toasters

toasters@lists.teaparty.net

13515 discussions

RE: Source for a non-root quota program?
by Thompson, Tim 20 Oct '99

20 Oct '99

> So what we want is a program (Solaris preferred, Linux or NT > might be acceptable) that will allow any user to check the > total usage for any other user. >... > Does NetApp have an official program that does this? > Possibly a program that someone has contributed? In the "Tools & Utilities" section of the NOW (http://now.netapp.com) site, in the "Toolshed" area, you'll find a "quota_tools" entry. That package contains several utilities for quotas, including a perl script named netapp_quota_report that will talk to a NetApp Filer via rsh, get a quota report, and construct an HTML web page. You can specify a quota limit, and people over that limit will be highlighted in red. *NOTE* - Be sure to use the "-ontap 5" option to netapp_quota_report, if you are using ONTAP 5.0 or higher. The quota_tools package also contains some scripts for sending mail when quotas are exceded. The package was written by Ed Finch (efinch(a)vais.net). ...Tim Thompson...Network Appliance, Inc...tjt(a)netapp.com...

2 1

Re: Easiest way to migrate data off of Filer
by sirbruce＠ix.netcom.com 20 Oct '99

20 Oct '99

On 10/19/99 12:52:29 you wrote: > >Hi, > >We're running an F540 with Ontap 5.3.2D3, setup for NFS and CIFS services. Most >(~95%) of our NFS clients are Solaris 2.6 machines. I would like to know if >there is an easy way to migrate home-dir data off of the filer and onto a Sun >server (Enterprise 450 with Solaris 2.6). If you're storing CIFS data, you'll of course lose it. Dump and restore should still work, if you want to do that; you can even do it by rsh over the network rather than go through a tape. >Doing a plain 'cp' tends to skip over .* files and is a bit tricky about >retaining permissions. We also have a script 'copy_dir' that uses the copy_io >command, but it takes an extraordinarily long time. We're talking a 6 Gb home >directory taking more than 12 hours to copy (over a 100 Mbs connection, too). I >am sure that there is no problems with the network, and I suspect that the >copy_io is getting hung up trying to copy over each version of the .snapshot >directories. Invariably, I will get a stale NFS error and eventually time out. Typically, I like to cd to the directory in question and use: find . -print | cpio -pdumv /destination/directory But this will choke on filenames with spaces in them. >Is there any way getting past the .snapshot directories during copies? I >imagine that other Solaris admins must have run into this problem before. The .snapshot is visible (in NFS) only in the topmost directory. You can get around it by copying each subdirectory from the root mountpoint individiaully, or using a find option to prune .snapshot (check the man page). Bruce

2 1

Re: Easiest way to migrate data off of Filer
by dnb＠ccs.neu.edu 20 Oct '99

20 Oct '99

I would think the rsync program (which is what we used to take our data off Sun and Auspex boxen and put it *on* our filer) would be a good choice. We also use it daily to backup local data from our main data servers on to our netapp prior to moving the data to tape. It is a really good tool. Rsync has options to exclude certain files/dirs which I suspect could easily be used to tell to ignore snapshots (though I would tend towards hiding them as another person suggested). Rsync can be found at: <http://samba.anu.edu.au/rsync/>. Peace, dNb

2 1

Re: Easiest way to migrate data off of Filer
by Michael Salmon 20 Oct '99

20 Oct '99

+----- On Tue, 19 Oct 1999 12:52:29 PDT, Yicheng Li-R37424 writes: | Hi, | | We're running an F540 with Ontap 5.3.2D3, setup for NFS and CIFS | services. Most (~95%) of our NFS clients are Solaris 2.6 machines. I | would like to know if there is an easy way to migrate home-dir data off | of the filer and onto a Sun server (Enterprise 450 with Solaris 2.6). | | Doing a plain 'cp' tends to skip over .* files and is a bit tricky about | retaining permissions. We also have a script 'copy_dir' that uses the | copy_io command, but it takes an extraordinarily long time. We're | talking a 6 Gb home directory taking more than 12 hours to copy (over a | 100 Mbs connection, too). I am sure that there is no problems with the | network, and I suspect that the copy_io is getting hung up trying to | copy over each version of the .snapshot directories. Invariably, I will | get a stale NFS error and eventually time out. You can use dump/restore (the netapp dump has an additional pass but I believe that they play happily together) or NFS mount the home directory and use tar, cpio, rdist or rsysnc. The latter 2 have the advantage that you can do most of the copying before hand. | Is there any way getting past the .snapshot directories during copies? | I imagine that other Solaris admins must have run into this problem | before. I don't think that dump includes the snapshots, for the other methods you will need to exclude them, if you mount the directory containing the home directories then it's pretty easy. /Michael

