toasters

toasters@lists.teaparty.net

13531 discussions

Start a nNew thread

version
by Mark D Fowle 27 Sep '99

27 Sep '99

What is the current release rev level of 5.3.2 ? Mark Fowle Unix/Metaphase/Oracle Administration Caterpillar - BCP

1 0

RE: CIFS, UNIX and ACLs
by Norman, Paul 26 Sep '99

26 Sep '99

First thing, all postings to Toasters are "non-official". If you want a sanctioned response to a query send it to support(a)netapp.com. Many folks in NetApp monitor Toasters and try to help out when we can, but its run by customers for the benefit of customers. Its your list, not NetApp's. This is just one aspect of the unique relationship NetApp has with its customers. NetApp may be a small computer company at a $400 Million run rate today, but we have a vision. Our Vision isn't just growing to be a billion dollar company although we certainly intend to do that. The fanatics here at NetApp, myself included, intend to convert the computing world into Appliance Fanatics. So if you own a NetApp box you're part of the team and NetApp folks treat you as such rather than just a customer. NetApp people are not allowed to talk about un-announced products in public forums. We are supposed to have NDAs in place before discussing future offerings. In fact we generally refer to all future releases by code name rather than actual name in case the numbers change. Matt's response was a minor slip of the lip...err finger? NetApp has changed the way we release software. We will not be generating "P" releases which were rollups of "D" patch releases. Instead we intend to issue periodic (quarterly) maintenance releases which rollup most, but not all D patches. The good news is that maintenance releases go through full regression testing. [Wait, let me get into my flame suit] Yes, I know we have released product only to find a serious bug in some feature which customers hit almost instantly after upgrading. I know sometimes it feels like we didn't test the simple things, but believe me, we test the heck out of each release. We've dramatically increased the size of our QA group in the last year. In my 29 years in the computer business I've never seen a sharper, more dedicated bunch of people. We've managed to accumulate the best talent in the Valley, not just in QA but throughout all of the company. We really take it to heart when a release has bugs. We've increased out test coverage and raised the bar on the quality requirements for each successive release. Now I said not all D patches get into a maintenance release. This is why we ask customers running a D patch release to check with CS before, REPEAT BEFORE, they upgrade to any newer release. Some D patches are not considered ideal solutions to a problem and we'd prefer to rewrite things rather than patch them. Rewriting takes longer and it sometimes isn't possible to get it done in time to make the maintenance release. Maintenance releases do not add major new functionality. In general maintenance releases are bug fixes and minor enhancements to existing features. We do allow new hardware options such as a roll of a NIC card or a larger capacity disk, but we wouldn't for instance allow an increase in the maximum capacity a filer can support. Occasionally there are minor improvements, for instance improving the scalability of NIS to handle very large environments or adding vif support to gigabit interfaces, but you won't see dramatic changes like changing the admin interface to eliminate rc_toggle_basic commands although a minor enhancement like history editing could happen. The big changes come in major releases. Bet you are wondering when the heck this Marketing dweeb is actually going to answer the question. So without breaking the rules I think I can say the following. The last maintenance release for 5.3 codeline was early August, therefore the next maintenance release should be out in about three months since that's the new system. So expecting to see something in November would be a reasonable assumption. You could assume it won't have any major new features but may contain new hardware options and perhaps minor enhancements. Being realistic, plans can change, so although you could assume the above will happen, you shouldn't count on it. 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: Eyal Traitel [mailto:r55789@email.sps.mot.com] > Sent: Saturday, September 25, 1999 2:57 AM > To: Matt Day > Cc: toasters(a)mathworks.com > Subject: Re: CIFS, UNIX and ACLs > > > Matt, > > Could you state an non-official due date for 5.3.4 ? > What will we see (fetures) ? > > Eyal. > > > > > Matt Day wrote: > > > Michael van Elst <mlelstv(a)xlink.net> wrote: > > >On Fri, Sep 24, 1999 at 12:33:17PM -0700, Sam Schorr wrote: > > >> We tried to do this but there is a known bug in OnTap > that prevents Samba > > >> from correctly opening a CIFS share on the filers. > > > > > >this is interesting, are there any details about this bug ? > > > > Samba's client isn't officially supported by Netapp, and there is at > > least one bug that fouls up smbclient pretty badly (bug #12563). > > But that bug, and all the other smbclient problems that I'm > aware of, > > will be fixed in the upcoming 5.3.4 release. I just tried smbclient > > 2.0.5a against a filer here running a 5.3.4 test build and every > > command seemed to work. Be aware, though: that's about all the > > smbclient testing we've ever done, so no guarantees. > > > > I think smbfs should be OK, too, but I haven't tried it in > quite a while. >

