toasters

toasters@lists.teaparty.net

13515 discussions

Toasters list turnround sluggishness
by Chris Thompson 11 Jul '00

11 Jul '00

Having been caught out again by asking a question when there was a list message already sent that answered it, I took a look at my mail folders to see why turnround on the list seems to be so sluggish. There doesn't seem to be any appreciable delay in messages getting to mathworks.com, or being processed by Majordomo. It's the time they sit on the queue at smtp.mathworks.com before being sent out that seems to be the problem: it's typically over 90 minutes. A typical (recent) example: | Received: from [144.212.95.101] (helo=smtp.mathworks.com) | by virgo.cus.cam.ac.uk with esmtp (Exim 3.15 #3) | id 13BmNV-00029g-00 | for cet1(a)cus.cam.ac.uk; Mon, 10 Jul 2000 23:50:18 +0100 | Received: (from majordom@localhost) | by smtp.mathworks.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) id RAA04028; | Mon, 10 Jul 2000 17:17:37 -0400 (EDT) That one is a 93 minute delay (22:50:18 GMT - 21:17:37 GMT). I don't think this is poor SMTP connectivity at our end, but if no-one else is seeing these delays then obviously I will investigate that possibility. Otherwise: can anything be done to reduce the turnround delay? Or is it being imposed for our own good... ? :-] 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.

3 3

cannot lockf
by Jim Harm 10 Jul '00

10 Jul '00

I know there was discussion on this before, but I don't recall any resolution. It started with the binmail program could not NFS lock the file. I have run the lockdump -h command and found the processes and the files. The processes are no longer running on the host. The file no longer exists.(I removed it) The locks are still on the filer. How can I get rid of them? and(anyone) Why does the NetApp box keep the lock for processes/files that don't exist? }}}===============>> LLNL James E. Harm (Jim); jharm(a)llnl.gov System Administrator Compaq Clusters (925) 422-4018 Page: 423-7705x57152

2 2

RE: volume/shelf containment
by abond＠netapp.com 10 Jul '00

10 Jul '00

I'd like to put the cat among the pigeons here(!), and ask why you feel it is necessary or desirable to "contain each volume to a shelf of its own". The same situation you have seen here is likely to occur again if another disk fails (it will, eventually). One reason to buy a filer is to minimise administration and maximise uptime, and this process will increase administration as well as introduce unnecessary downtime. One possible explanation is that you need to move some disks later to another filer - in which case identify at that time which disks comprise the volume you wish to move, and then simply move those. As mentioned by others, if you halt the filer, you can move the disks around with no fear whatsoever of confusing the filer - the disk's identity is not related to the slot in which it finds itself, rather to the label on the disk. It is also desirable to minimise the number of "disk fail" operations, following the maxim of "if it ain't broke, don't fix it" :-) Regards, Andrew > -----Original Message----- > From: Fox, Adam > Sent: 10 July 2000 15:55 > To: toasters(a)mathworks.com > Subject: RE: volume/shelf containment > > > There is a simplier way to do this, but it involves halting > the filer. > > You could simply, halt the filer, place the disks where > you want them, then reboot. > > Sorry I didn't mention this obvious way before, but I > tend to think in terms of no downtime. > > -- Adam Fox > NetApp Professional Services, NC > adamfox(a)netapp.com > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Fox, Adam > > Sent: Monday, July 10, 2000 10:38 AM > > To: makin(a)dnrc.bell-labs.com; toasters(a)mathworks.com > > Subject: RE: volume/shelf containment > > > > > > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > From: Bhavnesh Makin [mailto:makin@dnrc.bell-labs.com] > > > Sent: Monday, July 10, 2000 10:04 AM > > > To: toasters(a)mathworks.com > > > Subject: volume/shelf containment > > > > > > > > > We have a F740 filer with two 18 gig shelves. Each shelf is > > > dedicated to > > > a volume.We have reserved disk on each shelf as a > hotspare for that > > > particular volume. So in total we have two hot spares. > > > > > > Last week one of the disks failed on the first volume and > > failed disk > > > was recontructed on the spare which was physically > present on second > > > shelf. So we ended up with the volume which transgresses over to > > > another shelf. Our goal was to contain each volume to a > shelf of its > > > own. > > > > > > First,is there a way to contain the volumes with hot > > spares? Secondly > > > how do I make the first volume give up the disk on second > shelf and > > > recontruct it on spare which is physically present on first shelf. > > > > As far as I understand it, spares are global to the filer. > The filer > > will pick the smallest spare disk that will fit. So unless you have > > different sized disks on different volumes, you can't make a > > filer pick > > one disk over another. > > > > As far as fixing your current situation. Config your system > > now so that > > it only have 1 spare (it may be that way anyway now), then > > fail over the > > spare in the 2nd shelf which is now a data drive for the > volume on the > > first shelf. In my opinion, the best way to do this is to > > run the 'disk fail' > > command rather than pull the drive. I think it's cleaner > > since you won't > > have to cause your lop to reset. Then you will force your > > volume to rebuild > > on the only spare in the system, which not so coincidentally > > is the one you > > want. > > > > Hope this helps. > > > > -- Adam Fox > > NetApp Professional Services, NC > > adamfox(a)netapp.com > > >

