner Systems Group Manager Comverse Network Systems -----Original Message----- From: David H. Brierley [mailto:dhb@ssd.ray.com] Sent: Monday, November 29, 1999 11:25 PM To: Bruce Sterling Woodcock Cc: Dave Atkin; toasters(a)mathworks.com Subject: Re: Problems with file dates On Thu, 25 Nov 1999, Bruce Sterling Woodcock wrote: > Regardless of whether or not the dates are being set due to a bug or > improper setup > with the clients or even with the filer, Solaris should not be choking. The > correct > solution is to get Sun to issue a real working patch, and not to use Solaris > 7 in the > meantime. The problem is not limited to Solaris 7. I encountered the same problem on one of my Solaris 2.5.1 boxes. I was trying to remove an entire directory and it simply refused to remove one particular file. Since it was just one file I just pushed the whole issue aside until I could get back to it later. The next day I tried the remove again and this time it worked but then I realized I was not logged in on the Solaris machine this time but instead I was using on of our older Sunos 4.1.4 machines. -- David H. Brierley Raytheon Systems Company - Portsmouth RI Facility Work: dhb(a)ssd.ray.com Home: dave(a)galaxia.com

1 0

Problems with file dates
by Dave Atkin 29 Nov '99

29 Nov '99

We are finding an increasing number of user files (several thousand files at present) with bizarre dates, eg -rwx--x--x 1 rfx3 ug93 49 Dec 27 1931 /usr/fsa/ug93/rfx3/letter-home -rwx--x--x 1 socx12 socs 460 Jul 22 1948 /usr/fsa/extn/socx12/nov2nd The dates display mainly in the 1930s although there are a few around the year 2009! These files seem to have been created over CIFS from PCs running Windows 95. It becomes a real problem if you run Solaris 7 which seems to have numerous bugs in the area of NFS file dates. It won't read, write or delete these files - it says "Value too large for user buffer". It's all related to 64-bit vs 32-bit Solaris and whether dates are signed or unsigned. SGI systems and older Solaris systems don't have the problem. Having talked to Sun I tried patching the kernel variable nfs_32_time_ok to be 0xffffffff which appears to fix it, except it breaks other things like the utime system call. The best option at present seem to be to run a weekly script on a non-solaris 7 system to find the bad files and "touch" them. Any ideas anyone? ------------------------------------------------------ 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 ------------------------------------------------------

4 3

dump formats incompat. between 4.x and 5x. ?
by Dennis Chandler 29 Nov '99

29 Nov '99

I've been trying to load older dump tapes (ontap 4.3.3) to our new filer (ontap 5.2.3) and nothing is working. Solaris ufsrestore complains that the tapes aren't in dump format and attempts to load with filer dump fails miserably. Why wouldn't NetApp make these formats compatible? Dennis

2 1

Roaming profiles on toaster?
by Colm Buckley 29 Nov '99

29 Nov '99

Folks - I'm trying to track down a problem here, and I'm wondering if anyone else in this forum has encountered something like the following: We have a large number of students whose home directories are stored on a NetApp F720 called "swift". Using Windows NT clients, these are generally mapped as the user's home drive at logon (everything's in a Windows NT domain). For example, user "joesmith" might have a home directory set to "\\toaster\joesmith" (mapped to the U: drive at logon). So far so crunchy. However, the users' NT roaming profiles are also stored on the filer - for "joesmith", his profile is at "\\toaster\joesmith\.NTProfile" and so on. Everything seems to work okay 95% of the time, except I have noticed that users' profiles become corrupted with puzzling frequency - more than I can attribute to things like quota overflows or turning the computers off in mid-logout (yes, we get those too). Could it be a problem with the interaction between an NT client and the filer? Does anyone else have a setup similar to this? Noticed any problems? Colm (of course, it could just be more brain-death in NT) -- Colm Buckley B.A. B.F. # colm(a)tuatha.org colm.buckley(a)cs.tcd.ie Department of Computer Science # +353 87 2469146 # whois cb3765 Trinity College, Dublin 2, Ireland. # http://www.tuatha.org/~colm/ If at first you don't succeed, to hell with it.

1 0

Re: User Quotas in CIFS Environment
by Luke Mewburn 28 Nov '99

28 Nov '99

"Plawner, Marom" writes: > One other problem: > (Related but not completely related, so I deleted the original message) > When a user@tree quota is assigned, each user sees the whole volume's disk > space, not their quota limit and their current disk usage. Anyone noticed > this problem or better yet, knows of a solution? I've seen this recently too. However, I was sure that in the past I've seen the filers do the right thing. Maybe something got broken, but like you, I'd expect that the user should see the size of the share as the size of their quota, not the total share size. Or at least have it an option that can be enabled... (We've been using user@tree quotas and CIFS for a couple of years now, and I've seen various bits of behaviour change between releases...)

1 0

RE: User Quotas in CIFS Environment
by Plawner, Marom 28 Nov '99

28 Nov '99

One other problem: (Related but not completely related, so I deleted the original message) When a user@tree quota is assigned, each user sees the whole volume's disk space, not their quota limit and their current disk usage. Anyone noticed this problem or better yet, knows of a solution? Thanks, Marom Plawner ITI Systems Group Manager Comverse Network Systems

1 0

Jump to page:

2026

2025

2024

2023

2022

2021

2020

2019

2018

2017

2016

2015

2014

2013

2012

2011

2010

2009

2008

2007

2006

2005

2004

2003

2002

2001

2000

1999

1998

1997

toasters