toasters

toasters@lists.teaparty.net

13515 discussions

duplicate inode numbers
by Tom Reingold 25 Jan '99

25 Jan '99

Hey! My user could not copy a snapshot to the original place because "cp" claimed the files are identical. I think cp thinks so because the inode numbers are the same. The files do not have identical contents, so it seems like a serious bug that the filer issued duplicate inode numbers. Am I wrong? The output belog is wide. Please view it with a wide window. # ls -il myfile .snapshot/*/myfile 2436244 -rw-rw---- 1 pete pete 85933 Jan 24 17:50 .snapshot/hourly.0/myfile 2436244 -rw-rw---- 1 pete pete 85211 Jan 24 15:50 .snapshot/hourly.1/myfile 2436244 -rw-rw---- 1 pete pete 84223 Jan 24 11:56 .snapshot/hourly.2/myfile 971294 -rw-rw---- 1 pete pete 83436 Jan 24 00:47 .snapshot/hourly.3/myfile 971294 -rw-rw---- 1 pete pete 79270 Jan 23 12:57 .snapshot/hourly.4/myfile 971294 -rw-rw---- 1 pete pete 79270 Jan 23 12:57 .snapshot/hourly.5/myfile 971294 -rw-rw---- 1 pete pete 75104 Jan 23 02:42 .snapshot/hourly.6/myfile 971294 -rw-rw---- 1 pete pete 75104 Jan 23 02:42 .snapshot/hourly.7/myfile 971294 -rw-rw---- 1 pete pete 79270 Jan 23 12:57 .snapshot/nightly.0/myfile 971294 -rw-rw---- 1 pete pete 70938 Jan 22 19:41 .snapshot/nightly.1/myfile 971294 -rw-rw---- 1 pete pete 62606 Jan 21 22:20 .snapshot/nightly.2/myfile 2436244 -rw-rw---- 1 pete pete 86541 Jan 24 22:24 myfile Tom Reingold tommy(a)bell-labs.com http://www.bell-labs.com/~tommy Bell Labs, the Research and Development unit of Lucent Technologies Murray Hill, NJ, 07974-0636 US

2 1

Microsoft exchange
by Jason Middlebrooks 24 Jan '99

24 Jan '99

Is Microsoft exchange supported on the netapp filers? Jason Middlebrooks Systems Engineer Datalink Phone: 770-933-9327x260 2264 Northwest Parkway, Suite I Pager: 888-502-1625 Marietta, GA 30067 Fax: 770-933-9272

10 11

Recoverable error rates
by Aiello, Tony 24 Jan '99

24 Jan '99

Hello, There's been some questions of late regarding the meaning of soft or recovered errors. A recovered error is defined as the disk needing to take some action other than the initial access to the media in order to satisfy an i/o request. The methods used may be to retry the request, reseeking to the sector, recreating the data from error correction information or all of the above. Recovered errors do not indicate pending disk failure. Drive manufacturer's specify a bit error rate of so many recoverable errors per bits of access. Note that bits of access includes sector overhead. A 512 byte sector is bracketed by header and trailer information used to keep track of the location as well as error recovery information. While recovered errors do not in themselves indicate pending drive failure, an excessive rate of more than 10 a day on a filer under average load would indicate problems in media management. This condition must be examined more closely to really quantify the error rate. A single sector written with a bit flip will always return a recovered event when read. Naturally. The ECC does not match the stored data so the error correction is invoked to reproduce the proper image. So when examining the recovered error log look at the block address. If each entry references the same block, that is ONE recovered error, regardless of how many entries are made against it. If each one indicates a different address then the amount of traffic must be considered. Using sysstat to look at the megabyte per second rating of the system. Using that determine the megabyte per hour rating. Multiply by 8 to get bits. A reasonable number of for the recovered error rate is 10 per 10^12 bits of access. So consider a disk giving an average response of 20 ms per 4K i/o. It's serving 50 transactions per second or .2 MB/sec. In a 24 hour period then it serves about 1.4 * 10^11 bits. Not far from the recovered bit error rate. So a recovered error every day would not even be excessive. Naturally a filer serving more transactions per second would have a higher rate of expected recovered errors. Realistically, disks don't perform that poorly and may go for long periods of time without reporting a single recovery event. Our primary motivation in logging these events is more for performance. Since error recovery takes time, a disk having a large number of recovered errors could adversely effect performance. So we log these as a means to aid in diagnosing performance problems. The short story is: drives are expected to have these recovered errors. Recovered errors don't indicate a pending failure. Removing a disk because of soft errors wastes time and materials. Futher it exposes you to real damage should some other device experience an unrecoverable error. Tony -------------------------- mailto: taiello(a)netapp.com Ph:(408) 367-3251 Fax: (408) 367-3151