3 2

RE: Backup formats
by Norman, Paul 25 Sep '99

25 Sep '99

I didn't see a response to this, which is a bit unusual as the FSR guys are pretty quick to talk to folks on Toasters. As long as I'm here let me take a crack at answering. FAServer is the original name of filers before we moved to the Fxxx nomenclature. there were 400, 450, 1300, 1400 and perhaps other FAServers that I don't know about. They were this Darth Vader black pedestal sort of things that looked really cool. I just took a look on the web and couldn't find a picture of one, although if you read some of the older tech reports I am sure you'll see them mentioned. When our new facility is fully built we plan on having a little Filer Museum with samples of all the older machines - hopefully they'll also have a web based tour you can take to see where it all started. 1) The original BudTool used an rsh mechanism to get the filer to kick off a dump/restore. By piping the output back to BudTool, Budtool could effectively get a dump stream routed wherever it liked. Budtool put some header info on the stream, but otherwise it was just dump/restore. So the answer to (1) is its regular dump/restore format, which is a Unix derivative. It will restore to a filer or to a Sun machine with UFS restore but on the Sun you lose all the Windows attributes since Sun doesn't know what they are. Initially when folks just had one filer they needed to know they could get at their data if the filer broke, hence the Sun compatibility. Nowadays people aren't nearly as concerned about being stranded. 2) NDMP actually uses dump/restore as the underlying mechanism to handle the data, so its format is the same as dump/restore with a bit of header info. It tracks inodes which are logical pointers but not pointers to physical disk locations, so you can dump from any filer and restore to any other filer to your heart's content. 3) I think I just answered this. FAServer is like doing an "rsh filer.name dump" piped to a tape. NDMP uses a different protocol to invoke dump and direct the stream elsewhere. I think people are pushing you toward NDMP most new development (features/functions) will be done on NDMP as it is an industry standard and it works on other hardware vendors gear too. 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: Jay Orr [mailto:orrjl@stl.nexen.com] > Sent: Thursday, September 23, 1999 9:44 AM > To: toasters(a)mathworks.com > Subject: Backup formats > > > Hi all! > > I remember a spate of conversation about backup formats. > Currently we have > two F330's now running 5.3.2r1 and have two sun servers > running budtool. > One is at 4.6, the other is 4.6.1. > > I found out as of 4.6.1 that they are no longer supporting the > "dump.FAServer" dump. I have never been able to find > documentation on what > exactly this is (nor could the tech I spoke with at legato), > but that is > how the filers have been backed up. > > Now, if someone could be kind enough to answer a few confused > questions : > > 1) is the FAServer dump like a tar snapshot? One selling > point on other > backup software I've been pitched is that NDMP can only be > restored to the > toaster, it's a non-standard format and can't be restored to > a host then a > toaster. > > 2) Does NDMP save info of where on the hard disk it is? I > thought I read > that somewhere, which means you can't backup one filer then > restore it on > another... > > 3) Can someone give me a comparison of the different methods > of backing up > a toaster? I.e. what is FASserver and NDMP? > > Thanks! > > ----------- > Fujitsu - Nexion, St. Louis, MO > Jay Orr (314) 579-6517 >

1 0

RE: CIFS, UNIX and ACLs
by Mohler, Jeff 25 Sep '99

25 Sep '99

Matt, Could you state an non-official due date for 5.3.4 ? What will we see (fetures) ? Eyal. --- Although Ive not seen anything specific..I put in a note about an X-10 controller to control other "appliances" with. It was not met favorably. *grin* --- Jeff 'ThisIsWhyImNotAProgrammer' Mohler Professional Services Engineer

1 0

Re: CIFS, UNIX and ACLs
by Matt Day 25 Sep '99

25 Sep '99

Michael van Elst <mlelstv(a)xlink.net> wrote: >On Fri, Sep 24, 1999 at 12:33:17PM -0700, Sam Schorr wrote: >> We tried to do this but there is a known bug in OnTap that prevents Samba >> from correctly opening a CIFS share on the filers. > >this is interesting, are there any details about this bug ? Samba's client isn't officially supported by Netapp, and there is at least one bug that fouls up smbclient pretty badly (bug #12563). But that bug, and all the other smbclient problems that I'm aware of, will be fixed in the upcoming 5.3.4 release. I just tried smbclient 2.0.5a against a filer here running a 5.3.4 test build and every command seemed to work. Be aware, though: that's about all the smbclient testing we've ever done, so no guarantees. I think smbfs should be OK, too, but I haven't tried it in quite a while.

3 2

F330 & ONTAP versions
by Reidenbach, Edward 25 Sep '99

25 Sep '99

Jay, Thanks for the inquiry. As a matter of company policy, we do not comment about unannounced products. This said, the following information should give you some understanding of our plans. The F330 was officially EOA'ed on 4/30/98. The end of support (EOS) date for software compatible with the F330 is 2 years from that date or April 30, 2000 What EOS for software means is that NetApp will test all new releases of software for compatibility with the EOA'ed platform for two years after that platform's EOA date. In the case of the F330, if NetApp releases new software before April 30, 2000, it will be tested for compatibility with the F330. Ed > -----Original Message----- > From: Jay Orr [mailto:orrjl@stl.nexen.com] > Sent: Thursday, September 09, 1999 9:34 AM > To: toasters(a)mathworks.com > Subject: F330 & ONTAP versions > > > I was talking with a tech today fixing problems I experienced > upgrading > our F330 from 4.2a to 5.3.2r1, and I asked if this was the > last release > for the F330's, since after February you can't purchase a > software support > for these filers. He said he hadn't heard about the > end-of-support on the > F330's, but mentioned that 5.4 is scheduled for Feb. > > My question is, will 5.4 be available for the F330's or is 5.3.2r1 the > last release that'll work on the F330s ?? > > ----------- > Fujitsu - Nexion, St. Louis, MO > Jay Orr (314) 579-6517 >

