toasters

toasters@lists.teaparty.net

13513 discussions

FAS2040 to FAS2220 head swap
by James Andrewartha 17 Jul '13

17 Jul '13

Hi all, I have an (empty) single-controller FAS2040 with a DS4243 full of 2TB disks, which is purely used as a SnapVault destination. I need a bit more space in it, and somehow a new FAS2220 with 12 2TB disks is cheaper than 12 2TB disks for the 2040. So this means I need to do a head swap, which I haven't done before. I've had a read of https://library.netapp.com/ecm/ecm_download_file/ECMP1140588 and it seems fairly straightforward, but I thought I'd ask if there's any tips or gotchas I should know of. Also, what are the platform aggregate limits for the 2220? I know the 2040 had a limit of 22 disks (18 data), but can I add the new internal disks to the existing aggregate (which is 2x9+2 at the moment)? Obviously I'll need to do a reallocate after doing this. Thanks, -- James Andrewartha Network & Projects Engineer Christ Church Grammar School Claremont, Western Australia Ph. (08) 9442 1757 Mob. 0424 160 877

1 0

AD/LDAP Auth
by Mike B. 16 Jul '13

16 Jul '13

Disclaimer - I'm not Windows savvy so feel free to set me straight if/when/where needed.. I've searched around in the communities site and have read loads of posts about auth'ing admin users against AD. I've also searched the web for hours looking for similar content. I don't feel that all of what I've read fully addressed what I seem to be looking for though. Before I ramble on and on (my apologies in advance), here are some key things that need to be factored in: 1. There is no cDOT - everything is 7G/7-Mode 2. The use of vFilers is **not** an option 3. A 2-way trust **cannot** be established Reading through documentation all the way back to 7.2.5.1 (I didn't go any further), the docs say the following requirements exist to use AD: ======================== A valid CIFS license Your storage system joined to an Active Directory domain A two-way trust relationship established between your storage system’s domain and your LDAP server’s domain, if they are different ======================== >From what I've read, all one needs to do is run through the initial CIFS setup and that should suffice - but the above seems to contradict that. So do you actually /have to have/ a CIFS license AND be "..joined to an Active Directory domain" ?? IIRC you can auth against AD via the LDAP options without making the storage controllers actually be part of any AD. What if they *are* part of an existing AD; can you point them at a different set of AD servers all together for **just** admin auth? That whole trust req above seems to point to no.. Thanks!

2 1

thinn volume how to?
by Iluhes 15 Jul '13

15 Jul '13

Folks, Please tell me if the way to create a volume that will contain thin luns is the best below vol create vol1 -s none aggr0 550g vol options vol1 fractional_reserve 0 snap reserve -V vol1 0 vol autosize vol1 off snap autodelete vol1 on Do I need to create the LUNs with any special consideration Thanks!!!~

1 0

FAS 3210 after upgrade from 8.0.2 to 8.1.3 - higher cache age.
by Rafał Radecki 15 Jul '13

15 Jul '13

Hi All. I've performed an upgrade and afterwards my cache age is higher. Before the upgrade it was ~3 minutes, now it is ~4.5 minutes. The amount of operations over NFS did not change. NFS latency also for all volumes is now 50% of the latency before the upgrade. Cache age with snmp from http://ipmsupport.solarwinds.com/mibs/NETWORK-APPLIANCE-MIB/item.aspx?id=mi… . It is "Age in minutes of the oldest read-only blocks in the buffer cache. This indicates how fast read operations are cycling through system memory; when the appliance is reading very large files (larger than the machine's memory size), buffer cache age will be very low." In the background there is still a rlw_upgrading process running, details in https://communities.netapp.com/thread/22676 . So overall I think that lower nfs latency is better, but am not certain about cache age. Is it not strange both changed so much after the upgrade? Have you had similar experiences? Best regards, Rafal Radecki.

1 0

Netapp ONTAP 8.0.2 - NFS takeover/giveback - should it be visible to clients?
by Rafał Radecki 12 Jul '13

12 Jul '13

Hi All. I have two FAS3210 in 7-mode Actvie/Active. I perform takeover/gieback and see that the outage is visible for clients for nfs mounts. From your experiences should it be so? I think that information about nfs sessions and IP address are moved to the takeover node so in theory it should not be visible. Best regards, Rafal.

10 15

SAS cabling question
by Klise, Steve 09 Jul '13

09 Jul '13

Is there such a thing as SAS patch panels? I may have to go beyond the standard cable lengths to another area of the datacenter.. Has anyone had to get a workaround for this? I think the latest SAS length is 15M or 20M. Thanks Steve

4 3

Snapvault snapshots lost after upgrade.
by Jeff Cleverley 09 Jul '13

09 Jul '13

Greetings, I upgraded heads on our filers. The new 6290s had their own disks and I have 8.1.2P4 on them. The old 6080s were 7.3.5.1P4. For the update I kept the 6290 root/vol0 drives and changed ownership of all the other drives. The aggregates were brought online and all the volumes came up OK. I'm now seeing none of my backups are running because the snapvault snapshot is missing. I still have the acs snapshot. I've tried the snapvault start -S command and it says it is already a snapvault relationship. When I try to tell it to do a snapvault update, it says the base snapshot no longer exists on the source. What happened to all my snapvault snapshots? Why did the snapvault snapshots get released? I thought those were in the volume and should have carried over in the hardware migration. I still have access to the old root volumes and backups of the old root volumes if there is anything that can be salvaged. I would rather not have to re-baseline 100+TB of source data. Thanks, Jeff -- Jeff Cleverley Unix Systems Administrator 4380 Ziegler Road Fort Collins, Colorado 80525 970-288-4611

