toasters

toasters@lists.teaparty.net

13515 discussions

Re: ndmpcopy question
by sirbruce＠ix.netcom.com 29 Oct '98

29 Oct '98

On 10/28/98 17:49:05 you wrote: >NOW BEWARE! Once you test a few times and discover that ndmpcopy tends to >hang, you can get into the habit of just interrupting it whenever you see >that message. DON'T. If you are copying a very large amount of data, the >restore will probably finish well after the dump. This is because the >restore does a final pass (after all data has transferred) to set the >correct owner and permissions on all directories. If you interrupt >ndmpcopy while this is going on, you are left with a bunch of dirs owned >by root, with permissions 777 on the restore filer. Can you guess how >I found this out?? :-) This should be entered as a bug. Even though interrupting a restore isn't something you should do, having it create potential security issues as a result isn't really necessary. It's probably nice to have that as a with ndmpcopy as a shortcut in the code (you can probably rely letting the requests go through a higher level, since they have "permission"), though, so it's not surprising it's there. May not be something that can be fixed easily. Bruce

1 0

Re: raid scrubbing and hot spares
by sirbruce＠ix.netcom.com 29 Oct '98

29 Oct '98

On 10/28/98 09:28:15 you wrote: > >> If I recall correctly, NetApp suggests you don't cron rdate's to >> run on the hour because it's possible to step the clock past the >> hour and miss a scheduled event such as raid scrubbing or >> snapshots. I beleive I read this on NOW, not sure. >Interesting! >Wish they would provide an alternate solution. >The don't provide NTP and then they discourage us from cron'ing rdate. >What do they think? I have nothing else meaningful to do, but sit here >and periodically do > remoteshell filer1 "hello brain dead, here is your date/time" > remoteshell filre2 "hello brain dead, here is your date/time" > .... An understandable reaction, but slightly misguided. *frequent* rdates, particularly those at the top or "common" offsets of the hour, when another cron event is to take place, are what breaks it. Doing a infrequent rdate, say 4 times an hour at odd offsets like 12, 27, 42, and 57 minutes, should be just fine. However, this is a problem that does need to be fixed once and for all. Most people probably never experience it. Bruce

1 0

ndmpcopy port for HP/UX
by Garth T Kidd 29 Oct '98

29 Oct '98

Has anyone compiled ndmpcopy for HP/UX? Regards, Garth. -- Garth T Kidd <garth(a)netapp.com> Network Appliance: Systems Engineer, Australia & NZ Fast. Simple. Reliable. Multiprotocol. Mobile: +61-414-300-213 http://www.netapp.com/

2 1

RE: raid scrubbing and hot spares
by sirbruce＠ix.netcom.com 28 Oct '98

28 Oct '98

On 10/27/98 13:48:40 you wrote: > > >Hmm... That's interesting. Is there a CPU usage threshold before the filer >becomes "Busy"? Is it 60%, 70% or what? It's probably "busy" in the sense of heavy disk activity. Which might be associated with high CPU usage but not necessarily. As someone else noted, frequent rdates can do it too. Perhaps running a backup? I know certain models and certain OSes are less prone to this, but I don't know the details of how Netapp currently views the situation. Bruce