1 0

RE: CIFS, UNIX and ACLs
by Muhlestein, Mark 24 Sep '99

24 Sep '99

There is no way to manage NT security from UNIX clients that I am aware of, either from NetApp or a third party. We have an outstanding RFE on that issue (14140, which I have updated to include your request), but no shipping version of OnTap supports that functionality. You can do it easily from an NT client, of course. Mark Muhlestein -- mmm(a)netapp.com -----Original Message----- From: Michael van Elst [mailto:mlelstv@xlink.net] Sent: Friday, September 24, 1999 4:22 PM To: Sam Schorr Cc: 'Michael van Elst'; toasters(a)mathworks.com Subject: Re: CIFS, UNIX and ACLs On Fri, Sep 24, 1999 at 02:58:10PM -0700, Sam Schorr wrote: > Michael, Hi Sam, > I do not have the specifics on the bug. It came out ina conversation with a > Netapp engineer that ranged over a number of topics. We had been told that > 5.3.2 had support for Samba, but that turned out not to be true. If you did > use Samba to connect to a CIFS share on a 5.3.2 box, you would not be able > to see any file extensions or directory ACLs. well, with Samba2.0.5 and ONTAP 5.1.2, I cannot even open a session. > As for your setup to allow WinNT ACL access, I guess I'm not quite clear on > why this would be a problem. As I pointed out, we allow users to upload > files and directories using the NFS mount, which the netapp translates to > Unicode and does the necessary ACL mappings to handle the shift to CIFS as > long as the parent directory has been defined as a CIFS share. The Unicode > support is part of 5.2.3 and 5.3.2, but that may be an issue for you. Let me clarify the problem a bit more. The NT application is IIS4.0 with Frontpage extensions. Two (or more) NT-accounts need to access the files on a website: an anonymous account that is used by IIS4.0 when somebody browses through the site and one or more dedicated frontpage accounts that are allowed to modify the site. This is done by creating appropriate access control lists for all files and directories in the particular webspace. The webspace is also accessible from a UNIX host via NFS which performs the initial configuration and also hosts other applications that write to the webspace. Files created this way are owned by the frontpage account but do not have access lists, instead the filer does the usual UNIX mode -> ACL translation. The written files must be accessible by the annonymous user which means that the appropriate access lists must be created. There is no way to make it work with the translated UNIX modes. Currently we do this by running a slow script on the NT box, but I would prefer to handle all these maintenance tasks on the UNIX side. Setting access lists can be done by speaking the NT dialect of the SMB protocol to the filer, which unfortunately happens to be undocumented. I am now searching for a piece of software, commercial product or even some other kind of information that lets me do this. Regards, Michael van Elst > > Hope I've been of some help. > > --srs > > -----Original Message----- > From: Michael van Elst [mailto:mlelstv@xlink.net] > Sent: Friday, September 24, 1999 2:29 PM > To: Sam Schorr > Cc: 'Michael van Elst'; toasters(a)mathworks.com > Subject: Re: CIFS, UNIX and ACLs > > > On Fri, Sep 24, 1999 at 12:33:17PM -0700, Sam Schorr wrote: > > Michael, > > Hi Sam, > > > We tried to do this but there is a known bug in OnTap that prevents Samba > > from correctly opening a CIFS share on the filers. > > this is interesting, are there any details about this bug ? > > > We had to revert to > > using NFS mounts, but this has not caused any problems for NT access. > > Essentially, we are allowing people to ftp files into > > directories/subdirectories that are primarily accessed through CIFS shares > > from a Linux system. I don't know what you may lose doing it this way - > we > > haven't had any issues. > > My problem is to prepare files and directories for WinNT clients. > I can easily create the directories and write files using NFS, > but I cannot set WinNT access lists which are important for > the application. > > Regards, > Michael van Elst > > > > > > --srs > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Michael van Elst [mailto:mlelstv@xlink.net] > > Sent: Friday, September 24, 1999 5:10 AM > > To: toasters(a)mathworks.com > > Subject: CIFS, UNIX and ACLs > > > > > > Hello everyone, > > > > I'm looking for a method to access a CIFS share residing on a NetApp- > > Filer from a UNIX client. In particular I am interested in maintaining > > NTFS-style ACLs. > > > > Is anybody doing this successfully ? > > > > Regards, > > -- > > i.A. Michael van Elst / phone: +49 721 6635 330 > > Xlink - Network Information Centre \/ fax: +49 721 6635 349 > > Vincenz-Priessnitz-Str. 3 /\ link http://nic.xlink.net/ > > D-76131 Karlsruhe, Germany /_______ email: > hostmaster(a)xlink.net > > [ Xlink Internet Service GmbH, Sitz Karlsruhe > ] > > [ Amtsgericht Karlsruhe HRB 8161, Geschaeftsfuehrer: Prof. Michael Rotert > ] > -- > i.A. Michael van Elst / phone: +49 721 6635 330 > Xlink - Network Information Centre \/ fax: +49 721 6635 349 > Vincenz-Priessnitz-Str. 3 /\ link http://nic.xlink.net/ > D-76131 Karlsruhe, Germany /_______ email: hostmaster(a)xlink.net > [ Xlink Internet Service GmbH, Sitz Karlsruhe ] > [ Amtsgericht Karlsruhe HRB 8161, Geschaeftsfuehrer: Prof. Michael Rotert ] -- i.A. Michael van Elst / phone: +49 721 6635 330 Xlink - Network Information Centre \/ fax: +49 721 6635 349 Vincenz-Priessnitz-Str. 3 /\ link http://nic.xlink.net/ D-76131 Karlsruhe, Germany /_______ email: hostmaster(a)xlink.net [ Xlink Internet Service GmbH, Sitz Karlsruhe ] [ Amtsgericht Karlsruhe HRB 8161, Geschaeftsfuehrer: Prof. Michael Rotert ]

