toasters

toasters@lists.teaparty.net

13520 discussions

default unix file modes for CIFS users
by Ethan Torretta 30 Aug '00

30 Aug '00

How can one set the default file mode for files created by CIFS users in a unix qtree? The files here are being created with the mode 0755, which annoys the CVS admin because he has to fix them all in the server. The SecureShare Access utility is pretty neat, but it doesn't change the default, and it won't be possible to make all the Windows users change every file they create. The only filer option that seems similar is the PCNFS umask, but of course it's not for CIFS. ejt

1 0

Workaround for Burt 23129?
by TTSG 30 Aug '00

30 Aug '00

Hi, Has anyone heard/seen a work around for Burt 23149 : If an NFS over UDP request is received on a filer's interface and therequest is for the interface's secondary/aliased IP address, the filerwill always respond using the interface's primary (real) address.This can cause NFS mounts to hang if the aliased address is on adifferent subnet than the primary address. Tuc/TTSG

1 0

Recommendations/Opinions on the NetApp F720 filer
by lgkloft＠usgs.gov 30 Aug '00

30 Aug '00

I have a fairly small office (approximately 45 people) and perform GIS (geographic information system - ESRI ArcInfo) work, environmental modeling/database, reports writing, and other administrative tasks (email and web surfing). I am looking at the F720 fileserver (7-36GB drives, NFS, CIFS) to consolidate the $HOME and $PROJECT areas on my computer systems, and perhaps eventually the databases. The majority of my office is UNIX, but the number of PCs (as clients) is steadily growing. I am able to backup the UNIX boxes (servers) quite easily (~25GB), but the PCs are going to complicate matters. I realize this isn't much information to go on, but for those of you who are currently using the F720 - overall, are you happy with the performance and is your operation similar to mine (or larger)? How does your F720 respond to network traffic over the onboard 100-Base-T connection - is it a bottleneck? Do you utilize the QFE option (four 100-Base-T board) and did you designate certain protocols (NFS/CIFS) or servers to a particular IP address (pipes)? Do you now use the 1000Base-T connection - and how does/did this compare to the QFE option described above (if it was replaced)? Do you have any experiences/recommendations to provide on interfacing the filer into the LAN? How do your PC users (with local 10,000RPM disk drives) find the access speeds to their files on the file server - are they content or do they receive better performance having their data local on their drive? I have pulled numerous documents from NetApps WWW server (haven't read them all yet). Any closing comments/experiences (things to look out for, or plan for, etc.) positive or negative on the F720 would be greatly appreciated? Thanks, Loren

1 0

anybody using cluster with ATM and LANE?
by neil lehrer 30 Aug '00

30 Aug '00

hi, i'm looking for references to talk to about netapp filers. in particular cluster, with ATM using LANE, and NFS and CIFS. we are considering buying a pair of f760's and would like to hear about comparable experiences. our environment is solaris servers, nt workstations, fore atm switches. thanks. -- regards

1 0

Snapshots and the block allocation map [was: Alot minus alot equals some?]
by Chris Thompson 30 Aug '00

30 Aug '00

I wrote: > [...] the block allocation map (4 bytes per 4K block on the data discs) [...] > The former, in particular, does not have its blocks deallocated just because > they have reverted to being all-zero. It occurs to me that one thing that causes the allocation map to expand to its maximum size rapidly in a new volume is taking a snapshot. And *that* reminds me about one of the promises about ONTAP 6.0 in Field Alert #66: | * Enhanced Snapshot functionality to provide near instantaneous | snapshot creation/deletion and increased snapshot count from 20 | to 31 per volume The main reason taking a snapshot is not "nearly instantantaneous" at the moment is that the block allocation map gets completely rewritten. (And as a result, there's a space overhead of the size of the map times the number of snapshots less one.) It would be interesting to know how NetApp have reworked the internal structures to get round this. But maybe it's Confidential Information and we'll have our lips stapled together if we start speculating... :-) The maximum of 31 snapshots suggests that the basic style of a 32-bit word of allocation information per block still persists. Chris Thompson University of Cambridge Computing Service, Email: cet1(a)ucs.cam.ac.uk New Museums Site, Cambridge CB2 3QG, Phone: +44 1223 334715 United Kingdom.

