toasters

toasters@lists.teaparty.net

13531 discussions

Start a nNew thread

help
by Barr, Stephen 29 Sep '00

29 Sep '00

1 0

Solaris 2.5.1, stat/read/fcntl random freezes on NFS
by Graydon Dodson 29 Sep '00

29 Sep '00

This is similar to a problem we have been experiencing with increasing frequency. We run large batch jobs that compile our S/W. During these batch jobs we get "file not found" or "make: no rule to create target" type errors where we can prove the files existed on the filler when the Suns reported them missing. We don't have a "hang" just a failure to stat(). The problem has manifested itself on both our Solaris 2.5.1 and Solaris 8 systems. The filler is a F760 (5.3.5R2P2). The load on the filler when this happens is typically 10,000 ops/sec or greater. Netapp has asked for packett traces but we are talking gigabit interfaces here, the trace files are huge and "pktt" is dropping about 80% of the packets anyway. We have already cut "nfs.udp.xfersize" to 8K and are running out of ideas. I am getting hauled in front of management on a regular basis to explain how I am going to make the problem go away. Now all I need is a solution..... What type of filler do you have and what version of code is it running? I know it's obvious, but have you checked for duplex problems? If you find a solution I would really like to hear about it. Graydon Dodson (606) 232-6483 grdodson(a)lexmark.com Lexmark International Inc.

2 1

RE: fastboot
by Rowe, Alan 29 Sep '00

29 Sep '00

6.0 does indeed have a fast reboot option, which skips the memcheck and the load of the OS from the disk. This kicks in for panics and reboots where the OS version is still the same. Other parts of boot are faster too: WAFL replay, disk scan, ... {and, we're have more in mind..) alr -----Original Message----- From: Timothy A. McCarthy [mailto:tmac@netapp.com] Sent: Thursday, September 28, 2000 7:21 PM To: Todd C. Merrill Cc: toasters(a)mathworks.com Subject: Re: fastboot If it is any consequence, when 6.0.1 or later is loaded on your machine, it appears to have a "fastboot" type mechanism. It appears to skip POST & memory, just boots ontap from memory. --tmac "Todd C. Merrill" wrote: > SunOS used to have a `fastboot` command that skipped filesystem checks > (?) on bootup. HP-UX machines have a PROM setting FASTBOOT to skip > memory checks on bootup. > > Anything equivalent on a filer (skipping memory tests, not filesystem > checks, that is!)? > > With 3 GB of memory to check on boot, it takes (min:sec) 1:11 of a > total boot time of 2:15. Downtime can be reduced by 50% by just > skipping the memory test! > > It may not be a good thing in production, but during installation and > configuration, it gets to be tiring. > > Until next time... > > The Mathworks, Inc. 508-647-7000 x7792 > 3 Apple Hill Drive, Natick, MA 01760-2098 508-647-7001 FAX > tmerrill(a)mathworks.com http://www.mathworks.com > --- -- ******All New Numbers!!!****** ************* ************* Timothy A. McCarthy --> System Engineer, Eastern Region Network Appliance http://www.netapp.com 240-268-2034 Office \ / Page Me at: 240-268-2001 Fax \/ 888-971-4468

1 0

fastboot
by Todd C. Merrill 29 Sep '00

29 Sep '00

SunOS used to have a `fastboot` command that skipped filesystem checks (?) on bootup. HP-UX machines have a PROM setting FASTBOOT to skip memory checks on bootup. Anything equivalent on a filer (skipping memory tests, not filesystem checks, that is!)? With 3 GB of memory to check on boot, it takes (min:sec) 1:11 of a total boot time of 2:15. Downtime can be reduced by 50% by just skipping the memory test! It may not be a good thing in production, but during installation and configuration, it gets to be tiring. Until next time... The Mathworks, Inc. 508-647-7000 x7792 3 Apple Hill Drive, Natick, MA 01760-2098 508-647-7001 FAX tmerrill(a)mathworks.com http://www.mathworks.com ---

2 1

Ultra 1 and NFS
by Tuc 29 Sep '00

29 Sep '00

Hi, Would like to hear, OFF LIST, of anyone who's used NFS off a Sun Ultra 1 (170E especially) for a high volume web site. (4-5 Mb/s continuous out the front end). Thanks, Tuc/TTSG

1 0

RE: fastboot
by Knight, Graham 28 Sep '00

28 Sep '00

There's no automatic way to do it, but you can hit ESC on the console and it will skip the test. 6.0 has a warm reboot feature that skips the memory test completely. Graham -----Original Message----- From: Todd C. Merrill [mailto:tmerrill@mathworks.com] Sent: Thursday, September 28, 2000 2:47 PM To: toasters(a)mathworks.com Subject: fastboot SunOS used to have a `fastboot` command that skipped filesystem checks (?) on bootup. HP-UX machines have a PROM setting FASTBOOT to skip memory checks on bootup. Anything equivalent on a filer (skipping memory tests, not filesystem checks, that is!)? With 3 GB of memory to check on boot, it takes (min:sec) 1:11 of a total boot time of 2:15. Downtime can be reduced by 50% by just skipping the memory test! It may not be a good thing in production, but during installation and configuration, it gets to be tiring. Until next time... The Mathworks, Inc. 508-647-7000 x7792 3 Apple Hill Drive, Natick, MA 01760-2098 508-647-7001 FAX tmerrill(a)mathworks.com http://www.mathworks.com ---