3 6

Hooking a DS4243 to a "standard" SAS adapter
by Laurent CARON 30 Jun '13

30 Jun '13

Hi, I just decomissionned 2 DS4243. Since I'd rather use them now than let them take the dust, I wonder if it is possible to hook them to a standard SAS adapter (eg: LSI SAS 9207-8e) placed in a server to act as a JBOD enclosure. Physical cabling is ok and will cause no trouble, but will the disks be seen by the card. What about multipath ? Did anybody already do/try it ? Thanks Laurent

2 3

large amount of CIFS other ops from xp desktops after canceled search
by Jordan Slingerland 28 Jun '13

28 Jun '13

Hello toasters, I am having an issue where I periodically find that some xp desktop users are doing a large amount of other ops to a cifs share with a large amount of files for a sustained period. If I let them go, they will continue for days. In most cases, it seems the users do a search and the search takes too long, so they close the window, but it is running in some kind of stuck state in the background. Killing the session or closing open files via connection to the toaster via computer management does nothing; the session just starts back up and pounds the crap out of the filler. Rebooting the desktop has been my solution so far, though I suspect restarting explorer.exe may be sufficient. I am running 8.1.1P2 and this is an IBM rebranded FAS3070. Any ideas? Has anyone seen similar behavior? cifs top -n 10 ops/s reads(n, KB/s) writes(n, KB/s) suspect/s IP Name 1859 | 0 0 | 0 0 | 0 | 10.10.100.223 domain\someuser2 1418 | 0 0 | 0 0 | 0 | 10.10.100.227 domain\someuser1 1673 | 0 0 | 0 0 | 0 | 10.10.180.230 domain\someuser3 qtree status share1 vol1 ntfs enabled normal vol status -v share1 Volume State Status Options Share1 online raid_dp, flex nosnap=off, nosnapdir=off, minra=off, sis no_atime_update=off, nvfail=off, 64-bit ignore_inconsistent=off, snapmirrored=off, create_ucode=on, convert_ucode=off, maxdirsize=73400, schedsnapname=ordinal, fs_size_fixed=on, guarantee=none, svo_enable=off, svo_checksum=off, svo_allow_rman=off, svo_reject_errors=off, no_i2p=off, fractional_reserve=0, extent=off, try_first=volume_grow, read_realloc=off, snapshot_clone_dependency=off, dlog_hole_reserve=off, nbu_archival_snap=off Volume UUID: 0fbdb127-a774-11e2-ab63-123478563412 Containing aggregate: 'sataaggr0' Plex /sataaggr0/plex0: online, normal, active RAID group /sataaggr0/plex0/rg0: normal, block checksums RAID group /sataaggr0/plex0/rg1: normal, block checksums RAID group /sataaggr0/plex0/rg2: normal, block checksums RAID group /sataaggr0/plex0/rg3: normal, block checksums Snapshot autodelete settings for share1: state=off commitment=try trigger=volume target_free_space=20% delete_order=oldest_first defer_delete=user_created prefix=(not specified) destroy_list=none Volume autosize settings: state=off Hybrid Cache: Eligibility=read-write For the fourth consecutive year, Independent Health is the highest ranked health insurance plan in the New York/New Jersey region by J.D. Power and Associates 2013 Member Health Plan StudySM. For the sixth consecutive year, Independent Health was named one of the best companies to work for in New York State. Go to www.independenthealth.com to view careers and available positions. We are an Equal Opportunity Employer. CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: This e-mail and its attachments (collectively referred to as "e-mail") may contain confidential information that is privileged and protected from disclosure by Federal and State confidentiality laws, rules or regulations. This e-mail is intended for the designated addressee only. If you are not the designated addressee, you are notified that any disclosure, copying or distribution of this e-mail may be unlawful and may subject you to legal consequences. If you have received this e-mail in error, please contact me immediately by telephone at (716) 631 - 3001 and delete the e-mail from your computer immediately. Thank you for your attention.

2 5

Hardware migration process
by Jeff Cleverley 27 Jun '13

27 Jun '13

Greetings, I think I have a good handle on what I need to do but wanted to check for additional gotchas. We've got some 6290s that will replace some 6080. The 6290s are already built with their own root volume/disks and are running 8.1.2P4. The 6080s are running 7.3.5.1P4. I'm not planning on using the 6080 root disks so I'm not planning on upgrading the 6080s before hand. The plan is basically shut everything down, pull the 7.3.5 root disks, reassign all the other disks to the new system IDs and boot everything up. It is my understanding that there is no 64 bit upgrade to aggregates/volumes that gets done automatically so I'm not seeing and issue there. I have functional /etc/rc, exports, hosts, and username.map files in place on the new hardware. I'm also going to have a copy of the old /etc directories on the new filers so I'll have everything there if I need to go back to them. All needed hardware is in the new heads and supported. The new hardware has newer disk and shelf firmware but I'm going to let it do that during boot up. We have some MOOS drives that have been problematic so I don't want to do those before hand. We have no VM, very little cifs, and 1 SAN/FCP client. Other than that it is all nfs clients. I know I may or may not have to re-join the domain for the cifs piece but I can deal with that. It seems this should be relatively simple and easy, but that's usually when I get into trouble :-) Any obvious holes/flaws in my plans that I should be aware of? Thanks, Jeff -- Jeff Cleverley Unix Systems Administrator 4380 Ziegler Road Fort Collins, Colorado 80525 970-288-4611

3 11

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