3 2

RE: volume/shelf containment
by Adam.Fox＠netapp.com 10 Jul '00

10 Jul '00

I 'm new at this NetApp stuff so you may want to get a second opinion but if you pull the rebuilt spare then the first volume will rebuild it on the other spare. Plug it back in and it is now a dirty spare. Chuck This is true, but if you KNOW the disk is good, you can run the disk_zero command (I think you have to rc_toggle_basic first). Then pop the disk out and put it back in, and *poof*, it's a regular spare again! Little tricks that may help you! -- Adam Fox NetApp Professional Services, NC adamfox(a)netapp.com

1 0

RE: volume/shelf containment
by Chuck Ross 10 Jul '00

10 Jul '00

> We have a F740 filer with two 18 gig shelves. Each shelf is > dedicated to > a volume.We have reserved disk on each shelf as a hotspare for that > particular volume. So in total we have two hot spares. > > Last week one of the disks failed on the first volume and failed disk > was recontructed on the spare which was physically present on second > shelf. So we ended up with the volume which transgresses over to > another shelf. Our goal was to contain each volume to a shelf of its > own. > > First,is there a way to contain the volumes with hot spares? Secondly > how do I make the first volume give up the disk on second shelf and > recontruct it on spare which is physically present on first shelf. > I'm new at this NetApp stuff so you may want to get a second opinion but if you pull the rebuilt spare then the first volume will rebuild it on the other spare. Plug it back in and it is now a dirty spare. Chuck

1 0

RE: volume/shelf containment
by Adam.Fox＠netapp.com 10 Jul '00

10 Jul '00

There is a simplier way to do this, but it involves halting the filer. You could simply, halt the filer, place the disks where you want them, then reboot. Sorry I didn't mention this obvious way before, but I tend to think in terms of no downtime. -- Adam Fox NetApp Professional Services, NC adamfox(a)netapp.com > -----Original Message----- > From: Fox, Adam > Sent: Monday, July 10, 2000 10:38 AM > To: makin(a)dnrc.bell-labs.com; toasters(a)mathworks.com > Subject: RE: volume/shelf containment > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Bhavnesh Makin [mailto:makin@dnrc.bell-labs.com] > > Sent: Monday, July 10, 2000 10:04 AM > > To: toasters(a)mathworks.com > > Subject: volume/shelf containment > > > > > > We have a F740 filer with two 18 gig shelves. Each shelf is > > dedicated to > > a volume.We have reserved disk on each shelf as a hotspare for that > > particular volume. So in total we have two hot spares. > > > > Last week one of the disks failed on the first volume and > failed disk > > was recontructed on the spare which was physically present on second > > shelf. So we ended up with the volume which transgresses over to > > another shelf. Our goal was to contain each volume to a shelf of its > > own. > > > > First,is there a way to contain the volumes with hot > spares? Secondly > > how do I make the first volume give up the disk on second shelf and > > recontruct it on spare which is physically present on first shelf. > > As far as I understand it, spares are global to the filer. The filer > will pick the smallest spare disk that will fit. So unless you have > different sized disks on different volumes, you can't make a > filer pick > one disk over another. > > As far as fixing your current situation. Config your system > now so that > it only have 1 spare (it may be that way anyway now), then > fail over the > spare in the 2nd shelf which is now a data drive for the volume on the > first shelf. In my opinion, the best way to do this is to > run the 'disk fail' > command rather than pull the drive. I think it's cleaner > since you won't > have to cause your lop to reset. Then you will force your > volume to rebuild > on the only spare in the system, which not so coincidentally > is the one you > want. > > Hope this helps. > > -- Adam Fox > NetApp Professional Services, NC > adamfox(a)netapp.com >

