toasters

toasters@lists.teaparty.net

13515 discussions

upgrade problem 4.1 to 5.1
by Jason Middlebrooks 12 Oct '98

12 Oct '98

I recently had a problem upgrading to 5.1r1 here is the configuration of the filer. F630 4 SCSI Shelves full of 9 Gig drives 2 Quad 10/100 Network Cards (currently using only one port) 256 Meg Ram 8 Meg NVRAM Firmware 1.11_a1 The upgrade did fine and the NFS protocol was still working properly. I could not get CIFS to authenticate with the Primary Domain Controller. I was getting watchdog reboots most of the time and other times CIFS would not start. I had to downgrade in order to CIFS back up again. Do you think this will happen again if I upgrade to 5.1.2. What do I need to do to upgrade and get CIFS working correctly. 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

1 0

Logging CIFS logins
by Stephen C. Losen 11 Oct '98

11 Oct '98

Is there any way to log CIFS logins? We are using unix authentication, NIS enabled, and default logging (no /etc/syslog.conf file). We're running 5.0.2. Is there any way to coax our filer to log the time and loginid of each CIFS login? This information is essential for system administration in a university environment. Steve Losen scl(a)virginia.edu phone: 804-924-0640 University of Virginia ITC Unix Support

1 0

Re: 4.x to 5.x upgrade
by Daniel Quinlan 10 Oct '98

10 Oct '98

guy(a)netapp.com (Guy Harris) writes: > Note that the per-volume options are persistent; their values are > recorded in the file system "fsinfo block". Thus, for example, you > don't have to update "/etc/rc" to put Interesting. Can you share the reasoning behind making these options persistent? (I'll continue to put them into /etc/rc since I can't use RCS on the fsinfo block to keep track of changes, etc.) - Dan

1 0

Re: working around lack of NTP
by Daniel Quinlan 10 Oct '98

10 Oct '98

sirbruce <sirbruce(a)ix.netcom.com> writes: > If your netapp is really drifting that much during the day, like a > minute or more, then I suspect something is wrong with your netapp > that needs to be address. I'm "only" talking about 2 or 3 seconds, the example I sent was a one second drift. It's not bad hardware or software, but it is a problem. Some programs check timestamps, people have had "make" problems due to file modification times in the future, stat(1) fails if it thinks time is going backwards, etc. > (Note: It could drift farther during RAID scrubs than a minute. If > your schedule your RAID scrub rarely and rdate after it, there should > be no problems). That problem only affects our F330. To compensate, I rdate it every five minutes after the scrub begins. (It was drifting up to 5 minutes off of the correct time, it is down to about 45 seconds now). I also found that turning down the reconstruct speed will help reduce the rate of clock skew during scrubs. > I would normally run rdate every, say, 15 to 20 minutes, and I would > simply offset the times so it didn't run at the 0, 15, 30, or 45 > minutes after (which is when a cron job would normally be scheduled). 0, 15, 30, and 45 are typical for Data ONTAP cron jobs? That's the info I wanted, thanks. > [rdate] works as well as NTP for the granularity most people desire. > I suspect in your environment, your needs are different, but don't tar > and feather rdate for that. :) Yes, rdate has its uses. Well, at least until 2038 it does. It's simple enough for me to completely understand it, which I like. Unfortunately, whenever you set the time with rdate, even under the theoretically ideal conditions, the time can easily be incorrect by as much as one second. Jumping the clock when using rdate? Again, under theoretically ideal conditions, it can jump as much as one second. Real life is much worse, of course. NTP can give you sub-millisecond accuracy on a LAN. - Dan

