toasters

toasters@lists.teaparty.net

13515 discussions

Re: show_therm
by sirbruce＠ix.netcom.com 04 Aug '99

04 Aug '99

On 08/01/99 12:11:39 you wrote: > > >On Sat, 31 Jul 1999, Dave Hitz wrote: > >> One obvious concern on redesigning command UIs is >> breaking scripts, so we are especially interested in knowing which >> rc_toggle_basic commands people have built into scripts. > >Here is a short list of commands I've been caught using. I don't have any >of these in my scripts, but they are indispensable for me. >[various yp commands deleted] When they implemented yp/NIS, I told them to make these commands public. RFEs were opened. Netapp decided against it, so they were closed. Trot out the tired old "we're an appliance, it should be simple" explanation. >On a side note, is there a command to be used from the console or rsh that >allows one to log off the telnet session. This would be extremely usefull >as some of our admins telnet in from Windows making it relatively hard to >log them off. There was a bug/RFE opened on this as well, years ago. I think Netapp would find it more production, rather than doing another round of "tell us what you want" solicitation, is to go back and see what they got the last n times they asked "tell us what you want" and didn't do anything. Bruce

2 1

CIFS: No permission to rename files?
by Benjy Feen 03 Aug '99

03 Aug '99

"I didn't change anything!" :) On two of our toasters, both running 5.1.2R3P1, our CIFS-based users have found that they're suddenly unable to rename files. One user, who has administrator priviledges, doesn't have this problem. I wanted to post this short description before hauling off and gathering the full set of evidence/data. Anyone know this issue offhand? Thanks! Benjy Feen benjy(a)feen.com There is no spoon.

1 0

RE: CIFS Remote Backup Options
by Garrett Burke 03 Aug '99

03 Aug '99

Hi Matt, No we haven't tried 5.2.2P1 or 5.3 yet to solve the oplock bug. The reason is that out filer is stable at the moment and we have found in the past that we end up with some stability problems when we install another release of OnTap. We have a workaround for the oplocks bug which doesn't bite us so hard at the moment (Having said that we will be upgrading to 5.3 sometime as NTP would be nice) GB > ---------- > From: Matt Day[SMTP:mday@netapp.com] > Sent: 31 July 1999 00:21 > To: Garrett Burke > Cc: toasters(a)mathworks.com > Subject: Re: CIFS Remote Backup Options > > >c) oplocks. This has caused us numerous problems. We now run the > backups > >with oplocks turned off, as there some sort of interaction between > ARCServe > >and the oplock code (we tried a few D releases but never got around it) > >which means that things run very, very slowly. Like, 2 days to run the > >backup! > > Hi Garrett, > > There is an oplock bug in 5.2.1 (burt12483) that sometimes delays the > delivery of oplock break messages -- I bet that's the performance > problem you're hitting with oplocks enabled. The fix for this bug is > available in 5.2.2P1 and 5.3. Have you tried either of those releases? > > Matt >

1 0

RE: 5.3D20 and bug #16084
by Melvin, Grant 02 Aug '99

02 Aug '99

Hi Benjy, FYI, the fix for 16084 is targeted for a future release (slated for end of October) and should be made available in a 5.3.2 patch in the meantime. NetApp is working with Mark to determine what the "random_refusal_of_NDMP_connections" problem that he is seeing is. Cheers, Grant -----Original Message----- From: Benjy Feen [mailto:benjy@feen.com] Sent: Monday, August 02, 1999 10:32 AM To: toasters(a)mathworks.com Subject: Re: 5.3D20 and bug #16084 Wow, I check my mail and in two consecutive e-mails I lose two clicks of faith in NetApps. Are these critical NDMP problems limited to 5.3.X, or does 5.2.X have issues I should know about? Is thered a 5.3 release that gives me the NDMP functionality I need without giving me the NDMP bugs I don't? Does NetApp have any kind of document, internal or external, of the form: "How to use NDMP with NetBackup 3.2 without making your filers reboot randomly, or refuse backups, or catch fire"? On Mon, 2 Aug 1999, Stoltz wrote: > > Ok, so I've installed the latest and greatest development release that's > supposed to fix our clustered_filer_reboots_randomly_during_NDMP_dumps problem, > and now instead of randomly rebooting, our filer has gone the random_refusal > of_NDMP_connections route. Which leads me to my point, has anyone else who > installed this release to solve this problem seen similar results? > > Curious, > > Mark > Benjy Feen benjy(a)feen.com There is no spoon.