1 0

RE: "ypset" needs added to common command set
by Hackworth, Brian 19 Oct '99

19 Oct '99

: I would like to see the "ypset" command added In a forthcoming update release for 5.3, there is a new option to allow you to specify the list of NIS servers the filer should try to use (or "*" to use the old broadcast method). This obviates most of the need for ypset. In the next major functionality release, the family of yp commands are moved out of "rc_toggle_basic" into the main OnTap command set. As an engineer, I'm not allowed to suggest any dates for these releases. - Brian Hackworth

1 0

Re: "ypset" needs added to common command set
by Devi Nagaraj 19 Oct '99

19 Oct '99

Hi, NIS has been revamped in Data ONTAP 5.3.3 ( which is a special release available upon request). This supports multiple preferred NIS servers. All these are available in the soon to be released Data ONTAP 5.3.4. Thanks, -Devi At 03:58 PM 10/19/99 -0500, sirbruce(a)ix.netcom.com wrote: >On 10/19/99 15:13:26 you wrote: >> >>I would like to see the "ypset" command added to the common Data Ontap >>command >>set. We have several Netapps where we need to use the "ypset" command but in >>order to run the command and make it permanent, you have to go into >>rc_toggle_basic mode. For a permanent fix we have to add "rc_toggle_basic", >>"ypset nisserver", "rc_toggle_basic" to the rc file. Is there any plans to >>make "ypset" part of the common Data Ontap command set? > >There has been an open bug/RFE on this since before NIS was even >released. :) > >There was some talk recently on the list about them revising their >approach to some of these commands but I didn't see a firm date set. > >Bruce > > > >

1 0

Re: mailboxes on toaster
by tkaczma＠gryf.net 19 Oct '99

19 Oct '99

On Tue, 19 Oct 1999, Jim McCoy wrote: > >> 2) Inode cost should not be overlooked. You get at most 32 million per > >> volume, so if you have a lot of mailboxes a maildir or other > >> one-file-per-message scheme will chew through your inode limit long > before > >> you run out of disk space on that volume. > > > >BTW, how did you arrive at that number? > > > Experimentally and asking netapp. It may be that they have increased the > max value for maxfiles a while back and I did not notice, but at least up to > the early 5.1.2 series 32 million was the most inodes per volume allowed (we > ran into this the hard way when trying to use a filer to keep track of user > database entries for MyYahoo; it was a very painful experience...) That is interesting indeed. I couldn't find a mention of this on NOW or NetApp's main site. Perhaps it's there and I simply didn't use the right keywords in the search. As I understand it, modern NetApps use 32-bit inode numbers. This gives us 2^32 inodes. 32 million is roughly 2^25 that is 2^7 times less than alegedly supported by the inode numbers. 32 million is a far cry from roughly 4.3 billion supported by 32-bit addressing. Furthermore the new NetApp hardware is 64-bit which makes far larger addresses possible. Tom

2 1

Re: "ypset" needs added to common command set
by sirbruce＠ix.netcom.com 19 Oct '99

19 Oct '99

On 10/19/99 15:13:26 you wrote: > >I would like to see the "ypset" command added to the common Data Ontap >command >set. We have several Netapps where we need to use the "ypset" command but in >order to run the command and make it permanent, you have to go into >rc_toggle_basic mode. For a permanent fix we have to add "rc_toggle_basic", >"ypset nisserver", "rc_toggle_basic" to the rc file. Is there any plans to >make "ypset" part of the common Data Ontap command set? There has been an open bug/RFE on this since before NIS was even released. :) There was some talk recently on the list about them revising their approach to some of these commands but I didn't see a firm date set. Bruce