1 0

RE: CIFS, UNIX and ACLs
by Sam Schorr 24 Sep '99

24 Sep '99

Michael, I do not have the specifics on the bug. It came out ina conversation with a Netapp engineer that ranged over a number of topics. We had been told that 5.3.2 had support for Samba, but that turned out not to be true. If you did use Samba to connect to a CIFS share on a 5.3.2 box, you would not be able to see any file extensions or directory ACLs. As for your setup to allow WinNT ACL access, I guess I'm not quite clear on why this would be a problem. As I pointed out, we allow users to upload files and directories using the NFS mount, which the netapp translates to Unicode and does the necessary ACL mappings to handle the shift to CIFS as long as the parent directory has been defined as a CIFS share. The Unicode support is part of 5.2.3 and 5.3.2, but that may be an issue for you. Hope I've been of some help. --srs -----Original Message----- From: Michael van Elst [mailto:mlelstv@xlink.net] Sent: Friday, September 24, 1999 2:29 PM To: Sam Schorr Cc: 'Michael van Elst'; toasters(a)mathworks.com Subject: Re: CIFS, UNIX and ACLs On Fri, Sep 24, 1999 at 12:33:17PM -0700, Sam Schorr wrote: > Michael, Hi Sam, > We tried to do this but there is a known bug in OnTap that prevents Samba > from correctly opening a CIFS share on the filers. this is interesting, are there any details about this bug ? > We had to revert to > using NFS mounts, but this has not caused any problems for NT access. > Essentially, we are allowing people to ftp files into > directories/subdirectories that are primarily accessed through CIFS shares > from a Linux system. I don't know what you may lose doing it this way - we > haven't had any issues. My problem is to prepare files and directories for WinNT clients. I can easily create the directories and write files using NFS, but I cannot set WinNT access lists which are important for the application. Regards, Michael van Elst > > --srs > > -----Original Message----- > From: Michael van Elst [mailto:mlelstv@xlink.net] > Sent: Friday, September 24, 1999 5:10 AM > To: toasters(a)mathworks.com > Subject: CIFS, UNIX and ACLs > > > Hello everyone, > > I'm looking for a method to access a CIFS share residing on a NetApp- > Filer from a UNIX client. In particular I am interested in maintaining > NTFS-style ACLs. > > Is anybody doing this successfully ? > > Regards, > -- > i.A. Michael van Elst / phone: +49 721 6635 330 > Xlink - Network Information Centre \/ fax: +49 721 6635 349 > Vincenz-Priessnitz-Str. 3 /\ link http://nic.xlink.net/ > D-76131 Karlsruhe, Germany /_______ email: hostmaster(a)xlink.net > [ Xlink Internet Service GmbH, Sitz Karlsruhe ] > [ Amtsgericht Karlsruhe HRB 8161, Geschaeftsfuehrer: Prof. Michael Rotert ] -- i.A. Michael van Elst / phone: +49 721 6635 330 Xlink - Network Information Centre \/ fax: +49 721 6635 349 Vincenz-Priessnitz-Str. 3 /\ link http://nic.xlink.net/ D-76131 Karlsruhe, Germany /_______ email: hostmaster(a)xlink.net [ Xlink Internet Service GmbH, Sitz Karlsruhe ] [ Amtsgericht Karlsruhe HRB 8161, Geschaeftsfuehrer: Prof. Michael Rotert ]

2 1

RE: CIFS, UNIX and ACLs
by Sam Schorr 24 Sep '99

24 Sep '99

Michael, We tried to do this but there is a known bug in OnTap that prevents Samba from correctly opening a CIFS share on the filers. We had to revert to using NFS mounts, but this has not caused any problems for NT access. Essentially, we are allowing people to ftp files into directories/subdirectories that are primarily accessed through CIFS shares from a Linux system. I don't know what you may lose doing it this way - we haven't had any issues. --srs -----Original Message----- From: Michael van Elst [mailto:mlelstv@xlink.net] Sent: Friday, September 24, 1999 5:10 AM To: toasters(a)mathworks.com Subject: CIFS, UNIX and ACLs Hello everyone, I'm looking for a method to access a CIFS share residing on a NetApp- Filer from a UNIX client. In particular I am interested in maintaining NTFS-style ACLs. Is anybody doing this successfully ? Regards, -- i.A. Michael van Elst / phone: +49 721 6635 330 Xlink - Network Information Centre \/ fax: +49 721 6635 349 Vincenz-Priessnitz-Str. 3 /\ link http://nic.xlink.net/ D-76131 Karlsruhe, Germany /_______ email: hostmaster(a)xlink.net [ Xlink Internet Service GmbH, Sitz Karlsruhe ] [ Amtsgericht Karlsruhe HRB 8161, Geschaeftsfuehrer: Prof. Michael Rotert ]

2 1

Code Release confusion
by Graydon Dodson 24 Sep '99

24 Sep '99

I know that NetApp has been working on making the code release process easier to understand but I am still having problems. Any work NetApp can make to clean this up would be appreciated. I need to upgrade from 5.2.1P2 to a 5.3* release. My problem is finding the "correct" 5.3* release for my needs. I want something stable, we have had some bad experiences in the past. I also need support for the Legato Networker client. Legato states that 5.3D11 is the minimum supported release. Obviously I probably want something newer & more stable like 5.3.2R1 So I do a bit of research on NOW, and things just get more confusing. 5.3: No way to tell if this contains all the bug fixes in 5.2.1P1 5.3D*: The "D" releases (5.3D10 5.3D11) seem to have been built from 5.3 and may therefore not include all the fixes from the previous "D" release. 5.3.1: Again no way to tell if 5.3.1 includes all the bug fixes in 5.3D11 5.3.1D*: The first "D" releases (5.3.1D2 5.3.1D4 5.3.1D6) are built from 5.3.1 But later "D" releases (5.3.1D8 5.3.1D10 5.3.1D11 ...) are built from their preceding "D" release so their fixes ARE cumulative, unlike the earlier 5.3.1D* releases. 5.3.2: The NOW webserver refuses my NOW account access to this release I can get no data on it except the limited stuff in the pubs. 5.3.2R1: This is the release that Tech Support has told me for over a month now will become "recommended later this week". Still there is no way to tell what bugs are fixed in this release, all the documentation talks about is bugs fixed in 5.3.2, not 5.3.2R1. Of course what is important to me is if all the bugs fixed in 5.3D11 are also included in 5.3.2R1. I have found no way to verify this. 5.3.2D*: These "D" releases are built upon the previous "D" release so their fixes should be cumulative. There is no way to tell (unless you want to trust the file dates) if these releases are "newer" that the "R" release or if they contain the same fixes as the "R" release. Using "Bugs Online" is hopeless, most of the bugs I try to look up (11002, 13087, 10733, ...) return "not found", and when they are found, there is no info about which "R" release they are in. (if any) What I REALLY need to know is if all the 5.3D11 fixes are in 5.3.2R1 and the 5.3.2D* releases. It is impossible to determine this from NOW. If NetApp wants to help lower calls to the help line making this information available online would help. Graydon Dodson grdodson(a)lexmark.com Lexmark International Inc.