1 0

Re: Remote Backup Options
by Steve Kappel 02 Aug '99

02 Aug '99

>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)

2 1

Re: Remote Backup Options
by Jason Middlebrooks 02 Aug '99

02 Aug '99

I have gotten it to work with DOT 5.3D14. I have done backups and restores. Jason tkaczma(a)gryf.net on 07/31/99 01:39:03 AM To: toasters(a)mathworks.com cc: (bcc: Jason Middlebrooks/Datalink) Subject: Remote Backup Options 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. Support? My whole organization (really, I'm not kidding) is anxiously awaiting SnapMirror which is available in 5.3.x. However, I can't install the new version if I can't backup the servers. Thanks Tom

1 0

Re: show_therm
by sirbruce＠ix.netcom.com 01 Aug '99

01 Aug '99

On 07/30/99 21:27:32 you wrote: >Netapp - why do you do these things >to me?!?!?!?!? > >Graham Graham - why would you rely on undocumented and unsupported commands and risk disappointing your management?!?!? Bruce

6 5

Re:ISP_2100: cmd opcode 0x28, retry count 0: command timeout, aborting request error
by raster＠netapp.com 01 Aug '99

01 Aug '99

>Can anyone shed some light on the error below? It looks like it is just a >media error which was recovered from, but I wanted verification. > Thank you, > Mike > > >Wed May 12 00:13:03 EDT [isp2100_timeout]: 8.45 (cmd opcode 0x28, retry >count 0): command timeout, aborting request >Wed May 12 00:13:03 EDT [isp2100_timeout]: isp2100_reset_device: device 8.45 >(1.45) Hi Mike, The above message sequence is a symptom of SCSI command timeout. As part of timeout recovery, the device in question is reset and all pending commands are reissued. Hope this helps. -- --------------------------------------------------------------------------- Radek Aster [ raster_at_netapp_dot_com ] | "I bike, therefore I am" http://www.nowhere.net/~raster/ | - Rene' DesBiketes ---------------------------------------------------------------------------

6 11

Re: show_therm
by sirbruce＠ix.netcom.com 01 Aug '99

01 Aug '99

>As you can see, we have created a bit of a mess for ourselves. Slowly >but surely we are going to dig our way out. I don't mean to be a skeptic but you've been giving this idea the same lip service for years. I'm sure you're committed to it, but the real challenge will come in sticking with it every release. Anyway, the real problem was the disconnect between engineering and support. As another customer pointed out, support started handing out this information at first as-needed for problem troubleshooting and then later in actual courses. This issue should have been seen coming. But until it is resolved, I do think that customers who rely on such commands are making a mistake. Even Netapp's high level of support is only going to get you so far if you make too many assumptions about unsupported stuff. Bruce

2 1

Re: CIFS Remote Backup Options
by Matt Day 31 Jul '99

31 Jul '99

Garrett Burke <Garrett.Burke(a)msc.ie> wrote: >I currently use ARCServe 6.5 for backing up a F230,256MB RAM, 4MB NVRAM on >100BaseT full duplex, Extreme S48 switch, running OnTap 5.2.1 Issues that >have bitten us in the past are: > >a) It's slow. Backing up 24GB from the F230 using ARCServe 6.5 build 622 on >a DELL PowerEdge 1300 PIII 450 with 256MB Ram and 15 slot Compaq DLT70 >library (which is actually has a HP C5173-7000) I got 92.43 MB/min last >night which is about average. Note that we have lots of small files (source >code) The 24GB is made up of 315,913 files and 29,525 directories on a >single volume so you may see better performance or worse depending on your >mix. > >[..] > >c) oplocks. This has caused us numerous problems. We now run the backups >with oplocks turned off, as there some sort of interaction between ARCServe >and the oplock code (we tried a few D releases but never got around it) >which means that things run very, very slowly. Like, 2 days to run the >backup! Hi Garrett, There is an oplock bug in 5.2.1 (burt12483) that sometimes delays the delivery of oplock break messages -- I bet that's the performance problem you're hitting with oplocks enabled. The fix for this bug is available in 5.2.2P1 and 5.3. Have you tried either of those releases? Matt