1 0

Easiest way to migrate data off of Filer
by Yicheng Li-R37424 19 Oct '99

19 Oct '99

Hi, We're running an F540 with Ontap 5.3.2D3, setup for NFS and CIFS services. Most (~95%) of our NFS clients are Solaris 2.6 machines. I would like to know if there is an easy way to migrate home-dir data off of the filer and onto a Sun server (Enterprise 450 with Solaris 2.6). Doing a plain 'cp' tends to skip over .* files and is a bit tricky about retaining permissions. We also have a script 'copy_dir' that uses the copy_io command, but it takes an extraordinarily long time. We're talking a 6 Gb home directory taking more than 12 hours to copy (over a 100 Mbs connection, too). I am sure that there is no problems with the network, and I suspect that the copy_io is getting hung up trying to copy over each version of the .snapshot directories. Invariably, I will get a stale NFS error and eventually time out. Is there any way getting past the .snapshot directories during copies? I imagine that other Solaris admins must have run into this problem before. ---------- Yicheng Li (480)413-6636 WISD Engineering Network

2 1

"ypset" needs added to common command set
by Mike Ball 19 Oct '99

19 Oct '99

I would like to see the "ypset" command added to the common Data Ontap command set. We have several Netapps where we need to use the "ypset" command but in order to run the command and make it permanent, you have to go into rc_toggle_basic mode. For a permanent fix we have to add "rc_toggle_basic", "ypset nisserver", "rc_toggle_basic" to the rc file. Is there any plans to make "ypset" part of the common Data Ontap command set? Thank you, Mike

2 1

Re: mailboxes on toaster
by George Kahler 19 Oct '99

19 Oct '99

Greetings... armijo(a)cs.unm.edu writes: > > > > Please include any other suggestions. > > > > ok, > > assuming the toaster is the bottleneck, you may also want to turn off atime > updates, make sure the toaster is homed on each network on which it has > clients, would adding more nvram benefit help? are you running 100tx-fd, or > better? for that matter, is network, cpu, or disk i/o the real > bottleneck? Guys, much appreciate all of your responses to my question regarding maildir and mbx. The filer (520) has been smoking for a year now but us being a university depending on government funding it is hard to get new iron in here. I was looking for a quick and relatively pain-free fix; mbx seemed like a good candidate. The nvram/ram is maxed out at 8/256 and network is on 100/full. Disk shortage is another problem because I can't get the proper Seagate 9 GB SCSI disks to keep the OS happy. (some time ago I was asking those of you that run ST39173 what firmware rev they are using; no response) I am being told now, that a new filer from Dell might be an option at MUCH cheaper price. Q: anyone out there that has experience with Dell filers? are they just reselling the NetApp filers ? Thanks, George ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- George Kahler e-mail: george(a)yorku.ca Sr. Systems Administrator humans: (416) 736-5257 x.22699 Computing Services, York University machines: (416) 736-5830 Ontario, Canada, M3J-1P3

3 2

Re: Legato Networker Clientpak for Netapp filers
by Michael Salmon 19 Oct '99

19 Oct '99

+----- On Tue, 19 Oct 1999 09:38:17 +0200, "Schepers, Jan" writes: | Hello people, | | currently there is a Legato Networker Clientpak available | for Network Appliance Filers. Check: | | http://www-ftp.legato.com/Products/html/clientpak_for_netapps.html | | In our environment the Networker server is running on HP-UX but | Legato claims that it is available for W/NT and Solaris only. | | The first question is whether somebody wants to share experience | with the clientpak? I have recently installed it but I haven't had enough experience yet to send any info to the list. The manual doesn't mention that the backup is started using rsh, not nsrexecd so your hosts.equiv must include the backup server. | Secondly, Networker is a client/server application so did anybody | ever try the C/S combination Netapp/HP-UX rather then Netapp/Solaris? | Did it work? Why not? What were the problems? The server can be whatever you like but you must have a sparc/solaris or intel/nt machine if you want to install the s/w or recover files. I don't think that this s/w in it's current state will convince anyone to buy a toaster. BTW na_recover is not pleasant, I consider it to be at best alpha quality in it's user interface. I think that I should be paid for using this software rather than having to pay for a client license. /Michael