2 1

Re: Splitting large volumes
by Eyal Traitel 30 Aug '00

30 Aug '00

The easiest solution, that also demands minimal downtime is using ndmpcopy/rsync altogether... This will work only if you have free volumes on the new machine... 1. Copy a baseline copy of the seperate parts of your current volume to the target volumes, using ndmpcopy/rsync/tar/whatever (ndmpcopy will be the fastest probably). This can be done while users are working, a few hours/days before the migration downtime is planned. 2. In something like a few hours before the downtime, use the utility "rsync" and/or ndmpcopy to copy incrementally the changes since the baseline. 3. DOWNTIME - while in downtime, just do a final syncing, again using ndmpcopy incremental/rsync, and change the relevant settings: NIS maps, filer's /etc/exports, /etc/quotas... Eyal. ===== Yours, Eyal Traitel eTraitel(a)yahoo.com, Home: 972-3-5290415 (Tel Aviv) *** eTraitel - it's the new eBuzzword ! *** __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Yahoo! Mail - Free email you can access from anywhere! http://mail.yahoo.com/

5 5

Alot minus alot equals some?
by Tuc 30 Aug '00

30 Aug '00

Hi, Brand new filer, 11x18G disks in the RAID-5 group. I started copying content to it, but told it to follow links by accident. I had gotten about 3G of content on when I stopped it. I then just did a "rm -rf /mnt/*". However : 216.231.105.197:/vol/vol1 125186456 177408 125009048 1% /mnt # ls -lR /mnt /mnt: total 0 # Whats taking 177K? Tuc/TTSG

2 1

RE: Alot minus alot equals some?
by Tuc 30 Aug '00

30 Aug '00

> Hi, > > Brand new filer, 11x18G disks in the RAID group. > > I started copying content to it, but told it to follow links by > accident. > > I had gotten about 3G of content on when I stopped it. I then > just did a "rm -rf /mnt/*". However : > > 216.231.105.197:/vol/vol1 > 125186456 177408 125009048 1% /mnt > > # ls -lR /mnt > /mnt: > total 0 > # > > Whats taking 177K? > I just did it again.... Copied about 3G before I realized AGAIN that the Sun "cp" is different than my BSDI cp. Now : # df -k /mnt Filesystem kbytes used avail capacity Mounted on 216.231.105.197:/vol/vol1 125186456 182592 125003864 1% /mnt # du -s /mnt 80 /mnt # ls -lR /mnt /mnt: total 0 Am I hitting something I should report? Tuc/TTSG

2 1

references
by neil lehrer 29 Aug '00

29 Aug '00

1 0

RE: IIS 5 - pass through authentication
by Benn, Paul 29 Aug '00

29 Aug '00

Mathew, In the IIS5 testing I did late last year, it didn't work. I have yet to confirm the rumor but have heard that it does work with IIS5 if clear text passwords are enabled and the user name and password fields are left blank when setting up the UNC path. Once I confirm it working I'll update the tech report with my findings (will probably be a few weeks out). Best Regards, Paul "the guy who wrote that paper" Benn Network Appliance -----Original Message----- From: Mathew Anderson [mailto:mathew@nm.net] Sent: Tuesday, August 29, 2000 1:51 PM To: toasters(a)mathworks.com Subject: IIS 5 - pass thtough authentication I was wondering if, with IIS 5, the "Pass Through Authentication" problem was solved. This is in reguards to http://www.netapp.com/tech_library/3078.html (Integrating a NetApp Filer with Microsoft IIS 4.0) Thanks! -Mathew Mathew Anderson Systems Administration NM Technet Oso Grande Technologies, Inc. mathew(a)nm.net mathew(a)osogrande.net

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