8 8

samba and CIFS on netapp
by Bryan Hess 26 Oct '98

26 Oct '98

Recently a couple of us took a look at why Samba clients can't connect to NetApp filers running CIFS. Even something as simple as this fails: smbclient -L filername Netapp does not support samba clients, but we're interested in finding out what goes wrong. Attached to the end of this note is a summary of SMB interaction with the netapp filer, both from a windows machine and from samba. It was prepared locally by Larry Dootlittle. We'd like to see support for samba in OnTap. I'm told that it may be coming in a later version. --Bryan Hess ================================================================================ Attempt to diagnose why Samba fails to establish SMB session with a NetApp. Larry Doolittle <ldoolitt(a)jlab.org> Oct 23, 1998 Based on output of tcpdump-3.4a5 with smb patches by A. Tridell "Leach" is draft-leach-cifs-v1-spec-01.txt (expired). Windows 4 Samba Session Request (No mention of this packet in Leach) Flags 0x81000044 0x81000048 Source "WU" "RECYCLE" Session Granted (No mention of this packet in Leach) (no differences) SMBnegprot (REQUEST) Proc ID 28498 8593 UID 0 313 MID 2177 8693 SMBnegprot (REPLY) Proc ID 28498 8593 UID 0 0 MID 2177 8693 SMBsesssetupX (REQUEST) Flags1 0x10 (reserved) 0x08 (caseless) (Leach 3.2.2) Flags2 0x0 0x1 (KNOWS_LONG_NAMES) (Leach 3.2.3) Proc ID 28498 8593 UID 1 313 MID 2177 8693 Com2 0x75 0xFF Off2 116 0 MaxBuffer 2920 65535 MaxMpx 32 2 VcNumber 0 8593 (Illegal per Leach 4.1.2.1, see below) Capabilities 0x1 (not listed) 0x0 Account "GENFA" "LDOOLITT" Domain "" "WORKGROUP" OS "Windows 4" "Unix" LanMan "Windows 4" "Samba" SMBsesssetupX (REPLY) Error class 0x0 0x2 Error code 0x0 1 Proc ID 28498 8593 UID 2048 0 MID 2177 8693 Samba returned a VcNumber of 8593, when the NetApp said NumVcs=1 in its SMBnegprot (REPLY). This is a violation of Leach's section on "Pre NT LM 0.12". VcNumber is not mentioned in Leach's section on "NT LM 0.12", which is what both Windows 4 and Samba negotiated with the NetApp.

2 1

4.3.3 and y2000
by Mark Richards 23 Oct '98

23 Oct '98

Hello I'm running OnTap 4.3.3 (CIFS and NFS). I understand that the newest version of ontap is y2000 compliant. Does anyone know about the older versions? Regards Mark Richards

3 3

Re: (small?) feature request
by Tom Reingold 21 Oct '98

21 Oct '98

On Sun, 18 Oct 1998 13:05:48 EDT, Brian Tao <taob(a)risc.org> wrote: > Netapp could put up a "domestic build" and an "international > build" on now.netapp.com, and post up the usual disclaimers and domain > name checks, etc. to satisfy export restrictions. I'd love to ssh > into a Netapp and ditch rsh/telnet. Brian is right, netapp ought to be able to do it and ought to do it too. But you could try what I do. I have a "console" host with lots of serial ports, each connected to one of my servers' console ports. ssh into that host. Then the serial line from there to the netapp is secure. This workaround does not negate Brian's point.

6 5

RE: (small?) feature request
by Weeks, Thomas 21 Oct '98

21 Oct '98

> -----Original Message----- > From: marc_merlin(a)magic.metawire.com > [SMTP:marc_merlin@magic.metawire.com] > Sent: Tuesday, October 20, 1998 7:07 PM > To: toasters(a)magic.metawire.com > Subject: Re: (small?) feature request > > On 19 Oct 1998 06:51:22 -0700, Teemu Peltonen <teepee(a)netti.fi> wrote: > >Yet better, why wouldn't NetApp build and distribute the SSH > implementation > >outside the USA? Then it would be available to all users, no matter > where > >they lived. One of the most popular SSH implementations comes from > >Datafellows, a Finnish company. > > That wouldn't work, unless they move their whole engineering > building > outside of the US (I don't think Canada would do, because they have > similar > laws, and treaties with the US). > If they were to hire some programmers let's say in Australia, they > wouldn't > be allowed to merge the code with their source tree, and ship it > from the > US. The shipping builds would have to be compiled and sold from > Australia. > But even that wouldn't quite work because it means that the US > programmers > would have to leave hooks in their code for the encryption > module, and > exporting a program with hooks for an encryption engine also violates > ITAR > :-( > [Weeks, Thomas] Haha... The US wants to play this stupid little game, then Play it THEIR way! NetApp ought to take the same approach as all the floating casinos! Build a "NetApp Assembly Boat" just off the coast where the US office can send their hardware and the Aussys/Finnish can send their cypto/ssh code! I swear.. This is supposed to becoming a "Global Community"... Why doesn't someone pull the funding plug for the NSA/CIA?... Anyway... that's another monster all together. > That's why I was saying that they'd more or less have to move their > whole > engineering team outside of the US (and might even have to hire > non US > programmers because I'm not so sure that a US citizen is allowed to > develop > encryption software for another country). > [Weeks, Thomas] How about the "Good Ship NetApp"!! haha.. Really though guys... That might actually be something to LOOK at! > No, things are far from easy :-( > > Marc > [Weeks, Thomas] Thomas Weeks GTE SYSTEMS ENGINEER Testing-Integration Center "The Pit" Brooks AFB, DSN 240-5444