3 2

Re: NFS mail spool [ Was Re: Microsoft exchange ]
by Keith Brown 22 Jan '99

22 Jan '99

Use of NetApp filer technology to act as the storage portion of large scale e-mail installations is a relatively common application of our products. Almost "routine" in fact! :-) A very good technical paper has been written by one of our customers on this subject, which can be perused at: http://www.earthlink.com/about/papers/mailarch.html A similar paper describing the net news application of filers is also available from: http://www.earthlink.com/about/papers/scalenews.html A recently published article on the subject of "Hosting E-Mail for Heavyweights", involving our storage solutions can be viewed at: http://www.internetworld.com/print/1998/10/12/infrastructure/19981012-hosti… tml And finally, one of our own papers on the subject of e-mail performance benchmarking is available from: http://www.netapp.com/technology/level3/3022.html All just FYI... Keith

1 0

RE: Microsoft exchange
by Mohler, Jeff 22 Jan '99

22 Jan '99

While we're on the subject of mail, I was thinking of moving our sendmail spool area from a drive local to the Sun mail server to one of our NetApp boxes. Anyone have any pros/cons regarding NFS mounting the mail spool to the mail server? -- Two words. Dot locking. (procmail)

1 0

Re: Microsoft exchange
by Jason D. Kelleher 22 Jan '99

22 Jan '99

In message <199901221550.KAA20198(a)prospero.dma.isg.mot.com>, Gordon Keegan w rites: >> On Fri, Jan 22, 1999 at 09:47:48AM -0500, Jason Middlebrooks wrote: >> > Is Microsoft exchange supported on the netapp filers? >> >> Actually, I think exchange requires that all data be stored on local >> drives, just like SQL server does. >> >> -- > >While we're on the subject of mail, I was thinking of moving our >sendmail spool area from a drive local to the Sun mail server to >one of our NetApp boxes. Anyone have any pros/cons regarding NFS >mounting the mail spool to the mail server? Stale NFS file locks caused us some problems initially (procmail processes would clog the server waiting on locks), but that was bug #6118 which was fixed in 5.x. Other than that, no problems. And it's nice to be able to pull accidentally deleted messages out of snapshots. jason

1 0

Sybase not SQL
by Robert Black 22 Jan '99

22 Jan '99

Opps! Sorry all my brain was thinking SQL my eyes were seen Sybase. Been that kind of week. Bob ----------------------------------------------------------------- Robert Black Email: bobbl(a)netapp.com Network Appliance, Inc. Voice: (800) 550-6827 Systems Engineer - Pacific NW Pager: (800) 465-7149 -----------------------------------------------------------------

1 0

RE: Microsoft exchange
by Allison, Bridget 22 Jan '99

22 Jan '99

> Actually, I think exchange requires that all data be stored on local > drives, just like SQL server does. That's true today but NetApp is working with Microsoft to change that. Check out http://now.netapp.com/solutions/index.shtml (requires NOW login and password) for more info. If you need more info after that then contact me directly at bridget(a)netapp.com Bridget ============================= Bridget Allison Network Appliance Inc. office: (408) 367 3419 cell: (408) 823 1126