1 0

Legato Networker Clientpak for Netapp filers
by Schepers, Jan 19 Oct '99

19 Oct '99

Hello people, currently there is a Legato Networker Clientpak available for Network Appliance Filers. Check: http://www-ftp.legato.com/Products/html/clientpak_for_netapps.html In our environment the Networker server is running on HP-UX but Legato claims that it is available for W/NT and Solaris only. The first question is whether somebody wants to share experience with the clientpak? Secondly, Networker is a client/server application so did anybody ever try the C/S combination Netapp/HP-UX rather then Netapp/Solaris? Did it work? Why not? What were the problems? The outcome of the above may help convert somebody to NA. TIA - Yann

1 0

RE: now.netapp.com now needs javascript/cookies?
by Graydon Dodson 18 Oct '99

18 Oct '99

I don't want to feed a flame war here, but I agree that NOW access should NOT require java/javascript. GUI browsers aren't the only tools used to access this site, Some of us automate, (one of the major advantages of a CLI) and have perl scripts for pulling info from the site. Cookies complicate these programs, java/javascript makes them unworkable. > Michael Ryan wrote: > >a toaster tidbit: NOW uses cookies not only to manage Session state in IIS but >also to maintain Authentication and Authorization across our newly expanded >backend. That's why the Cookies have domain ".netapp.com" and not >"now.netapp.com." Using cookies for authentication/authorization is a bad idea. The NOW site is basically insecure to start with (no SSL, all authentication info sent in the clear). The only value the cookies have is to avoid presenting multiple login challenges to the user as they move from server to server. But this can lower security even further because a "cracker" may not need to guess a username:password, just a currently valid cookie. P.S. I don't care what you do with the corporate site (www.netapp.com) but for us folks who pay for the support site, it would be nice if "easy to use" was a priority. My $0.02 Graydon Dodson grdodson(a)lexmark.com Lexmark International Inc.

1 0

RE: now.netapp.com now needs javascript/cookies?
by sirbruce＠ix.netcom.com 18 Oct '99

18 Oct '99

On 10/18/99 10:59:17 you wrote: >that said, IMHO, i think it's key for NTAP to review and >architect, again, how NOW should handle general interactions with modern text >browsers (including the absence of javascript). Why review and architect *again*? Surely these issues were forseeable before, and yet obviously you didn't care. Did you even bother to *ask* the customer base and research this before hand? No. So either admit that you guys made a mistake, or stop paying lipservice. BTW, while you are rearchitecting, rip out IIS. You will be better off in the long run. Bruce

1 0

RE: now.netapp.com now needs javascript/cookies?
by Ryan, Michael 18 Oct '99

18 Oct '99

a toaster tidbit: NOW uses cookies not only to manage Session state in IIS but also to maintain Authentication and Authorization across our newly expanded backend. That's why the Cookies have domain ".netapp.com" and not "now.netapp.com." i hear the input about lynx and the ability to script. while modern lynx supports cookies -- e.g. release 2.8.1rel.2 libwww-FM 2.14, not all installations do. that said, IMHO, i think it's key for NTAP to review and architect, again, how NOW should handle general interactions with modern text browsers (including the absence of javascript). thanks for the feedback. //michael -----Original Message----- From: Pete Ehlke [mailto:pde@listserv.music.sony.com] Sent: Sunday, October 17, 1999 6:41 PM To: Luke Mewburn Cc: toasters(a)mathworks.com Subject: Re: now.netapp.com now needs javascript/cookies? Luke Mewburn (lukem(a)cs.rmit.edu.au) said, on [991017 20:43]: > Since when has now.netapp.com needed JavaScript & Cookies? > Since someone decided that IIS/ASP was a Good Thing(TM). And, AFAICT, the cookies aren't used at all for the only technical reason for using them, keeping state. I smell the presence of marketroids and user tracking. Pfeh. > I find this unacceptable: > > a) I have JavaScript (& Java) disabled on my GUI browser > because it increases the reliability and security. > > b) My text browser (lynx) doesn't support JavaScript. > As do a fair number of the people who use NOW, I'd wager. > With NetApp's drive to encouraging customers to using now.netapp.com > as a method to lodge support calls, I remind them that until this > point I could do everything (manage my filers, submit calls, look > at bug reports/new releases) via a text based connected *if* I needed > to. > So could I. And if I ever need information from NOW in the middle of the night, while I'm hunched over a dead filer in a colo cage, with nothing but a vt100 at my disposal, I'm going to pitch a pretty serious fit. This is a technical resource, folks, not just another opportunity for your marketing department to count hits. -- Pete Ehlke Sys Admin type @ Sony Music entertainment "Once is happenstance, twice is coincidence, three times is enemy action." -- Ian Fleming