2 1

Re: (small?) feature request
by mds＠ns.gbnet.net 19 Oct '98

19 Oct '98

Try slipping native ssh support on a filer past export controls - we'd be very unhappy in the UK to find our company prevented from trading for breaking the arms embargo along with our suppliers. Now, allowing us to do something well defined, perhaps with the Java VM, for *ourselves* along the lines of adding a secure control protocol to our filers...now *that* would be a fine thing.

4 3

Postmark
by Marc Nicholas 17 Oct '98

17 Oct '98

Out of interest, anyone run Postmark benchtests on F700 series filers as per the whitepaper on the NetApp website? I'd be interested to see the results and don't have access to any of the 700 series... -marc -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- Hippocampus OSD, Inc. "Industrial Strength Internet Solutions" vox://416.979.9000 fax://416.979.8223 http://www.hippocampus.net =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= Host your business website for only $29/month! 1.877.GO.HIPPO

1 0

RE: Logging CIFS logins
by Allison, Bridget 16 Oct '98

16 Oct '98

I'm late into this thread so my apologies if someone has already given this info. The release of DataONTAP targeted for 1st quarter CY99 will include access logging for CIFS. You'll be able to track file and directory access and user logon/off for CIFS users. This is a subset of the auditing available for NT servers. More details will be available as the release gets closer. ===================================== Bridget Allison Manager, NetApp Windows Networking Network Appliance Inc. office: (408) 367 3419 cell: (408) 823 1126

1 0

Re: fcal and the 760
by Daniel Quinlan 15 Oct '98

15 Oct '98

Scott Schoenthal <sas(a)netapp.com> writes: > Support for the SNTP subset of NTP is currently scheduled to ship in > the next major release of ONTAP which is targeted for Feb/Mar '99. That's good news. Will it work against the standard xntpd server as well as against SNTP servers? - Dan

2 1

Backing up data
by Jason Middlebrooks 15 Oct '98

15 Oct '98

Since the 700 series filers only allow one SCSI backup device to be attached to a Filer how is it possible to back up 1TB of data in timely manner. I am talking about backing up in a 8 to 12 hour time frame. Any ideas would be great. Thanks, Jason Jason Middlebrooks Systems Engineer Direct Connect Systems Phone: 770-933-9327x270 2264 Northwest Parkway, Suite I Pager: 888-502-1625 Marietta, GA 30067 Fax: 770-933-9272