1 0

WinNT NFS clients + toasters - can't create files
by John Stoffel 24 Sep '99

24 Sep '99

Guys, I'm working with people to figure out why they can't write their files from the WinNT 4.x PC side to directories in Toasters (running 5.2.1). I've confirmed their problem as well on my PC and a seperate toaster as well. On the PC, I can NFS mount the filesystem without any problems, and I can view/open files on there as well. But if I try to create a new file, or save changes to an existing file, I just get the following error on the PC: Check the drive to make sure the door is closed and it contains the correct disk or CD. (G:\JOHN\FOO.DOC) I'm running NetManage NFS version 7.0.2, do I need a newer version of this software possibly? One thing I've found out is that if I make the directory the files are in world writeable, then people can update files without any problems. But if the mode is only 775, even the owner of the file can't save changes from the PC (inside Word 97) to that file he owns. I know the group authenication is correct because the files get the right owner and group membership when they are created in a world writeable directory. We only have the NFS license for our toasters, maybe we need to spring for and get the CIFS license as well to take care of this problem, but we'd like to find a solution before going that step. Thanks for any help or suggestions, John John Stoffel - Senior Unix Systems Administrator - Lucent Technologies stoffel(a)lucent.com - http://www.lucent.com - 978-952-7548 john.stoffel(a)ascend.com - http://www.ascend.com

1 0

Veritas netbackup 3.2 and Ontap 5.3.2(D3)
by Menachem Kaiser 24 Sep '99

24 Sep '99

Hi, Has anyone started using Veritas netbackup version 3.2 with Ontap 5.3.2(D3) or just plain Ontap 5.3.2. Before upgrading our backup software, we would like to here from other sites that have experienced this upgrade. Thanks Manny

4 4

Backup formats
by Jay Orr 23 Sep '99

23 Sep '99

Hi all! I remember a spate of conversation about backup formats. Currently we have two F330's now running 5.3.2r1 and have two sun servers running budtool. One is at 4.6, the other is 4.6.1. I found out as of 4.6.1 that they are no longer supporting the "dump.FAServer" dump. I have never been able to find documentation on what exactly this is (nor could the tech I spoke with at legato), but that is how the filers have been backed up. Now, if someone could be kind enough to answer a few confused questions : 1) is the FAServer dump like a tar snapshot? One selling point on other backup software I've been pitched is that NDMP can only be restored to the toaster, it's a non-standard format and can't be restored to a host then a toaster. 2) Does NDMP save info of where on the hard disk it is? I thought I read that somewhere, which means you can't backup one filer then restore it on another... 3) Can someone give me a comparison of the different methods of backing up a toaster? I.e. what is FASserver and NDMP? Thanks! ----------- Fujitsu - Nexion, St. Louis, MO Jay Orr (314) 579-6517

1 0

RE: IIS and Netapp Compatibility
by Sam Schorr 22 Sep '99

22 Sep '99

Jay, Yes, we are doing this very thing. We have 12 IIS servers (and several others) using regular UNC path calls to user content created and stored on 2 F740's and 2 F760's. You do not, and should not, use mapped drives as these only persist with a user logged into your IIS servers. The IUSR#### NT Account user that IIS runs under will be the security context for access to the UNC. All you need do is make a share on the filer through the documented Server Manager function, make sure the NT user account IIS runs under has at least Change rights to the share, then use that in you IIS setup or ASP's, dll's, whatever. -----Original Message----- From: Michael van Elst [mailto:mlelstv@xlink.net] Sent: Tuesday, September 21, 1999 1:51 PM To: Jay Querusio Cc: toasters(a)mathworks.com Subject: Re: IIS and Netapp Compatibility On Tue, Sep 21, 1999 at 01:03:15PM -0400, Jay Querusio wrote: > Hi, > > Is anyone using IIS as a front end to the Netapp. We would like to have IIS > through a mapped drive serve ASP, JavaScript, and Html pages that are stored > on the Netapp. Can this be done and is anyone doing it now? We are using a F740 as storage for two IIS4.0 Webservers (and a couple of Apache/Solaris webservers). IIS refers to the websites via UNC paths, not with a mapped drive. > If so, does anyone know if there are any bench mark tests out there that we > could try? Sorry, no. > We are currently running 5.3D20 We are using ONTAP 5.12. -- i.A. Michael van Elst / phone: +49 721 6635 330 Xlink - Network Information Centre \/ fax: +49 721 6635 349 Vincenz-Priessnitz-Str. 3 /\ link http://nic.xlink.net/ D-76131 Karlsruhe, Germany /_______ email: hostmaster(a)xlink.net [ Xlink Internet Service GmbH, Sitz Karlsruhe ] [ Amtsgericht Karlsruhe HRB 8161, Geschaeftsfuehrer: Prof. Michael Rotert ]

1 0

RE: Remote Backup Options
by Melvin, Grant 22 Sep '99

22 Sep '99

Hi Menachem, I think this link is what you are looking for. http://now.netapp.com/knowledge/contents/TIP/TIP_605.shtml <http://now.netapp.com/knowledge/contents/TIP/TIP_605.shtml> Cheers, Grant