2 1

show_therm
by Graham Knight 31 Jul '99

31 Jul '99

Well, i spent a goodly amount of time integrating the output of "show_therm" into our MRTG graphs, and did some bragging to management about how cool it was (and they agreed). Now, i load rev 5.2.3 of the OS and the command is *gone*!!!! Netapp - why do you do these things to me?!?!?!?!? Graham

1 0

RE: SnapMirror Very Slow
by Melvin, Grant 30 Jul '99

30 Jul '99

Hi, Just wanted to throw in that we discussed with David Midgett (while waiting for the next SnapMirror schedule to be triggered) how he was using SnapMirror. And heard (correct me if I'm wrong David) that his copy of data was being accessed by other clients in read-only fashion effectively balancing the client load across the CFO pair. So not only does David have a (local) disaster recovery copy of his data, but its also accessible (in read-only mode) at all times (after the baseline transfer has completed). Cheers, Grant -----Original Message----- From: alexei(a)mindspring.net [mailto:alexei@mindspring.net] Sent: Thursday, July 29, 1999 3:35 PM To: Sam Schorr Cc: toasters(a)mathworks.com Subject: Re: SnapMirror Very Slow Sam Schorr <sschorr(a)homestead.com> writes: > Actually, there is a very good reason to do both. Clustering only protects > filer head failures. If a volume on a filer loses 2 disks in 1 RAID group, > the volume built on that RAID group is useless and needs to be rebuilt upon > disk repair. So, by using SNAPMIRROR to "almost realtime" copy data to a > read-only volume on another filer, upon disk failure that volume can be made > "live" or the master volume. This is a strategy we are employing to fully > protect our users' data and insure the highest availability of that data. I am not arguing that doing both is not (potentially) good, but doing both on the same set of filers is troublesome. Individually, each solution addresses a set of problems, and each has its own set of problems. With CF (cluster failover), you get transparent (or close to) failover such that a client does not percieve a failure, just a pause. The cluster partner is then serving both sets of data (its own and that of its partner). If you do not size the filer correctly, you are going to be in trouble, especially if you loose a disk during failover. Snapshots are an additional overhead. With snapmirror, you have a copy of the data N minutes old (where N is a function based on the network latency, the size of the volume (clustermap overhead), size of the network pipe and ammount of deltas). In order to make that copy "live", you will need to update mount points across your clients in order to point at the now-read-write snapmirror volume on the other filer. So, doing snapmirror between cluster members is not a clear win. You are better off snapmirroring to a filer that is not part of the cluster. That way you can isolate your disaster backup copy from any potential problems the cluster might experience. Alex

2 1

RE: CIFS Remote Backup Options
by Garrett Burke 30 Jul '99

30 Jul '99

Hi Anissa, I currently use ARCServe 6.5 for backing up a F230,256MB RAM, 4MB NVRAM on 100BaseT full duplex, Extreme S48 switch, running OnTap 5.2.1 Issues that have bitten us in the past are: a) It's slow. Backing up 24GB from the F230 using ARCServe 6.5 build 622 on a DELL PowerEdge 1300 PIII 450 with 256MB Ram and 15 slot Compaq DLT70 library (which is actually has a HP C5173-7000) I got 92.43 MB/min last night which is about average. Note that we have lots of small files (source code) The 24GB is made up of 315,913 files and 29,525 directories on a single volume so you may see better performance or worse depending on your mix. b) careful of share permissions. Make sure when setting up the Job that the username and password entered in the security dialog can connect to the filer. We use the pre & post script option in ARCServe to create and share a snapshot (& turn oplocks off, see below), backup from the share and then unshare the snapshot. c) oplocks. This has caused us numerous problems. We now run the backups with oplocks turned off, as there some sort of interaction between ARCServe and the oplock code (we tried a few D releases but never got around it) which means that things run very, very slowly. Like, 2 days to run the backup! d) watch your network infrastructure. If you are dropping packets then you will see a major performance hit. Of course, the usual thing of ensuring that your duplex setting match on both filer and switch need to be taken care of. Note that the performance figures given at http://www.netapp.com/technology/level3/3052.html are for ARCServe IT 6.6, but I haven't heard of any other performance figures for 6.6 from filer users. Anyone out there using ARCServe IT 6.6 to backup a filer? Regards, GB > ---------- > From: Mohler, Anissa[SMTP:amohler@mail.bokf.com] > Sent: 29 July 1999 18:28 > To: 'toasters(a)mathworks.com' > Subject: CIFS Remote Backup Options > > I am working on design of a backup system for our F740 filer (100G usable) > in a CIFS environment. At this time we have no plans on directly attaching > a > tape backup device to the filer. Our current enterprise backup solution is > ARCserve 6.5 (on NT). > > I have the White Paper on NT Backups and am wondering what is actually in > use in the field. Are there any gotcha's I need to watch out for? Any best > practices out there? > > Thanks! > > Anissa Mohler > amohler(a)mail.bokf.com > BOKf Network Services Group >