1 0

RE: volume/shelf containment
by Adam.Fox＠netapp.com 10 Jul '00

10 Jul '00

> -----Original Message----- > From: Bhavnesh Makin [mailto:makin@dnrc.bell-labs.com] > Sent: Monday, July 10, 2000 10:04 AM > To: toasters(a)mathworks.com > Subject: volume/shelf containment > > > We have a F740 filer with two 18 gig shelves. Each shelf is > dedicated to > a volume.We have reserved disk on each shelf as a hotspare for that > particular volume. So in total we have two hot spares. > > Last week one of the disks failed on the first volume and failed disk > was recontructed on the spare which was physically present on second > shelf. So we ended up with the volume which transgresses over to > another shelf. Our goal was to contain each volume to a shelf of its > own. > > First,is there a way to contain the volumes with hot spares? Secondly > how do I make the first volume give up the disk on second shelf and > recontruct it on spare which is physically present on first shelf. As far as I understand it, spares are global to the filer. The filer will pick the smallest spare disk that will fit. So unless you have different sized disks on different volumes, you can't make a filer pick one disk over another. As far as fixing your current situation. Config your system now so that it only have 1 spare (it may be that way anyway now), then fail over the spare in the 2nd shelf which is now a data drive for the volume on the first shelf. In my opinion, the best way to do this is to run the 'disk fail' command rather than pull the drive. I think it's cleaner since you won't have to cause your lop to reset. Then you will force your volume to rebuild on the only spare in the system, which not so coincidentally is the one you want. Hope this helps. -- Adam Fox NetApp Professional Services, NC adamfox(a)netapp.com

1 0

DLT 7000-----Suggestions
by bhaskar.g＠philips.com 10 Jul '00

10 Jul '00

Hi all, we are planning to purchase a DLT 7000 Tape library. Please can anyone suggest, as to which Library suits the Filer. we are currently having a Filer F720 (preferably HP Make). kind regards Bhaskar G Philips Semiconductors, #3, Sterling Square,Madras Bank Road, Off St Mark's Road,BANGALORE-560 001. Voice : +91 80 222 9200 Ext 5060 Fax: +91 80 2229700

1 0

RE: NDMPD
by Francett, Robert D (SAIC) 07 Jul '00

07 Jul '00

Ferdie, Grasping at straws... After your toaster comes up, if you enter 'ndmpd status' from the console or admin host, is the status 'ON' then? If so, perhaps it's just timing. Maybe the process to switch on ndmpd hasn't completed yet when the 'ndmpd status' command is read. Try moving the 'ndmpd on' up a few lines in the /etc/rc file - like just before the 'options' calls - to give it a bit more time. Bob > ---------- > From: Ferdie Mazon[SMTP:ferdie@san.rr.com] > Sent: Friday, July 07, 2000 10:35 AM > To: toasters(a)mathworks.com > Subject: Fw: NDMPD > > Sorry for the confusion, here is a copy of the rc file. > > #Regenerated by registry Fri May 26 17:19:40 PDT 2000 > #Auto-generated by setup Tue May 2 19:06:59 GMT 2000 > hostname srglfs3 > ifconfig e0 `hostname`-e0 mediatype 100tx-fd netmask 255.255.0.0 > ifconfig e3a `hostname`-e3a mediatype 100tx-fd netmask 255.255.0.0 > route add default 10.0.0.160 1 > routed on > options dns.domainname brandes.com > options dns.enable on > options nis.enable off > savecore > exportfs -a > nfs on > options autosupport.enable on > ndmpd on > ndmpd status > > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Jim Ward" <jimw(a)worksta.com> > To: <ferdie(a)san.rr.com> > Sent: Friday, July 07, 2000 11:33 AM > Subject: Re: NDMPD > > > > Ferdie, > > > > Have you tried "ndmpd on" in lower case? > > > > Jim > > > > -- > > __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ > __ > __ > > | > | > > | EMail: jimw(a)worksta.com Tel: +1 (603) 672-8600 x232 > | > > | WWW: http://www.worksta.com Fax: +1 (603) 672-3154 > | > > | Post: Workstation Solutions, Inc., Five Overlook Drive, Amherst, NH > 03031 | > > | > | > > | * Data Backup and Recovery Solutions for Your Peace of Mind * > | > > | __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ > __ > __ | >

2 1

RE: NDMPD
by Mike Sphar 07 Jul '00

07 Jul '00

Both of my filers still have the "nfs on" entries and they're working fine, and the entries after that are being executed. -- Mike Sphar - Sr Systems Administrator - Engineering Support Services, BOFH, GWP, MCP, MCP+I, MCSE, BFD -----Original Message----- From: Bruce Sterling Woodcock [mailto:sirbruce@ix.netcom.com] Sent: Friday, July 07, 2000 12:25 PM To: Ferdie Mazon; toasters(a)mathworks.com Subject: Re: NDMPD Is the "nfs on" entry even required anymore? Perhaps it's bailing out of the rc file once it reads that line. Bruce

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