3 2

None
by jason 15 Oct '98

15 Oct '98

toasters unsubscribe

1 0

Re: fcal and the 760
by Keith Brown 15 Oct '98

15 Oct '98

>| As far as performance goes, the three FCAL loops are peers in the system. > >Is this true in a clustered failover environment as well Sure. >or can I tag >the failover loops as having a lower priority than the "local" loops? What exactly do you mean by "local loops"? If by "local loops" you mean FCAL loops that are private to an individual filer within the cluster, then I'm not entirely sure that we support that type of configuration anyway. In a cluster configuration, each filer requires at least two FCAL adapters, one to connect it to its primary disk array, and another to connect it to its secondary disk array which it takes over in the event of a failure (which is the primary of the other filer in the cluster) . It is "normal" for that to be the beginning and end of the story, except in the case of a large capacity cluster that requires two pairs of FCAL adapters per filer (see below). Just from the quantity perspective, the only filers that can or will be able to receive a third FCAL loop are the F630 and F760 units, so this discussion is somewhat moot in the context of an F740. As a point of information though, the Data ONTAP 5.2 release only supports F630 filer clustering. It does include support for the "large capacity" cluster I mentioned above (4 FCAL adapters per system, but topping out at 168 drives across the 4 loops, not 224, so an "obvious" sample configuration would involve implementing 42 drives per loop, giving each *individual* system a capacity of 84 drives or ~722 GB gross, adding up to the ~144 GB gross in the whole cluster), but F700 series clustering for the F740 and F760 systems is not yet shipping. Patience... :-) >| Well yes, but distance-from-the-controller is not a significant influencer >| of device performance on an FCAL loop. This type of fibre channel > >There must be some guidelines though. I would think that you would not >want to keep all the loops within some reasonable distance. I don't think so. That's kinda like worrying about communications between the nodes at the opposite ends of an Ethernet segment being slower because the bits have further to walk! :-) >That is, I >would probably want to put my filer in the middle of the rack so all >loops are semi-equal as opposed to at the end of the rack (thinking that >a filer that takes up 3 racks with 3 fully populated loops). Yes, there may be some physical "can it reach" issues on a three FCAL loop system. At the moment, I know that our standard issue FCAL cable that takes an FCAL adapter output plug on a filer to the input of the first shelf is just one meter long. That's no problem on a two loop system, as you can just go taking off in opposite directions to go along the shelf chain for each loop (one chain heads off up the rack, the other down, that kind of thing...) but I guess it does get kinda interesting when you've got three loops to worry about. I'll have to leave this one to someone at NetApp who knows exactly how we recommend this work physically. >Indeed. fcal is quite spiffy. It is a thing of beauty. :-) >Actually, why the decision to use copper instead of fiber? I think the reasons were plentyfold. Affordabality was certainly in the mix. Keith

4 5

Macintosh Access
by Graham C. Knight 15 Oct '98

15 Oct '98

Help! Does anyone know of a piece of software that will run on Unix or NT that will allow a NAC file system to be used by a Macintosh? Or any tricks that will allow NT to re-export a CIFS share via appletalk? I've had it with CAP - after finding yet another bug. Our usage of Filers depends on being able to access the filers from macintosh (with no client software on the mac!). If anyone has any suggestions i'd really like to hear them. Thanks, Graham

7 8

Re: file system size limit
by mds＠ns.gbnet.net 15 Oct '98

15 Oct '98

> I know that the argument will be that I should break up the single filesystem into > multiple volumes, since then I can fine tune the options (snapshots, snap schedules, > etc) per volume. That is all good, but when you start getting 100's of GB of data, > sometimes it does not split cleanly (and updating the vfstab N clients becomes a chore, > no matter how automated you have it (well, save for NIS, but who does that?)). We do. It works. We're happy.

1 0

Re: Macintosh Access
by mds＠ns.gbnet.net 15 Oct '98

15 Oct '98

Xinet. Comes free with SGI IRIX ASE, also available as a separate product last time I looked. Works very well.

1 0

ONTAP 5.2
by alexei＠cimedia.com 14 Oct '98

14 Oct '98

now that the manuals are up on NOW, when is 5.2 going out the door? thanks. Alex

2 1

Large files
by Jason Middlebrooks 14 Oct '98

14 Oct '98

I was wondering how Filers handle large files compared to small files. I am talking about storing music files to be accessed via the internet. Is the performance very good? I will be using a 700 series filer. Thanks Jason Middlebrooks Systems Engineer Direct Connect Systems Phone: 770-933-9327x270 2264 Northwest Parkway, Suite I Pager: 888-502-1625 Marietta, GA 30067 Fax: 770-933-9272

3 2

Re: snapcopy -> volcopy?
by Keith Brown 14 Oct '98

14 Oct '98

Hi Alexei... >Is volcopy the same as what snap copy was being touted as? Yes. >If volcopy >requires a separate license, why not make it part of the basic >OS instead? Volume copy did initially ship as a component that required a separate licence, but it is now free. Contact customer service or your sales rep if you have a version of ONTAP that requires a license code to enable it. I believe you will find that our latest GA release, 5.1.2, does not though. >That is, why does it require another license key? Because initially it was supposed to cost money, but now it is a base OS feature. Keith

3 4

snapcopy -> volcopy?
by alexei＠cimedia.com 14 Oct '98

14 Oct '98

This is probably a question better answered by my sales rep, but it is late and I doubt she would appreciate a page right now :) Is volcopy the same as what snap copy was being touted as? If volcopy requires a separate license, why not make it part of the basic OS instead? That is, why does it require another license key? Just curious. Thanks. Alex