1 0

Restore problems.Please help !!!!
by Richard Burton 30 Jul '99

30 Jul '99

Anyone has any insights as to what I am doing wrong?I am trying to restore a single file from a 5 tape dump. The tape inserted in the beginning is the correct tape (tape 5).Should I get any message from restore saying that it liked my tape 5 and would now need the next tape ? Because I inserted tape 4 after 5 and got Wrong volume 2.Can anyone explain why it does not say wrong volume 5 but says wrong volume 1. Moreover why does it crap out on me with the 'Tape Block size should be 10240, not 64512' message ? Any help is greatly appreciated.The dump command I used is : dump 0uf urst0a,urst0a,urst0a,urst0a,rst0a /vol/vol0 bean> restore xvfD rst0a /vol/vol0/test/restore /users/john/lib/hit.c RESTORE: Dump date: Mon Jul 28 15:46:35 PDT 1999 RESTORE: Dumped from: the epoch RESTORE: Level 0 dump of /vol/vol0/ on bean:/vol/vol0/../snapshot_for_backup.5 RESTORE: Label: none RESTORE: Initialize symbol table. RESTORE: Extract directories from tape RESTORE: Warning: cannot create directory /vol/vol0/test/restore: File exists RESTORE: Make node /vol/vol0/test/restore RESTORE: Extract requested files RESTORE: You have not read any tapes yet. Please start with the last tape volume and work towards towards the first. RESTORE: Specify next tape volume #:5 RESTORE: Mount tape volume on bean RESTORE: Enter ``none'' if there are no more tapes RESTORE: otherwise enter tape name (default: rst0a) urst0a RESTORE: Wrong volume 1 RESTORE: Mount tape volume on bean RESTORE: Enter ``none'' if there are no more tapes RESTORE: otherwise enter tape name (default: urst0a) RESTORE: Wrong volume 2 RESTORE: Mount tape volume on bean RESTORE: Enter ``none'' if there are no more tapes RESTORE: otherwise enter tape name (default: urst0a) RESTORE: Wrong volume 3 RESTORE: Mount tape volume on bean RESTORE: Enter ``none'' if there are no more tapes RESTORE: otherwise enter tape name (default: urst0a) RESTORE: Wrong volume 4 RESTORE: Mount tape volume on bean RESTORE: Enter ``none'' if there are no more tapes RESTORE: otherwise enter tape name (default: urst0a) RESTORE: Tape Block size should be 10240, not 64512. RESTORE: Mount tape volume on bean RESTORE: Enter ``none'' if there are no more tapes RESTORE: otherwise enter tape name (default: urst0a) RESTORE: Tape Block size should be 10240, not 64512. RESTORE: Enter ``none'' if there are no more tapes RESTORE: otherwise enter tape name (default: urst0a) none RESTORE: No more tapes, recovery operation aborted bean>

2 1

Re: SnapMirror Very Slow
by alexei＠mindspring.net 29 Jul '99

29 Jul '99

Sam Schorr <sschorr(a)homestead.com> writes: > Actually, there is a very good reason to do both. Clustering only protects > filer head failures. If a volume on a filer loses 2 disks in 1 RAID group, > the volume built on that RAID group is useless and needs to be rebuilt upon > disk repair. So, by using SNAPMIRROR to "almost realtime" copy data to a > read-only volume on another filer, upon disk failure that volume can be made > "live" or the master volume. This is a strategy we are employing to fully > protect our users' data and insure the highest availability of that data. I am not arguing that doing both is not (potentially) good, but doing both on the same set of filers is troublesome. Individually, each solution addresses a set of problems, and each has its own set of problems. With CF (cluster failover), you get transparent (or close to) failover such that a client does not percieve a failure, just a pause. The cluster partner is then serving both sets of data (its own and that of its partner). If you do not size the filer correctly, you are going to be in trouble, especially if you loose a disk during failover. Snapshots are an additional overhead. With snapmirror, you have a copy of the data N minutes old (where N is a function based on the network latency, the size of the volume (clustermap overhead), size of the network pipe and ammount of deltas). In order to make that copy "live", you will need to update mount points across your clients in order to point at the now-read-write snapmirror volume on the other filer. So, doing snapmirror between cluster members is not a clear win. You are better off snapmirroring to a filer that is not part of the cluster. That way you can isolate your disaster backup copy from any potential problems the cluster might experience. Alex