1 0

Re: group issues
by Robert L. Millner 18 Oct '99

18 Oct '99

t> Or you can use different group names with the same gid and everything will t> work fine. This is what we do. ;) We use NIS for everything. The degeneracy state of group.bygid map should be causing you subtle problems somewhere. The 1k limit is inherent in the NDBM code that NIS relies on. You can change this limit and recompile if you have access to the source for libc/ypbind/ypserv/ndbm on ALL platforms you support but that is a major pain in the ass. Is netapp planning to support LDAP based access to passwd, group, etc... at some point[1]? Solaris and Linux have been able to do this for a while and RedHat 6.1 even comes with the packages. It doesn't suffer that limit and purports to perform better[2]. Rob 1. I realize that this would be an un-official word on the toasters list. 2. I have not tested this myself yet. The traditional NIS server is single threaded and really slow. LDAP parsing and record searching is a more expensive process than a simple NDBM lookup but the server should perform better against multiple clients.

3 2

now.netapp.com now needs javascript/cookies?
by Luke Mewburn 18 Oct '99

18 Oct '99

Since when has now.netapp.com needed JavaScript & Cookies? I find this unacceptable: a) I have JavaScript (& Java) disabled on my GUI browser because it increases the reliability and security. b) My text browser (lynx) doesn't support JavaScript. With NetApp's drive to encouraging customers to using now.netapp.com as a method to lodge support calls, I remind them that until this point I could do everything (manage my filers, submit calls, look at bug reports/new releases) via a text based connected *if* I needed to. Next thing we know the initial release of new features will only be available via Windows and/or Web based GUI interfaces. Memo to NetApp: if you do this, you will lose customers. Luke. (Afraid of the slippery slope to brain damaged interfaces because of PC magazine perceptions that filers ``need'' a GUI..)

10 9

Re: group issues
by sirbruce＠ix.netcom.com 18 Oct '99

18 Oct '99

On 10/15/99 21:50:34 you wrote: > > >Or you can use different group names with the same gid and everything will >work fine. This is what we do. ;) We use NIS for everything. No, you can't. Been there, done that; it won't work for everything, and you will eventually run into NIS trouble (see other message). The best thing to do is live with the 16 group limit until a new standard version of NFS supports access lists, or wait for LDAP to become more widely adopted. I think it *is* on Netapp's agenda, but most vendors are slow to adopt it. Bruce

2 1

Re: now.netapp.com now needs javascript/cookies?
by sthaug＠nethelp.no 18 Oct '99

18 Oct '99

> CLI will be out in the next few years, no matters where your nostalgia goes. As I've said before (about Wellfleet/Bay/Nortel routers): Having a GUI is fine. Having a GUI *only* is terrible. Some of us swear by command line interfaces. They enable you to use any kind of terminal, and to work from home or over a slow dialup line. Yes, clearly, the use of GUIs is increasing. However, for us, a product which offers management via a GUI only starts off with a significant disadvantage (or disincentive for purchase, if you wish). Steinar Haug, Nethelp consulting, sthaug(a)nethelp.no

1 0

group issues
by mcbride2＠us.ibm.com 16 Oct '99

16 Oct '99

I am having an issue regarding the number of groups and, the numbers of users per group at our site. We have 3 toasters running 5.2.1P2 being administered by a solaris 2.5.1 server. We have about 75 unix style qtrees for both NFS and CIFS protocols. I have a requirement that several users need to be in more than 16 groups. I believe modifying the Solaris kernel will not only slow down the access, but may present problems on the filer. Also, I require to have more than 1024 characters needed per group entry. I have tried creating sub-groups and a master group within the group file(see below) - I cannot get this to work. Maybe I need to upgrade my Solaris NIS server? example: project1:*:100:usera,userb... project2:*:101:usery,userz mstproject:*:102:project1,project2 I would think someone has encountered this problem before. I would appreciate any feedback regarding these issues. Mike McBride IBM Global Services Unix and NT Server Support mcbride2(a)us.ibm.com (760) 634-6239