1 0

Re: working around lack of NTP
by sirbruce＠ix.netcom.com 10 Oct '98

10 Oct '98

On 10/09/98 19:42:19 you wrote: > >NetApp does not support NTP, so we must set the system time via >periodic "rdate" commands. We have found that running rdate too often >(or at the wrong time of day) can cause regularly scheduled jobs (such >as scrubs) to be missed. This is a known bug I discovered. I'd give you the BUGID if I had it. :) >Right now, we're setting the time three times a day, but that doesn't >cut it. Some programs bitch that time is "going backwards" and other >nonsense because the NetApp isn't synchronized with everything else. (*) If your netapp is really drifting that much during the day, like a minute or more, then I suspect something is wrong with your netapp that needs to be address. Various factors in the past - old software releases, old SCSI cards, etc. - have contributed to clock drift. And sometimes, your clock is just bad. I think you should have support look into this and determine exactly how much your are drifting in a day and why. (Note: It could drift farther during RAID scrubs than a minute. If your schedule your RAID scrub rarely and rdate after it, there should be no problems). >I'd like to know when NetApp cron jobs (other than scrubs -- I know >when they happen) are scheduled, so we can run "rdate" more often, but >without causing problems. There are other periodic timed behaviors in a filer, like CIFS and WINS stuff, that are variable. I don't know if throwing off the software clock effects them - hopefully not. The only other major cron jobs you need to be aware of are the snap schedule (I think I've rarely if ever seen clock drift effect this) and the hourly statd message (and support email, whenever that is). I would normally run rdate every, say, 15 to 20 minutes, and I would simply offset the times so it didn't run at the 0, 15, 30, or 45 minutes after (which is when a cron job would normally be scheduled). >What I'm trying to do (fix the time problem we're having) is really >futile, of course. You can't synchronize crap with rdate. It works as well as NTP for the granularity most people desire. I suspect in your environment, your needs are different, but don't tar and feather rdate for that. :) Bruce

1 0

working around lack of NTP
by Daniel Quinlan 10 Oct '98

10 Oct '98

NetApp does not support NTP, so we must set the system time via periodic "rdate" commands. We have found that running rdate too often (or at the wrong time of day) can cause regularly scheduled jobs (such as scrubs) to be missed. Right now, we're setting the time three times a day, but that doesn't cut it. Some programs bitch that time is "going backwards" and other nonsense because the NetApp isn't synchronized with everything else. (*) I'd like to know when NetApp cron jobs (other than scrubs -- I know when they happen) are scheduled, so we can run "rdate" more often, but without causing problems. What I'm trying to do (fix the time problem we're having) is really futile, of course. You can't synchronize crap with rdate. - Dan (*) this is really easy to reproduce, by creating a file and running stat() on it immediately afterwards. This script shows the problem: ------- start of cut text -------------- #!/usr/local/bin/perl require "ctime.pl"; require "stat.pl"; die "usage: $0 [filename]\n" unless $ARGV[0]; open(TEST, "> $ARGV[0]"); close(TEST); do Stat($ARGV[0]); $now = time(); print "atime = ", &ctime($st_atime); print "mtime = ", &ctime($st_mtime); print "ctime = ", &ctime($st_ctime); print "adiff = ", ($now - $st_atime), "\n"; print "mdiff = ", ($now - $st_mtime), "\n"; print "cdiff = ", ($now - $st_ctime), "\n"; ------- end ---------------------------- Run it against a NetApp that is "synchronized": ------- start of cut text -------------- $ ./stat-test foo atime = Fri Oct 9 19:26:11 1998 mtime = Fri Oct 9 19:28:37 1998 ctime = Fri Oct 9 19:28:37 1998 adiff = 145 mdiff = -1 cdiff = -1 ------- end ---------------------------- $now should always be >= than all of the timestamps.

1 0

4.x to 5.x upgrade
by alexei＠cimedia.com 09 Oct '98

09 Oct '98

As I contemplate upgrading all my old filers from 4.x to 5.x, I was wondering what the horror stories are out there. Or is this truly a simple upgrade? Thanks. Alex

6 5

Re: 4.x to 5.x upgrade
by stephen＠netapp.com 09 Oct '98

09 Oct '98

> stephen(a)netapp.com (Stephen Manley) writes: > > > More specifically, in 5.1 (not 5.0) we don't allow tape record sizes > > greater than 64KB and we default to 63KB (rather than 10KB). > Note, that this limitation does not apply to NDMP to locally attached tape, or the NDMP 3-way backup. Sm