1 0

RE: SnapMirror Very Slow
by Sam Schorr 29 Jul '99

29 Jul '99

Alexei, Actually, there is a very good reason to do both. Clustering only protects filer head failures. If a volume on a filer loses 2 disks in 1 RAID group, the volume built on that RAID group is useless and needs to be rebuilt upon disk repair. So, by using SNAPMIRROR to "almost realtime" copy data to a read-only volume on another filer, upon disk failure that volume can be made "live" or the master volume. This is a strategy we are employing to fully protect our users' data and insure the highest availability of that data. Regards, Sam -----Original Message----- From: alexei(a)mindspring.net [mailto:alexei@mindspring.net] Sent: Thursday, July 29, 1999 1:48 PM To: dmidgett(a)about.com Cc: toasters(a)mathworks.com Subject: Re: SnapMirror Very Slow "David Midgett" <dmidgett(a)about.com> writes: > Has anyone experienced problems with the SnapMirror taking an excessively > long time to complete the transfer. We have two F760's in a cluster > configuration. The mirror is set to update every 15 minutes. There is not > that much data that is changing and the total volume is 107Gb with only 1Gb > used spanning 10 disks. The transfer takes hours for any change to be > replicated. The 'vol snapmirror status' command shows that it is > transferring. The network speed is not an issue. Also connected the two > NetApp's directly to each other with a cross cable. This does not speed it > up. Any insight? Hmm. I don't know if this should work as you describe. The normal overhead for the snapmirror includes moving a constant set of data plus the deltas. Once the initial (level 0) snapmirror finishes, how long do incrementals take? Have you tried with larger intervals? What network interface are you using to conenct the filers? snapmirroring between cluster partners does not seem like it would/should work completely. The whole point of clustering is to have access to both sets of data with a failure, so snapmirroring it between the cluster is an unneccessary step. What occurs when: - snapmirror source filer fails - cluster-failover kicks in - cf partner (snapmirror destination) takes over - snapmirror continues.... how? The filer talks to itself? Try breaking the cluster setup, then do the snapmirror again. See if the speed improves. Perhaps others have better ideas. HTH. Alex

1 0

SnapMirror Very Slow
by David Midgett 29 Jul '99

29 Jul '99

Has anyone experienced problems with the SnapMirror taking an excessively long time to complete the transfer. We have two F760's in a cluster configuration. The mirror is set to update every 15 minutes. There is not that much data that is changing and the total volume is 107Gb with only 1Gb used spanning 10 disks. The transfer takes hours for any change to be replicated. The 'vol snapmirror status' command shows that it is transferring. The network speed is not an issue. Also connected the two NetApp's directly to each other with a cross cable. This does not speed it up. Any insight?

3 3

RE: SnapMirror Very Slow
by Melvin, Grant 29 Jul '99

29 Jul '99

Hi Paul, > Well, have you tried contacting NetApp CS > and asked them to look at your setup? You > may have something different in your > environment or it could be you've uncovered a bug. David HAS contacted NetApp CS and Engineering is helping them troubleshoot the problem. Cheers, Grant