1 0

RE: Remote Backup Options
by Melvin, Grant 22 Sep '99

22 Sep '99

Hi Benjy, Veritas added support for 3-way NDMP backups to NetBackup (NBU) 3.2. Data ONTAP has supported 3-way NDMP backups since we supported NDMP v2 in 4.x. HOWEVER, during certification of NBU 3.2 & 5.3.2 we recognized that 3-way restores weren't functioning completely in *every* scenario that we tested with NBU & we tracked this down to issues on *both* sides. These issues are being addressed, but won't be certified/supported until a follow-on release of Data ONTAP is released (currently scheduled for the end of October '99). Cheers, Grant -----Original Message----- From: Benjy Feen [mailto:benjy@feen.com] Sent: Monday, August 02, 1999 10:23 AM To: Steve Kappel Cc: toasters(a)mathworks.com Subject: Re: Remote Backup Options Steve: Since you seem to know both sides of the NDMP debate here, let me ask you: is there ANY NetBackup/NetApp configuration which allows 3-way NDMP backups? On Mon, 2 Aug 1999, Steve Kappel wrote: > >Speaking of remote backup, my backup team tells me that Veritas backups of > >Filers via NDMP don't work with the current release (5.3.x) of DOT. Any > >word on when (date please) this will be fixed? If already fixed, can > >someone let me know so I could get the appropriate version from Tech. > > OnTap 5.3.2 will be qualified for local (not 3-way) backup/restores > with NetBackup 3.2 very soon. 5.3.2 should be out "any day now". > > > __________________________________________________________________________ > Steve Kappel steve.kappel(a)veritas.com > VERITAS Software steve.kappel(a)iname.com (Personal) > Benjy Feen benjy(a)feen.com There is no spoon.

2 1

Multiple entries in a directory
by Dave Atkin 22 Sep '99

22 Sep '99

We recently used the "rsh filer1 dump ... | rsh filer2 restore ..." method to copy lots of user files to a new filer. We got a small number of errors, like: RESTORE: Warning: cannot rename /fsb/soci/cmm104/ini/PINERC to /fsb/soci/cmm104/ini/RSTTMP01071733 (8.3 name ~MKN0100.7~0): No such file or directory and then at the end: RESTORE: bad entry: incomplete operations RESTORE: name: ./cmm104/ini/RSTTMP01071733 RESTORE: parent name ./cmm104/ini RESTORE: sibling name: ./cmm104/ini/host-news.york.ac.uk RESTORE: entry type: LEAF RESTORE: inode number: 1071733 RESTORE: flags: TMPNAME When we looked at the source directories, we found that they had two identical entries, pointing to different inodes: # cd /usr/fsa/soci/cmm104/ini # ls -li total 48 2411623 -rwxr--r-- 1 cmm104 soci 11222 Apr 21 1998 PINERC 707049 -rwxr--r-- 1 cmm104 soci 11222 Apr 21 1998 PINERC The files were all PINERC files as generated by the PC-Pine application. Some were old but others were quite recent. Anyone else seen anything like this? [We ran wacky on the source filestore a couple of months ago to fix a different problem]. We're running 5.2.2P1. 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: tech support waits
by Skinner, Alistair 21 Sep '99

21 Sep '99

Todd, Thanks for the feedback. Glad you like the improvements on NOW! In fact we've many more in the pipeline, including realtime case updates (they're still batched up today). You should see some more changes roll out next month. Hey, don't give up on submitting your cases through NOW! yet either. As a direct result of your feedback, we've changed the process for handling them. You're right we can't expect you to use it if we don't provide consistent response. So as of yesterday (Monday 20th) all cases submitted through NOW! get expidited service, which is tracked and reported daily to me. Thanks for your continued support and feedback. Alistair -----Original Message----- From: Todd C. Merrill [mailto:tmerrill@mathworks.com] Sent: Thursday, September 16, 1999 2:02 PM To: Skinner, Alistair Cc: 'toasters(a)mathworks.com' Subject: Re: tech support waits On Thu, 19 Aug 1999, Todd C. Merrill wrote: > I am getting frustrated with the response time from tech support. [rest of diatribe deleted] On Thu, 19 Aug 1999, Skinner, Alistair wrote: > Our preferred method of online access is through the web. Using the email > option from within a case view gives you a pre-formatted subject line to > make sure the email is attached to the case in our system. The comments field > can also be used. Unfortunately currently there can be up to a day delay between > you > submitting something and it getting into our system as these updates are > batched. > We expect to have an enhanced version implemented in the next two months which > will > include immediate updates directly to the case. I have a good response and a bad response to this response. First, the good. I like what has been done to the NOW site. Getting to a final destination (ONTAP updates, case searches, etc.) requires a lot less clicking and the responsiveness seems much improved. Bravo. However, I recently entered a case into the system via the NOW site for a tech support issue. *Nine* days later I got first response from an engineer on the case. (Luckily, it wasn't a critical issue.) With a response time like that, I am not encouraged to use the web/email way of calling in for tech support. [0] Throw some more manpower on the phones, 'cause that's how I'll be entering tech support cases in the future. [1] (There's not much else to say on this case, but if you want to talk to me about it, Alistair, give a call.) [0] This is generally true of most tech support calls I make, to NetApp or other companies. Email/web requests are treated as second class, lower-priority calls. If you (enter-your-favorite-company's-tech- support-organization-here) want us to save you time by entering data into your system, the least you could do is respond to the calls with equal priority. [1] [1] Forgive the attitude. Having a bad week....bad weather....bad machines....bad network....stress headaches. Grrrr.... 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: tech support waits
by Mohler, Jeff 21 Sep '99

21 Sep '99

>Furthermore, the customer information is not going to be kept up to date >by many sites. IT professionals have too much to do as it is; one reason >why *you* are paid for *support* is so that *you* do some of that work. >It is not unreasonable for support to try to keep their records updated. --- I dont know the entire structure behind the technical support data dug out of the autosupport messages, but if when you got your filer, you registered on the NOW site, your system serial number should be cross referenced with the latest/greatest contact data your organization has provided us. Now, if the automated scripting, or in-place procedures do not cross reference that data..then it should be (knock knock on GSC..can you clarify this please) updated. Critical information such as who you are, and how we can best reach you isnt something any support team can be asked to proactively consult a customer for. You know best when your environment changes. I am a former customer of NetApp, and now an employee..so..dont flame on me too hard *grin* and if you must, flame me as Id flame anything else. Medium rare, charred, and with a nice dousing of HP sauce please. *grin* --- Jeff Mohler Professional Services Engineer jmohler(a)netapp.com