1 0

unsubscribe
by Daniel Long 22 Jan '99

22 Jan '99

unsubscribe

1 0

backup with a STK 9730 Library
by Jason Middlebrooks 22 Jan '99

22 Jan '99

Does anybody have any ideas of how to use a STK 9730 library with a F740. I can not go the Netbackup route at this time. What about BudTools or anything? Jason Middlebrooks Systems Engineer Datalink Phone: 770-933-9327x260 2264 Northwest Parkway, Suite I Pager: 888-502-1625 Marietta, GA 30067 Fax: 770-933-9272

1 0

Backup Solution for a F760
by Des Barden 22 Jan '99

22 Jan '99

Could someone please advise what is a good solution for backing up a F760. We are looking to have a day one usage of 600 megabytes useable, scalable upto 2 terabyte system. We would prefer to use Veritas Netbackup as the Backup Manager software. The backup window is to backup within 24 hours for a full backup. Des Barden Team Leader Unix/LAN IS Regional Services (Harlow) Nortel Networks Esn: 742-5856

2 1

Subscribe
by Jonas Jonsson 22 Jan '99

22 Jan '99

1 0

SUMMARY: can't control access over CIFS
by Tom Reingold 22 Jan '99

22 Jan '99

Thanks to Keith Brown of Netapp! His answer was right. After connecting a drive (or being told the user is not allowed), changing the permissions is not adequate. The user has to log out of NT. Keith suggested also doing "cifs terminate workstation-name" on the toaster, which I'll try next time. Thanks to Mark Muhlestein of Netapp for following up to make sure I'm a satisfied customer. I think we get more than our money's worth on this mailing list. :-) What other vendor follows up so thoroughly? Thanks to all others who tried. -- Tom Reingold tommy(a)bell-labs.com http://www.bell-labs.com/~tommy Bell Labs, the Research and Development unit of Lucent Technologies Murray Hill, NJ, 07974-0636 US

1 0

Subnet/Gateway Problem
by Patrick.Day.B＠bayer.com 22 Jan '99

22 Jan '99

I have a 740 with a 4-Port nic card. We are running both WINS and DNS (and the respective addresses are static-mapped). I have attached each port to a different subnet (they are all connecte via routers). When i run setup, it asks for each nic address and subnet mask, howerver it only asks for one gateway address for all. Only the nic that corresponds to the gateway will respond. How can i configure a default gateway for each port? -Patrick Day Bayer Corporation

2 1

Re: Subnet/Gateway Problem
by Keith Brown 22 Jan '99

22 Jan '99

> http://now-internal.netapp.com/knowledge/contents/TIP/TIP_55.shtml > >and: > > http://now-internal.netapp.com/knowledge/contents/TIP/TIP_56.shtml Doh! My apologies to everyone. I cut and pasted the above links from my browser and promptly forgot to modify them for *external* access to NOW. Unless you work here, you won't be able to get to these. The correct links are: http://now.netapp.com/knowledge/contents/TIP/TIP_55.shtml http://now.netapp.com/knowledge/contents/TIP/TIP_56.shtml Keith

2 1

Re: Subnet/Gateway Problem
by Keith Brown 21 Jan '99

21 Jan '99

>How can i configure a default gateway for each port? There are some "Tip and Technique" documents in the Knowledge Base of the NOW website that discusses this (at least they discuss the issue of multiple default gateways). They are: http://now-internal.netapp.com/knowledge/contents/TIP/TIP_55.shtml and: http://now-internal.netapp.com/knowledge/contents/TIP/TIP_56.shtml Hopefully they will answer your question. Take a look at the doc for /etc/dgateways also, which you will probably find at: http://yourfiler.bayer.com/na_admin/man/na_dgateways.5.html Keith

1 0

RE: Clustered failover product roadmap
by Norman, Paul 21 Jan '99

21 Jan '99

> I did see a pair of 740s clusetered at LISA. I've also been talking > to my reseller about clustering a pair of them, with nary a word of it > not being possible. I've also heard of clustering between a 630 and a > 7xx, but it "wasn't supported." True, the only supported configurations are between identical model filers. > > K. >