1 0

None
by yingchih＠mitac.com.tw 08 Oct '98

08 Oct '98

Unsubscribe toasters

1 0

unsubscribe
by Tim Lewis 08 Oct '98

08 Oct '98

Unsubscribe

1 0

None
by yingchih＠mitac.com.tw 08 Oct '98

08 Oct '98

unscrible toasters

1 0

Re: NetApp and Solaris: setfacl and getfacl
by sirbruce＠ix.netcom.com 07 Oct '98

07 Oct '98

On 10/06/98 17:19:32 you wrote: >I know that Net App filers and Auspexes are more reliable than Sun's >however in practice the difference is minimal. I also know that they >are faster but in practice it isn't so noticeable. We do everything we >can to avoid NFS e.g. cachefs, and most of our users seem to be of the >save and forget variety so we don't really need the performance either. It just goes to show that there are a lot of different environments out there. :) You don't specify exactly what sort of environment you have, but it sounds like it's very low key. You obviously aren't concerned with heavy Internet traffic, multiuser loads, email delivery, database or CAD simulations, etc. Sure, I could see where if you just need a server to store user files, primarily documents and a small amount of email and the like, an ordinary Sun or NT server would be just fine. And since your space needs aren't as great either (generally) in such environments, you probably view disk storage very differently. >Price will probably dictate most which way we go in future and CIFS is >a big incentive but on alternate wednesdays I still favour Sun's. I'm surprised you mentioned price, since the impression I'm getting is that you wouldn't be adverse to paying more for a standard, good ol' Sun that you all know and love. But my previous guess as to your environment may be way off, so what do I know? :) >| In an odd way, since UNIX has generally done without ACLs for so long, >| most places that I know of who could use them don't, since it's not >| really necessary and it's not going to be interoperate well in a >| heterogeneous environment. So I don't know of many customers who would >| decide that they were going to rollout widespread ACL use and switch >| all of their servers over to Sun to accomodate this. > >I would definitely use ACL's if I could but 90% of our file storage is >on machines that don't support them. I also like to use better security, >same story. I'm curious what exactly you would use them for - just intellectual curiosity, mind you, not the argumentative kind. Is security a problem currently? Will ACLs solve a particular problem with sharing files among users you're currently running into? Or do you plan to use it as a basis of a new file-sharing architecture? Do you anticipate any difficulty in getting users to use ACLs, and use them correctly? I haven't seen many UNIX environments heavily use ACLs, so I'm curious as to what people are envisioning. I'm familiar with how they are commonly used on the NT side, but the needs there are different. Bruce

1 0

None
by gordon＠nabaus.com.au 06 Oct '98

06 Oct '98

unsubscribe toasters

1 0

Re: NetApp and Solaris: setfacl and getfacl
by sirbruce＠ix.netcom.com 06 Oct '98

06 Oct '98

On 10/05/98 10:44:36 you wrote: > >+----- On Fri, 02 Oct 1998 20:07:01 CDT, writes: >| The last time the subject of ACLs came up, I sent >| out a message that said the following: >| >| I'd like to see them support all the different ACL types, Solaris, NT, >| Digital Unix, Irix, etc. (at least, I think the latter two have them) >| and have them all interoperate reasonably well. But that's no doubt a >| big undertaking for Netapp with very little return. >| >| It might make more sense is to wait on a standard ACL protocol (maybe >| as part of NFS v4) and then implement that and everyone will talk the >| same language. > >The ACL's are handled with a separate protocol which is IMHO the best >way to handle them. One only needs to look at the SMB^H^H^HCIFS >protocol to see the wisdom of doing it this way. The protocol is even >rudimentally described in /usr/include/rpcsvc/nfs_acl.x. > >| I hve reasons to believe the above statement is still an accurate >| reflection of NTAP's plans. Of course, ACLs for NT were necessary, >| and given the nature of the next NFS standard it may become important >| for them to implement Solaris ACLs as well. It will be interesting >| to see if they can make NT and NFS ACLs interoperate - if anyone can, >| I'm confident it will be Netapp. :) > >In the mean time it's a plus for Sun and a minus for Network Appliance. >After many years of working with Auspex servers I have come to the >conclusion that if you want NFS then Sun is your safest bet, if not >always fastest or best performance. Well, I suppose if you want access to "new" features, such as NFS v3 or ACLs, you're right - Sun tends to have them first before other vendors. However, most places I'm familiar with would rather have better performance and reliability and so on, and if that means not having NFS ACLs, so be it. In an odd way, since UNIX has generally done without ACLs for so long, most places that I know of who could use them don't, since it's not really necessary and it's not going to be interoperate well in a heterogeneous environment. So I don't know of many customers who would decide that they were going to rollout widespread ACL use and switch all of their servers over to Sun to accomodate this. Bruce