1 0

RE: SnapMirror Very Slow
by Norman, Paul 29 Jul '99

29 Jul '99

> -----Original Message----- > From: alexei(a)mindspring.net [mailto:alexei@mindspring.net] > Sent: Thursday, July 29, 1999 1:48 PM > To: dmidgett(a)about.com > Cc: toasters(a)mathworks.com > Subject: Re: SnapMirror Very Slow > > > "David Midgett" <dmidgett(a)about.com> writes: > > > Has anyone experienced problems with the SnapMirror taking > an excessively > > long time to complete the transfer. We have two F760's in a cluster > > configuration. The mirror is set to update every 15 > minutes. There is not > > that much data that is changing and the total volume is > 107Gb with only 1Gb > > used spanning 10 disks. The transfer takes hours for any > change to be > > replicated. The 'vol snapmirror status' command shows that it is > > transferring. The network speed is not an issue. Also > connected the two > > NetApp's directly to each other with a cross cable. This > does not speed it > > up. Any insight? > > > Hmm. I don't know if this should work as you describe. The > normal overhead > for the snapmirror includes moving a constant set of data > plus the deltas. Correct, overhead is 1/1024 of the volume size. In this case a little over 100MB. > > Once the initial (level 0) snapmirror finishes, how long do > incrementals take? > > Have you tried with larger intervals? The implication here being that an update that does not complete due to network being down or some such will just restart at the next scheduled update time. How are you determining that updates take a long time. Have you done snap list and seen how fast the snapshot names are incrementing. > > What network interface are you using to conenct the filers? > > snapmirroring between cluster partners does not seem like it > would/should > work completely. The whole point of clustering is to have access to > both sets of data with a failure, so snapmirroring it between > the cluster is an > unneccessary step. What occurs when: > > - snapmirror source filer fails > - cluster-failover kicks in > - cf partner (snapmirror destination) takes over > - snapmirror continues.... how? The filer talks to itself? Exactly! The filer is running a virtual machine that actually sends the update to the original physical machine. Actually not as crazy as it first sounds. In fact we do have customers that just have a single filer and want to mirror so that they have two copies of data. [Poof! The engineer in me takes over for the Marketing dweeb that's been talking til now] Alright, maybe we don't have anybody doing it, but we've talked about it with customers. :-) When we first set up customer demos of snapmirroring here in corporate, we did it on a cluster since that was the equipment we had in the demo room. I don't recall any special issues in using it on a cluster. It was hard to see the updates since we had a tiny volume, 30GB, and a direct gigabit connection. Every time we did a status it was idle. Trying to catch the 30MB in flight turned out to be impossible. A sysstat would show the update going once a minute. Looking at the snapshot names incrementing turned out to be the simplest way to see what was happening. > > Try breaking the cluster setup, then do the snapmirror again. > See if the > speed improves. This shouldn't be an issue. > > Perhaps others have better ideas. Well, have you tried contacting NetApp CS and asked them to look at your setup? You may have something different in your environment or it could be you've uncovered a bug. > > HTH. > > > Alex >

1 0

Re: SnapMirror Very Slow
by alexei＠mindspring.net 29 Jul '99

29 Jul '99

"David Midgett" <dmidgett(a)about.com> writes: > Has anyone experienced problems with the SnapMirror taking an excessively > long time to complete the transfer. We have two F760's in a cluster > configuration. The mirror is set to update every 15 minutes. There is not > that much data that is changing and the total volume is 107Gb with only 1Gb > used spanning 10 disks. The transfer takes hours for any change to be > replicated. The 'vol snapmirror status' command shows that it is > transferring. The network speed is not an issue. Also connected the two > NetApp's directly to each other with a cross cable. This does not speed it > up. Any insight? Hmm. I don't know if this should work as you describe. The normal overhead for the snapmirror includes moving a constant set of data plus the deltas. Once the initial (level 0) snapmirror finishes, how long do incrementals take? Have you tried with larger intervals? What network interface are you using to conenct the filers? snapmirroring between cluster partners does not seem like it would/should work completely. The whole point of clustering is to have access to both sets of data with a failure, so snapmirroring it between the cluster is an unneccessary step. What occurs when: - snapmirror source filer fails - cluster-failover kicks in - cf partner (snapmirror destination) takes over - snapmirror continues.... how? The filer talks to itself? Try breaking the cluster setup, then do the snapmirror again. See if the speed improves. Perhaps others have better ideas. HTH. Alex

1 0

RE: CIFS Remote Backup Options
by Benn, Paul 29 Jul '99

29 Jul '99

Hello Annisa, Keeping ARCServe in place should be just fine and would relieve you from having to learn a new piece of backup software (not to mention having to train anybody else in the support staff that might need to use it). The most common (only) "gotchas" that I've personally seen are related to mal-configured file permissions or occasionally name resolution problems. Make sure that the backup application's service account has access to the files and directories that you want to backup. Best of Luck! Regards, Paul Benn Network Appliance -----Original Message----- I am working on design of a backup system for our F740 filer (100G usable) in a CIFS environment. At this time we have no plans on directly attaching a tape backup device to the filer. Our current enterprise backup solution is ARCserve 6.5 (on NT). I have the White Paper on NT Backups and am wondering what is actually in use in the field. Are there any gotcha's I need to watch out for? Any best practices out there?