2 1

RE: Snapshots/no snapshots on the same volume
by Norman, Paul 21 Jan '99

21 Jan '99

> -----Original Message----- > From: Bob Collie [mailto:bob.collie@telalink.net] > Sent: Wednesday, January 20, 1999 1:01 PM > To: toasters(a)mathworks.com > Subject: Snapshots/no snapshots on the same volume > > > Can you designate a certain area of the same volume to not snapshot > where you designate the rest of it to do so? > > It is my current understanding that I have to create an entirely > new volume in order to try and do this, but I'm hoping that is > not the case. I hate to be the one to dash your hopes, but your understanding is correct. You need to create additional volume. Snapshots are indeed done on a per volume basis. > > NetApp Release 5.1.2: Sat Sep 26 05:05:59 PDT 1998 > > Thanks, > -Bob > > -- > Bob Collie, VP/Chief Technical Officer, Telalink Corporation > mailto:bob.collie@telalink.net >

1 0

RE: Clustered failover product roadmap
by Norman, Paul 21 Jan '99

21 Jan '99

> -----Original Message----- > From: Brian Tao [mailto:taob@risc.org] > Sent: Wednesday, January 20, 1999 12:26 PM > To: toasters(a)mathworks.com > Subject: Clustered failover product roadmap > > > I've got two conflicting pieces of information that I'd like > to have sorted out. I initially thought that clustered failover was > available on the F760 late last year, and that it was coming to the > F740 sometime this quarter. I was then told by a Netapp vendor that > last year saw the rollout of clustering on the F630's, and that I > should only expect clustering on the F760's this quarter. Clustering > on the F740's was not in the plans. F630 Clusters starting shipping October 10th of last year. F760 and F740 Clusters started shipping January 11th of this year. > > I'm pretty sure I heard right the first time, and I'm told Netapp > demonstrated an F740 cluster at LISA'98. I bought a pair of F740's on > the assumption that I could get clustering on them for 1999Q1, and I'm > about to buy another pair on the same assumption. We did demonstrate an F740 cluster at LISA'98 last December. > -- > Brian Tao (BT300, taob(a)risc.org) > "Though this be madness, yet there is method in't" >

1 0

Re: Snapshots/no snapshots on the same volume
by Keith Brown 21 Jan '99

21 Jan '99

>Can you designate a certain area of the same volume to not snapshot >where you designate the rest of it to do so? No. Sorry. Keith

3 2

Clustered failover product roadmap
by Brian Tao 20 Jan '99

20 Jan '99

I've got two conflicting pieces of information that I'd like to have sorted out. I initially thought that clustered failover was available on the F760 late last year, and that it was coming to the F740 sometime this quarter. I was then told by a Netapp vendor that last year saw the rollout of clustering on the F630's, and that I should only expect clustering on the F760's this quarter. Clustering on the F740's was not in the plans. I'm pretty sure I heard right the first time, and I'm told Netapp demonstrated an F740 cluster at LISA'98. I bought a pair of F740's on the assumption that I could get clustering on them for 1999Q1, and I'm about to buy another pair on the same assumption. -- Brian Tao (BT300, taob(a)risc.org) "Though this be madness, yet there is method in't"

4 3

Snapshots/no snapshots on the same volume
by Bob Collie 20 Jan '99

20 Jan '99

Can you designate a certain area of the same volume to not snapshot where you designate the rest of it to do so? It is my current understanding that I have to create an entirely new volume in order to try and do this, but I'm hoping that is not the case. NetApp Release 5.1.2: Sat Sep 26 05:05:59 PDT 1998 Thanks, -Bob -- Bob Collie, VP/Chief Technical Officer, Telalink Corporation mailto:bob.collie@telalink.net

1 0

RE: Clustered failover product roadmap
by Gegenheimer, Bill 20 Jan '99

20 Jan '99

You may get multiple responses on this one. Clustering on the 760's and the 740's is supported now, as of release 5.2.1, which has just come out (last week). Bill > -----Original Message----- > From: Brian Tao [mailto:taob@risc.org] > Sent: Wednesday, January 20, 1999 12:26 PM > To: toasters(a)mathworks.com > Subject: Clustered failover product roadmap > > > I've got two conflicting pieces of information that I'd like > to have sorted out. I initially thought that clustered failover was > available on the F760 late last year, and that it was coming to the > F740 sometime this quarter. I was then told by a Netapp vendor that > last year saw the rollout of clustering on the F630's, and that I > should only expect clustering on the F760's this quarter. Clustering > on the F740's was not in the plans. > > I'm pretty sure I heard right the first time, and I'm told Netapp > demonstrated an F740 cluster at LISA'98. I bought a pair of F740's on > the assumption that I could get clustering on them for 1999Q1, and I'm > about to buy another pair on the same assumption. > -- > Brian Tao (BT300, taob(a)risc.org) > "Though this be madness, yet there is method in't" >