2 1

Re: NetApp and Solaris: setfacl and getfacl
by sirbruce＠ix.netcom.com 05 Oct '98

05 Oct '98

The last time the subject of ACLs came up, I sent out a message that said the following: I'd like to see them support all the different ACL types, Solaris, NT, Digital Unix, Irix, etc. (at least, I think the latter two have them) and have them all interoperate reasonably well. But that's no doubt a big undertaking for Netapp with very little return. It might make more sense is to wait on a standard ACL protocol (maybe as part of NFS v4) and then implement that and everyone will talk the same language. I hve reasons to believe the above statement is still an accurate reflection of NTAP's plans. Of course, ACLs for NT were necessary, and given the nature of the next NFS standard it may become important for them to implement Solaris ACLs as well. It will be interesting to see if they can make NT and NFS ACLs interoperate - if anyone can, I'm confident it will be Netapp. :) Bruce

3 2

ndmpc command reference
by Paul English 05 Oct '98

05 Oct '98

Can anyone point me to this? Or even how to get more than just a list of commands from within ndmpc? The documentation with the ndmpkit seems to be "specificational" in nature. The netapp website only has a couple of hints, and this list archive indicates that people use either ndmpcopy or Budtool for the most part. Specifically I need to restore some files from a library attached to the filer to an arbitrary location on a remote unix host (running ndmpd and ndmpc). This should be possible, but the example scripts and packaged documentation are not helpful at all. Pardon the incoherence -- it is Monday, Paul -- Paul English (Tallpaul) (508) 647-7715 tallpaul(a)mathworks.com (508) 647-7015 FAX Walkie Channel 2

1 0

subscribe
by bbagnall＠Aureal.com 03 Oct '98

03 Oct '98

subscribe toasters

1 0

Re: NetApp and Solaris: setfacl and getfacl
by Keith Brown 02 Oct '98

02 Oct '98

>Solaris ACLs would rock. > >Any plans of such? Mike.. I am afraid that I am not at liberty to discuss or pre-announce any future or upcoming... well, everyone knows how this sentence ends, right? :-) In actuality, I am unfamiliar with our formal plans in this area, so this is really just a great way for me to cop out of having to say "Errr.. I don't know!" :-). Unfortunately the preceeding sentence would have to apply, even if I did. Hopefully the good folk on this list are understanding of such matters? Keith

1 0

Re: NetApp and Solaris: setfacl and getfacl
by Keith Brown 02 Oct '98

02 Oct '98

>Does anyone know if there is a way to make Access Control Lists work with >NetApp boxes? No there isn't. We don't support Solaris-style UNIX ACLs at this time. We do have NTFS-style ACLs though (for your Windows clients), if you're interested? ;-) Keith