3 2

RE: Model 1400 and Y2K
by Norman, Paul 16 Oct '99

16 Oct '99

Graham, Jeff is incorrect. The information on the NOW web site is correct. FAServers, including the 1400, can not run 5.x code line of Data ONTAP. The NetApp Y2K statement is available on the web: http://www.netapp.com/y2k.html It includes a section on FAServers: FAServer® models 400, 450, 1300, and 1400 have not been tested for Y2K compliance. All of these models ceased production in October 1995 and support in April 1998. If you have one of these models, contact your Network Appliance Sales Representative or the Installed Base Group to purchase an upgrade to current filer products. The Y2K statement on the web also includes my name as the corporate contact for Y2K queries. So please feel free to e-mail/call me if you need further clarification. 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 > -----Original Message----- > From: Jeff Sloan [mailto:jeffs@netapp.com] > Sent: Friday, October 15, 1999 11:50 AM > To: 'Graham C. Knight'; toasters(a)mathworks.com > Subject: RE: Model 1400 and Y2K > > > The highest OS the FAServer 1400/450 can run is 5.1D3, and only with a > little tweaking. There is currently no OS release that makes > the 1400 Y2K > compliant. > > Jeff Sloan > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: owner-dl-toasters(a)netapp.com > > [mailto:owner-dl-toasters@netapp.com]On Behalf Of Graham C. Knight > > Sent: Friday, October 15, 1999 11:26 AM > > To: toasters(a)mathworks.com > > Subject: Model 1400 and Y2K > > > > > > > > Does anyone know if a model 1400 > > can be made Y2K compliant? The NOW > > website does not include this model > > in it's list of systems that can run 5.x > > > > Thx, > > Graham > > >

1 0

mailboxes on toaster
by George Kahler 15 Oct '99

15 Oct '99

Hey folks, I'm looking for information that would help us alleviate a bottleneck with mailboxes and home directories on toaster(s). Yah, we still run sendmail and our inboxes are in the old Unix style format (one file per user, multiple messages per file). I heard some of you mention Maildir and I also came across information on mbx format. It doesn't look like I would have to do much to switch over to mbx vs. Maildir. Q: Will mbx buy me performance on the toaster ? Q: Is Maildir a better choice ? Please include any other suggestions. Thanks, George ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- George Kahler e-mail: george(a)yorku.ca Systems Administrator humans: (416) 736-5257 x.22699 Computing Services, York University machines: (416) 736-5830 Ontario, Canada, M3J-1P3

5 5

SUMMARY:Impact of adding disk to filer
by Frank Smith 15 Oct '99

15 Oct '99

Just in case anyone was curious, the consensus was that it should have little or no impact to add a disk to a volume, and that is the way it actually turned out. Physically adding the drive to the shelf froze it for 10-15 seconds, prompting my initial concern and question. The 'vol add vol0 1' command took upwards of 5 minutes to zero the disk, but the actual increase in volume size was instantaneous after the zeroing completed. There was no noticeable increase in CPU or NFS ops during the zeroing or addition (although our traffic is rather bursty in nature, but I did not see any sudden big numbers in CPU or ops). -- Frank Smith fsmith(a)hoovers.com Systems Administrator Voice: 512-374-4673 Hoover's Online Fax: 512-374-4501

1 0

Model 1400 and Y2K
by Graham C. Knight 15 Oct '99

15 Oct '99

Does anyone know if a model 1400 can be made Y2K compliant? The NOW website does not include this model in it's list of systems that can run 5.x Thx, Graham

2 1

Jump to page:

2025

2024

2023

2022

2021

2020

2019

2018

2017

2016

2015

2014

2013

2012

2011

2010

2009

2008

2007

2006

2005

2004

2003

2002

2001

2000

1999

1998

1997

toasters