3 2

Re: Macintosh Access
by Keith Brown 14 Oct '98

14 Oct '98

>Does anyone know of a piece of software that will >run on Unix or NT that will allow a NAC file system >to be used by a Macintosh? I can't give you the names of any packages that are "officially certified" to work with NFS mounted file systems and our filers, but I can give you some alternatives to the Columbia AppleTalk Package if this is proving unsatisfactory for what you are trying to accomplish. First, there is another free alternative to CAP called Netatalk. This one is from the University of Michigan and I am led to understand that it is a "better" implementation. For details, see: http://www.umich.edu/~rsug/netatalk Then there are some commercial alternatives. One comes from a company called IPT Technology and is called uShare. See: http://www.iptech.com Another comes from a company called Helios and is called EtherShare. See: http://www.helios.com >Or any tricks >that will allow NT to re-export a CIFS share >via appletalk? Unfortunately this is not possible today. >Our usage of Filers depends on being able to access >the filers from macintosh (with no client software >on the mac!). If anyone has any suggestions i'd >really like to hear them. Are you aware of the way that does involve a little client software on the Macs? A company called Thursby make a CIFS client for the Macintosh called DAVE. Thursby are at: http://www.thursby.com Keith

2 1

fcal and clustered failover
by alexei＠cimedia.com 14 Oct '98

14 Oct '98

According to the white paper http://www.netapp.com/technology/level3/1004.html, in a clustered failover (CF) setup 2 filers would be attached to the same fc loop, 1 filer to the A port and 1 to the B port (to determine who is "master" for that set of disks). Now, I take this to mean that on any given loop, only 1 filer can be master for that loop. Based on this assumption, how does this alter the max shelves per filer? That is, on a f740 I can have 2 loops (based on the 8 shelves per loop guideline and 16 shelves per filer on a 740). If this f740 and another f740 were part of the same CF setup and both filers were "active", would I be limited to a single loop of active shelves on each filer? Or would I be able to have 4 loops, 2 active and 2 in standby (ie: my partners shelves)? Or does the 8 shelves per loop guideline not apply to the CF setup? I just looked through the f700 hardware guide as well as the ONTAP 5.2 sys admin guide (thanks for having that up). The chapter on CF is good. Definitely. Ok, so the hardware guide says that a f740 and an f760 can both only have 112 fcal drives, 2 fcal loops max. How does the 760 then do 1.4TB of storage and the 740 960GB? Seems there are 56 or so drives missing.... another loop? So, my bottom line question is: in a CF setup with 2 f740's, what is the maximum *useable* storage space I will have (combined)? Also, why does a f630 get to have 3 fcal loops? Boy, I am just full of questions tonight... Thanks. Alexei

2 1

Re: fcal and clustered failover
by Keith Brown 14 Oct '98

14 Oct '98

Alexei... I'm going to leave your shelves-per-loop and loops-per-filer in the cluster scenario questions for our clustering product manager to address. He will have the latest information on exactly what configurations we have tested and are supporting on which filer. However, I will take a shot at the obvious question... >Ok, >so the hardware guide says that a f740 and an f760 can both only have 112 >fcal drives, 2 fcal loops max. > >How does the 760 then do 1.4TB of storage and the 740 960GB? Seems there are >56 or so drives missing.... another loop? This was/is just a quality assurance and testing lag. The F760 should be going to the full three FCAL loop configuration in the near term (if it hasn't happened already?). Our latest GA release, 5.1.2, just officially gave the full 3 FCAL loop / 168 drive capability to our former high end unit, the F630, so hopefully the new F760 isn't too far behind! :-) >So, my bottom line question is: in a CF setup with 2 f740's, what is the maximum >*useable* storage space I will have (combined)? Don't take it as gospel, but I *think* you'll probably be looking at a couple of FCAL loops-worth. In other words, ~960 GB combined (~480 GB per filer). The actual *useable* space is dependent on some other configuration specifics. >Also, why does a f630 get to have 3 fcal loops? Because it's been tested, certified and stamped as "approved" in a 3 FCAL loop configuration by our quality people. >Boy, I am just full of questions tonight... Tell me about it! :-) Keith

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