2 1

Backups hanging
by pradeep＠algorithmics.com 02 Oct '98

02 Oct '98

Hi, has anyone out there had any experience of the backups hanging when done using BudTool from a Solaris machine? My environment is as follows: - 2 NetApps, one running 5.0.1D8 (ratso) and the other running 5.0.1 (rizzo). - adminhost is running Solaris 2.5 and has BudTool 4.6 on it. - ratso has a DLT tape library attached to it. - both ratso and rizzo are running ndmp, supporting both versions. When I call for a level 0 backup, it hangs with no error messages whatsoever on various points. Sometimes on a ratso filesystem and other times on rizzo filesystems. I did manage to get one full backup successfully completed, but this was never repeated. However, I get the incrementals done fine though. No problems at all. Has anyone else out there seen this? If so would you be willing to share as to how you solved this problem with me? Thanks in advance. Pradeep. -- Pradeep Subramaniam, | Senior Network/Systems Administrator | You can fool some of the people Algorithmics Inc., Toronto, On., Canada.| all the time, but not all the e-mail: pradeep(a)algorithmics.com | people all the time. phone: (416) 217 4203 | - Yet another brilliant philosopher fax: (416) 971 6263 | *******************************************************************************

1 0

Re: NetApp and Solaris: setfacl and getfacl
by mds46523＠ggr.co.uk 02 Oct '98

02 Oct '98

AFAIK NFS doesn't generically support ACL's yet - we're kinda waiting on NFS4 for that I believe. ISTR Solaris can do ACL's over NFS between Solaris boxes, but I may be wrong there. On Oct 2, 20:05, Charles Homan [ext 422] wrote: > Subject: NetApp and Solaris: setfacl and getfacl > Greetings! > > Does anyone know if there is a way to make Access Control Lists work with > NetApp boxes? In Solaris 2.5/2.6, you can use the setfacl and getfacl > commands to set permissions for a file on a per-user and per-group basis. > Unfortunately, this does not seem to work on our F330, at least not > out-of-the-box. Has anyone had any experience with this? > > Regards, > /charles > > ------------------------------------------------------------------ > Charles Homan Applix, Inc. > System & Network Operations Group 112 Turnpike Rd. > choman(a)applix.com Westboro, MA 01581 > ------------------------------------------------------------------ >-- End of excerpt from Charles Homan [ext 422] -- -Mark, TSG Unix admin and support, int 782 2499, ext +44 1438 76 2499. ... an Englishman in London ...

1 0

NetApp and Solaris: setfacl and getfacl
by charles＠applix.com 02 Oct '98

02 Oct '98

Greetings! Does anyone know if there is a way to make Access Control Lists work with NetApp boxes? In Solaris 2.5/2.6, you can use the setfacl and getfacl commands to set permissions for a file on a per-user and per-group basis. Unfortunately, this does not seem to work on our F330, at least not out-of-the-box. Has anyone had any experience with this? Regards, /charles ------------------------------------------------------------------ Charles Homan Applix, Inc. System & Network Operations Group 112 Turnpike Rd. choman(a)applix.com Westboro, MA 01581 ------------------------------------------------------------------

1 0

group and default quotas
by Garrett Burke 30 Sep '98

30 Sep '98

Hi All, F230, 5.1D4, 256MB RAM, 2 volumes, predominatly CIFS. I'm trying to over ride a default quota using a group quota, so that some of my users get a bigger quota in their home directories than others. The home directories are in /vol/.vol0/users, so the default quota line in quota file is: * user@/vol/vol0/users 50M 2K which works fine. The line before this one in the quota file is: bigusers group@/vol/vol0/users 100M 4K where bigusers is a group specified in etc/group on the toaster and whose membership is a sub set of all th users. 'quota report' shows the 50M quota for the users, but those in the 'bigusers' group only have 50M as well. Anyone got any ideas? I have tried a quota off/on cycle after a member of bigusers created some new files, but to no avail, just in case this is related to Bug 5660 Thanks, GB. ------ Garrett Burke, Network Administrator, Managed Solutions, 32 Upper Mount St., Dublin 2, Ireland +353-1-661-4840 A loaf of bread, a cup of wine and thou.

2 1

snap copy
by alexei＠cimedia.com 30 Sep '98

30 Sep '98

Has anybody gotten snap copy and used it? How well has it worked for you? Tranfer times? Impact on filer? We are getting a filer next week and I was wondering what to expect. Thanks. Alex

2 1

unsubscribe
by Gordon_Maudsley＠nag.national.com.au 29 Sep '98

29 Sep '98

Gordon Maudsley@NAG 30/09/98 07:43 AM

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