1 0

CIFS style tape backups
by Clarke, John L. (CIS) 28 Sep '00

28 Sep '00

Hello, We have an F740 in a mixed NFS/SMB environment and have been trying to do CIFS style tape backups to preserver the ACL's. Unfortunately, HP Omniback II has been giving us fits and we need to look for other options. Are any of you doing CIFS style backups? What software are you using? How happy are you with that software, and the service provided by the vendor? Thanks John

2 1

RE: Low SMB throughput
by Mike Sphar 28 Sep '00

28 Sep '00

Have you run any network analyzers on the network? This is the kind of thing where a good sniffer (or a fluke, damn I love those) can be invaluable. "If it works, it must be a Fluke." -- Mike Sphar - Sr Systems Administrator - Engineering Support Services, BOFH, GWP, MCP, MCP+I, MCSE, BFD -----Original Message----- From: chris_good(a)webtop.com [mailto:chris_good@webtop.com] Sent: Thursday, September 28, 2000 6:56 AM To: toasters(a)mathworks.com Subject: Re: Low SMB throughput andrew-m.webster(a)db.com wrote: > Where is the delay? Is it that the inital connection to the Filer takes a long time? This would indicate that the Filer is having problems authenticating users via the domain controller. People log on OK, intermittently files just will not save, transfers take forever while nfs is still screaming. Netapp engineers have had a look at it and are as baffled as we are. >BTW: We never rely on autonegotiate (AUTO), but set each Filer interface to 100meg/Full Duplex. We force everything as a matter of course. -- Chris Good WebTop.com http://www.webtop.com Tel: +44 (0) 1223 715000 Fax: +44 (0) 1223 715001

1 0

RE: Low SMB throughput
by Hawley, Rob 28 Sep '00

28 Sep '00

What version of the filer are you running? This is the checklist I give in the cifs performance class I teach for the netapp SE's. This is based on the experience of actual customers in order of decreasing probability. 1. Network Problems. In one of your earlier emails you stated you were sure this did not apply. Since NFS performance is OK, you are probably correct, but I would run netdiag anyway. 2. Virus Scanner. Some of the previous years implementations of virus scanners were not very friendly with file servers. If you are running a virus scanner on the affected clients, then you might want to temporarily disable it to diagnose the problem. 3. Oplock problems. There is a known timing bug in Win95 redirector that the filer triggers. The short version is that the client is not able to immediately receive a response from a file server. The filer has a provision to insert delays in its responses to avoid this problem. Take a look at the cifs stat OpLkBkNoBreakAck to see if this is happening. If you are getting counts on this stat, please contact CS. We can tune the filer for your environment so this will stop happening. 4.Max_mpx too small. Normally I include this in any list. Since this is happening with Win95 clients, this can be eliminated as a source. If you cannot identify the problem based on this list, then please work with NetApp CS. They can perform some more detailed tests to identify the source of your problem. mailto: hawleyr(a)netapp.com US Mail: Network Appliance Inc. Windows Networking Engineering 495 E Java Dr Phone/pager: 408-822-6661 Sunnyvale, CA 94089 http://www.netapp.com -----Original Message----- From: Alfred Lerch [mailto:alfred_lerch@mentorg.com] Sent: Thursday, September 28, 2000 12:07 AM To: Toasters Subject: Low SMB throughput Friends, we are running a F740 in a heterogenous NFS/SMB environment. While we are completely happy on NFS performance SMB performance is not what we would like it to be. But it is only on some Win95 and NT 4.0 where then throughput is low, other Win95 and NT 4.0 systems with the same configuration are fine (as far as you are able to state that two Windows installations are the same). Looking to our 3Com switches shows us that it is not an issue on the ethernet level. I personally guess that it is a protocol issue between the NetApp and Microsoft implementation of CIFS/SMB/NetBIOS over TCP/IP but I'm unable to verify this. Any ideas where we might start looking ? Has anyone experienced a similar issue ? regards alfred -- -- \\\\\/// / ^ _ \ ( (o) (o) ) --- That's all folks --- +=oOOO=====(_)=====OOOo==========================================+ |Alfred Lerch Mentor Graphics Deutschland GmbH| |Network & System Administrator Elsenheimer Str. 41 - 43| |IT - Business Support Team Munich D-80687 Muenchen, Germany| |email: alfred_lerch(a)mentor.com Fax : +49 89 57096-400| |Tel. : +49 89 57096-241 Mobile: +49 172 8915200| | | |Helpdesk IT Central Europe in Munich | |Tel. : +49 89 57096-110 internal: 777| |email: helpdesk_dem(a)mentor.com | +=============Oooo.==============================================+ .oooO ( ) ( ) ) / \ ( (_/ \_)

1 0

Do F740 cards work in an F760
by Matt Phelps 28 Sep '00

28 Sep '00

Folks, I know I can get this answer from NetApp, et. al., but this list is easier ;-) Can we use the cards we have in our 740 (gigabit and fiber channel controllers) for an anticipated 760 upgrade? Thanks, -- Matt Phelps System Administrator, Computation Facility Harvard - Smithsonian Center for Astrophysics mphelps(a)cfa.harvard.edu, http://cfa-www.harvard.edu/~mphelps

2 1

Jump to page:

2026

2025

2024

2023

2022

2021

2020

2019

2018

2017

2016

2015

2014

2013

2012

2011

2010

2009

2008

2007

2006

2005

2004

2003

2002

2001

2000

1999

1998

1997

toasters