1 0

Linux, Samba and CIFS
by Sam Schorr 29 Jul '99

29 Jul '99

Folks, We're trying to get a Linux box, using Samba, to mount an NT share to our filers. We have been, quite successfully, accessing the filers from the NT domain they are in using normal UNC share names. We have also, successfully, mounted NT shares from the Linux box using Samba. The failure seems to be in some area of authentication on the part of the filers that is somehow unique to them as other NT systems are quite happy talking to the Linux/Samba mount. Any thoughts? Sam Schorr Homestead Technologies ph: (650) 549-3152 fax: (650) 364-7329 sschorr(a)homestead.com Don't just build a home page...build a Homestead!! http://www.homestead.com

3 2

File Ownership
by Ken Zola 29 Jul '99

29 Jul '99

Has anyone had the problem of Microsoft Word or Excel file writes taking over ownership of a file? I have a 720 at OS version of 5.1.2R3 running both the NFS and CIFS protocols. The filer contains only the root volume which has multiple qtrees of UNIX style security. Scenario: CIFS user#1 creates a Microsoft Word document which has write access at the UNIX group level. CIFS user#2, who is in the same UNIX group, modifies the file and automatically becomes the UNIX owner of the file. This works the same for Excel documents but not for text documents using Notepad. All help is appreciated. Ken

2 1

RE: File Ownership
by Muhlestein, Mark 29 Jul '99

29 Jul '99

This has to do with the way many Windows applications work. When a file is opened the application typically operates on a temporary copy of the original file. The temporary file is of course owned by the user that just created it. When the file is saved, the original file is renamed to become a backup file, and the temporary file is renamed to the original file name. That's how the ownership changes. Mark -----Original Message----- From: Ken Zola [mailto:kenz@cfsmo.honeywell.com] Sent: Thursday, July 29, 1999 8:24 AM To: toasters(a)mathworks.com Subject: File Ownership Has anyone had the problem of Microsoft Word or Excel file writes taking over ownership of a file? I have a 720 at OS version of 5.1.2R3 running both the NFS and CIFS protocols. The filer contains only the root volume which has multiple qtrees of UNIX style security. Scenario: CIFS user#1 creates a Microsoft Word document which has write access at the UNIX group level. CIFS user#2, who is in the same UNIX group, modifies the file and automatically becomes the UNIX owner of the file. This works the same for Excel documents but not for text documents using Notepad. All help is appreciated. Ken

1 0

RE: Linux, Samba and CIFS
by Benn, Paul 29 Jul '99

29 Jul '99

You might want to consider upgrading to Data ONTAP 5.3.2. The smbmount command works with that version. Out of curiosity, is there any reason that you would rather use CIFS than NFS to connect from a Linux box (assuming your filer is licensed for both)? Regards, Paul -----Original Message----- From: Sam Schorr [mailto:sschorr@homestead.com] Sent: Thursday, July 29, 1999 10:49 AM To: 'Benn, Paul'; Sam Schorr; 'toasters(a)mathworks.com' Cc: Stephen Wu; Mike Mcnelly Subject: RE: Linux, Samba and CIFS We are using Samba 2.0.3-8. the filers are running 5.2.1P2D6. -----Original Message----- From: Benn, Paul [mailto:paul.benn@netapp.com] Sent: Thursday, July 29, 1999 10:46 AM To: 'Sam Schorr'; 'toasters(a)mathworks.com' Cc: Stephen Wu; Mike Mcnelly Subject: RE: Linux, Samba and CIFS What are you using to mount the share? What version of Data ONTAP are you using? Regards, Paul -----Original Message----- We're trying to get a Linux box, using Samba, to mount an NT share to our filers. We have been, quite successfully, accessing the filers from the NT domain they are in using normal UNC share names. We have also, successfully, mounted NT shares from the Linux box using Samba. The failure seems to be in some area of authentication on the part of the filers that is somehow unique to them as other NT systems are quite happy talking to the Linux/Samba mount.

1 0

Jump to page:

2025

2024

2023

2022

2021

2020

2019

2018

2017

2016

2015

2014

2013

2012

2011

2010

2009

2008

2007

2006

2005

2004

2003

2002

2001

2000

1999

1998

1997

toasters