4 3

IIS and Netapp Compatibility
by Jay Querusio 21 Sep '99

21 Sep '99

Hi, Is anyone using IIS as a front end to the Netapp. We would like to have IIS through a mapped drive serve ASP, JavaScript, and Html pages that are stored on the Netapp. Can this be done and is anyone doing it now? If so, does anyone know if there are any bench mark tests out there that we could try? We are currently running 5.3D20 Thanks for your help in advance, Jay

2 1

autosupport mail (Was RE: tech support waits)
by Garrett Burke 21 Sep '99

21 Sep '99

Hi Diptish, With regards to NetApp starting to use the autosupport mail for automated suggestion of bug fixes might I suggest two things: a) That the contents of the autosupport mail be made configurable For example I like autosupport mail, but I don't like the NT Share ACLs, usernames nor connected hosts being included as this leaks internal security information (running 5.2.1). The mails are already in sections so your automated system could use these to see what info is avalable in the mail. I understand that the more information that I provide to support the quicker the fix, but it's a shame that it might be an all or nothing decision as regards auto support. b) Provide your customers with the same scripts that you use to process autosupport so it can be done on site or at least provide a 'what to look for in autosupport mails' guide right down to the nitty gritty like 'If nbt disconnects are more than .1% of your total CIFS operations then you should investigate for possible network problems' (Given the info & the time I'd write my own scripts and use qpage to page me when things got nasty. I'd happily share such scripts) Providing the customers with the scripts would allow those sites that don't want to run autosupport mails the ability to place a support call and be able to give more info than at present e.g. 'I'm running 5.3.2 and autosupport processing script v1.3 is giving a problem #44 - disk showing recurring errors' It's in our (i.e. filer users) interest to provide as much info as possible to help CS solve the problem and NetApp can help us to provide that info. Support is a two way thing. Thanks for taking the time to listen to users comments Regards, GB. > ---------- > From: Datta, Diptish[SMTP:diptish.datta@netapp.com] > Sent: 21 September 1999 07:11 > To: 'sirbruce(a)ix.netcom.com' > Cc: toasters(a)mathworks.com > Subject: RE: tech support waits > >

2 1

autosupport debug
by Graham C. Knight 21 Sep '99

21 Sep '99

A few weeks ago somebody on the list told me about an option that could be set to help debug a lack of autosupport mail after reboot. autosupport works fine, except occasionally there will be no autosupport mail when a system reboots. (5.2.3). I lost the mail. Hopefully whoever it was can send it to me again. Sorry to bother the whole list with this. Thanks, Graham

3 2

RE: autosupport mail (Was RE: tech support waits)
by Datta, Diptish 21 Sep '99

21 Sep '99

Excellent suggestions. Both of them. I will fllow up on this with engineering. -diptish > -----Original Message----- > From: Garrett Burke [mailto:Garrett.Burke@msc.ie] > Sent: Tuesday, September 21, 1999 2:12 AM > To: 'Datta, Diptish' > Cc: toasters(a)mathworks.com > Subject: autosupport mail (Was RE: tech support waits) > Importance: High > > > Hi Diptish, > > With regards to NetApp starting to use the autosupport mail > for automated > suggestion of bug fixes might I suggest two things: > > a) That the contents of the autosupport mail be made configurable For > example I like autosupport mail, but I don't like the NT Share ACLs, > usernames nor connected hosts being included as this leaks > internal security > information (running 5.2.1). The mails are already in > sections so your > automated system could use these to see what info is avalable > in the mail. > > I understand that the more information that I provide to support the > quicker the fix, but it's a shame that it might be an all or nothing > decision as regards auto support. > > b) Provide your customers with the same scripts that you use > to process > autosupport so it can be done on site or at least provide a > 'what to look > for in autosupport mails' guide right down to the nitty > gritty like 'If nbt > disconnects are more than .1% of your total CIFS operations > then you should > investigate for possible network problems' (Given the info & > the time I'd > write my own scripts and use qpage to page me when things got > nasty. I'd > happily share such scripts) > > Providing the customers with the scripts would allow those > sites that don't > want to run autosupport mails the ability to place a support > call and be > able to give more info than at present e.g. 'I'm running 5.3.2 and > autosupport processing script v1.3 is giving a problem #44 - > disk showing > recurring errors' > > It's in our (i.e. filer users) interest to provide as much > info as possible > to help CS solve the > problem and NetApp can help us to provide that info. Support > is a two way > thing. > > Thanks for taking the time to listen to users comments > > Regards, > GB. > > ---------- > > From: Datta, Diptish[SMTP:diptish.datta@netapp.com] > > Sent: 21 September 1999 07:11 > > To: 'sirbruce(a)ix.netcom.com' > > Cc: toasters(a)mathworks.com > > Subject: RE: tech support waits > > > > >

1 0

OS2/Warp CIFS Clients?
by Mohler, Anissa 21 Sep '99

21 Sep '99

Hello all - I really doubt this is out there... but I have to give it a shot. My filer FINALLY went into production mode last night and this morning I found out that the ONE OS2/Warp Client in the company does not see the filer, at all. All other CIFS clients see the filer and are operating flawlessly. The OS2/Warp client was configured to work with NT 4.0 Servers and had no problems. You would think that the OS2 box wouldn't have any problems since it works with NT now. I'm putting some static mappings in WINS and verifying the Filer is in DNS just to be on the safe side, but I am thinking the OS2/Warp box doesn't see the filer because it is not supported by ONTAP. (We are running ONTAP version 5.3.2R1.) Has anyone tried to get an OS2/Warp client to see a filer? Has anyone been successful? This is one of those things that would be nice to have work... but if it doesn't it won't hurt. Anissa Mohler amohler(a)mail.bokf.com BOk Technical Services desk - 918.295.0431 Network Services Group pgr - 918.672.1214