2 1

Re: can't control access over CIFS
by Keith Brown 20 Jan '99

20 Jan '99

>Clearly, there is some cacheing going on, but I don't know where, why, >or when. Yes there is some "cacheing" going on, and this is probably what's causing your confusion. When a Windows client first establishes a CIFS session to the filer, either by mapping a network drive to a filer share or by accessing our file system using a UNC pathname, the Windows user is normally mapped to a valid UNIX identity so that the UNIX permissions in the file system can be enforced on that user. This is done by looking up the Windows username in the filer's /etc/passwd file (or the equivalent passwd.byname NIS map) and associating the users UNIX UID, primary GID and secondary GIDs with the established CIFS session (the secondary GIDs, if any, come from an /etc/group lookup, just like on UNIX). This mapping only occurs at session establishment time. If you subsequently add the user to another group by editing the /etc/group file, or change their UID or primary GID by editing the /etc/passwd file, the new values and/or group memberships will not be associated with the Windows user until they disconnect their session from the filer and then reconnect. Forcing a Windows client to disconnect a CIFS session from a server is actually something of an art form. The CIFS redirector on Windows manages sessions largely independently of direct user actions, and this may also be causing some confusion. For example, a: NET USE Q: \\FILER\SHARE will establish a CIFS session to the filer (unless there is one established already), but a: NET USE Q: /D will not disconnect the session. It will disconnect the network drive from the CIFS session (you won't have a Q: anymore), but the CIFS session itself will normally remain established, even if you have no other drives mapped to the filer. Only if you don't try and access the filer via *any* method (UNC or mapped drive) for a period of time (10 minutes is the default, but it can be changed in the registry) will the CIFS redirector quietly disconnect the session from the filer. This is just how Windows networking works, whether you're dealing with a filer or a Windows NT server. So, if you mess with a Windows user's group memberships by editing the passwd and group databases, the easiest way to make *certain* that a new mapping is done immediately is to force a disconnect from the filer side using the "cifs terminate <workstation-name>" console command. I'm fairly certain that logging the user out of the Windows client and then logging them back in again will force a client side disconnect, but I haven't watched that one with my own eyes and I don't want to mislead you. The Windows redirector's session management policies can be a little esoteric. :-) Whatever you do, you can use the "cifs sessions" command to make sure that the client's session has gone before you try accessing the filer again from said client after making the changes. As a final note, this mapping-Windows-users-to-equivalent-UNIX-users stuff is actually unnecessary if you are using the filer in a Windows-only context. If you enable NTFS security within our file system, Windows users do not have to be associated with unique UIDs and GIDs etc... in order for security to be enforced. In other words, Windows-centric folk should not be "scared" by any of the above. If you don't care about UNIX, none of this is necessary or directly applicable. If you just have a mass of humble Windows users, we don't "force" you to mess with passwd files, group files, UIDs, GIDs, UNIX perms etc, etc... to administer these users. It can all be done using regular domain accounts and NTFS permissions, all managed and administered from the standard User Manager for Domains and Server Manager NT tools, as well as the Explorer UI (file properties -> security -> permissions etc...). Keith

1 0

Frequency of "recovered error" messages
by sthaug＠nethelp.no 20 Jan '99

20 Jan '99

We have an F330 running 4.3.3D2 where one of the disks is now generating 30 - 40 "READ sector xxxxxxx recovered error" messages per day. At what frequency of such messages should I start worrying about the disk? Steinar Haug, Nethelp consulting, sthaug(a)nethelp.no

3 2

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