1 0

RE: tech support waits
by Datta, Diptish 21 Sep '99

21 Sep '99

Some comments in line ... Some of your comments I don't agree with and some points are very valid. But in summary I think what you are saying is you want to see the results. These changes are things we are working on. We'll have to wait to see the results. > -----Original Message----- > From: sirbruce(a)ix.netcom.com [mailto:sirbruce@ix.netcom.com] > Sent: Monday, September 20, 1999 12:45 PM > To: diptish.datta(a)netapp.com; armijo(a)cs.unm.edu > Cc: toasters(a)mathworks.com > Subject: RE: tech support waits > Importance: High > > > On 09/19/99 21:35:17 you wrote: > > > >Steve, > >I can see how the "proactive" response to a disk failure > autosupport would leave > >you rather unimpressed when the call back is after you have > already acted on it > >yourself! Fact of the matter is, that is indeed the way it > is today. Autosupport > >is filtered by a script and the ones needing attention (eg > DISK_FAIL) are > >forwarded to CSRs for attention. A call is logged and the > customer is contacted. > >Now, the info in the autosupport is not very CS-friendly > because the info that > >we need to locate the customer is not mandatory. So, often > it slows down the > >process of logging the call, finding the contact information, etc. > > In other words, Network Appliance implemented autosupport > without committing > to the staffing necessary to support all of the events > generated. The solution > then is either to ditch autosupport, or increase staffing. > Productivity > enhancements to the process (i.e. automation) are fine, but > are not enough by > themselves in the long term unless the fundamental issue is resolved. ############# I completely disagree. When autosupport was designed we thought of a lot of benefits we could get from it. Post processing the data to collect install base profile and such is one example. That is still valid. We also designed alerts that CS could trap and respond to proactively. We have a group of Customer Support Reps who are dedicated to processing autosupport alerts. We never claimed this to be a *substitute* for you being responsible for your filers. For example, when a drive fails, we designed the process to alert CS, log a call and RMA a drive. But if you receive the autosupport notification also (which is what we expect) then you will make sure that a spare was available and reconstruction completed. As a company grows, its success challenges existing processes. That is what we are faced with today. The solution is not increased staffing - the solution is automation. That is the only way we will be able to scale. And that is what we are shooting for. > > >We are looking at correcting these bottleencks by proposing > changes to > >Engineering that would make contact and customer information > mandatory in > >autosupport. > > So your solution is to shift more work off to the customer? Shift work to the customer? Entering contact information in a setup screen is that much extra work? Ok .... > Not a good > strategy. You should keep it optional so that customers can still get > *some* benefit out of autosupport if they chose, even if it > means Netapp > won't be able to respond their quickest. A simple note in > the documentation > making it clear that the more information the better would be > sufficient. Agreed. We can't make it mandatory any way because of secure sites and such. > > Furthermore, the customer information is not going to be kept > up to date > by many sites. IT professionals have too much to do as it > is; one reason > why *you* are paid for *support* is so that *you* do some of > that work. > It is not unreasonable for support to try to keep their > records updated. Paid or not, I'm not sure how we would keep our database info updated without input from the customers. The NOW site is one channel that allows you to tell us the info - I'm thinking autosupport may be another way for us to keep the info current. > > >We also have a team engaged right now to scope out automation > >around autosupport. If, for example, locating a customer > record in our database > >was simple and guaranteed (programatically) then a script > could field the > >DISK_FAIL autosupport, log a call, check the customer's > service level, issue the > >RMA and email you back the call log number and the shipment > info. (Know anyone > >that could help us with this project? :-). > > This sort of automation should have been done years ago. > Doing it now depends > a lot on your choice of customer database and may require a > new one if your old > one was not properly planned. As to who can help you, you're > in the heart of > Silicon Valley... look out the window and wave some stock > options around. Or > consider offer existing personnel additional incentives to do > the task. (Why > do we have to tell you this?) No - you really did not have to say any of that! :-) I'll pass on the idea of waving stock certificates out the window to the recruiters that are working full time trying to find people the hard way. > > >We are also thinking about automating the analysis of a > crash - I think we > >should be able to suggest patches just based on info in > autosupport ... at least > >some percent of the cases. Not sure how successful this will > be. But it would be > >really cool even if we were able to auto-analyze and propose > upgrades for 25% of > >the cases! > > This is a good idea. Thanks!!! > The wording will have to be careful to > distinguish between > "This looks like a known bug and we think this upgrade may > fix the problem" and > "We don't know specifically about this problem, but it may be > fixed by going to > the latest recommended version" and also catching those cases > where the latter > advice might actually be unwise. This can help in the > response time but in many > cases you will ultimately need some actual human intervention > to follow-up. Good points. > > >This should be possible. Autosupport has a lot of untapped > benefits that we can > >take advantage of. It is not straightforward - but you > should see some changes > >in the future - for the better. > > Look, I know this message sounded harsh. No need to respond. > But I recognize > corporate PR song and dance when I see it and it pushes one > of my hot buttons > to see it on this list. Looking at resolving the problem? > It's been around > for a long time. Considering more automation? I bet you > would have said the > same thing 5 years ago. Explanations are fine, but excuses > are just excuses. > Customers want to see results. Harsh? Naaah! Bruce, I appreciate your input. Honestly, 5 years ago (if we had autosupport 5 years ago - which we didn't) we though that the volume would be manageable. We were wrong. We did not have a problem dealing with the volume then. Now we do. Automation is now necessary. Results are what matter. Proof is in the pudding and all that. Agreed. I am not in PR - I am in CS. So, this is important to us. I can not tell you what we will end up with - all I am saying is that the areas I mentioned are areas that we are working on. > > Bruce > > Diptish Datta Director, Product Support Network Appliance

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