toasters

toasters@lists.teaparty.net

13529 discussions

UNIX volume and root
by Uros Lampret 13 Jun '00

13 Jun '00

Hi! Another question. I have F740 with single CIFS volume. (I'm an NT person) Now I'll have to add 2 UINIX volumes. I'll substitute two UNIX servers with it. I have some security considerations. The two UNIX servers were administrated by two admins. Is it possible to have diferent root passwords for this two volumes? Uros Lampret Our Space d.o.o. Malnarjeva ulica 47 1000 Ljubljana - Slovenia tel. +386 1 2425 372 fax +386 1 5000 959 email: Uros.Lampret(a)ourspace.si internet: www.ourspace.si

1 0

Re: Data OnTap 5.3.5P2 and NDMP Backups
by Moshe Linzer 13 Jun '00

13 Jun '00

Thanks for confirming this, Greg. I have seen this problem with 5.3.5P2 and Budtool 4.6.1a. I had downgraded to 5.3.5 to continue backing up. Now I was informed that 5.3.5 is buggy, and have gone to 5.3.5R2P2. Initial testing indicates that NDMP is working with Budtool 4.6.1a. We'll know for sure after the weekend... Moshe >From: "Linn, Greg" <Greg.Linn(a)netapp.com> > >A NDMP-based backup problem has been identified in our Data OnTap 5.3.5P2 patch >release. > >During development of Data OnTap 5.3.6, a deadlock condition was discovered >which impacted the NDMP Java implementation. This condition typically manifests >itself as an NDMP connection failure during resource depletion conditions. We >believe it was first introduced 5.3.5P2. The problem has been resolved in >5.3.5R2P2 and in the forthcoming 5.3.6 release. > >If you are running 5.3.5P2, and are experiencing NDMP backup problems similar to >the connection failure described above, we recommend that you upgrade to >5.3.5R2P2. > >Greg Linn >Manager, NDMP Development >linn(a)netapp.com >408.822.3752 telephone >408.822.4457 fax > > ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- Moshe Linzer | Mastery of Unix offers real freedom. Unix Systems Manager | The price of freedom is always dear, but National Semiconductor, Israel | I'd rather pay for my freedom than live in Phone: 972-9-970-2247 | a bitmapped, pop-up-happy dungeon like NT. Fax: 972-9-970-2001 | Email: moshel(a)nsc.com | - Thomas Scoville, Unix Review -----------------------------------------------------------------------------

5 4

Help With Firmware Upgrades.
by Lobban, Robert W SSI-ISEP-3 13 Jun '00

13 Jun '00

I am looking for some help with Disk firmware upgrades. Specifically do the updated .LOD files for Disk Firmware Upgrades come with the Filer Firmware Upgrades or do they need to be downloaded from the now site? If they do need downloaded from the now site, can you point me in the right direction as I can't seem to find them. We also plan to upgrade the version of Ontap we are using and I presume that I need to perform the Disk firmware updates first and then the Filer Firmware upgrades before attempting the Ontap upgrade?. Any help would be appreciated as we are a fairly new Toaster site performing our first complete upgrade. Regards Robert Lobban Shell Services International Ltd, Northern Area Office Robert.W.Lobban(a)IS.Shell.Com

1 0

RE: ONTAP 5.3 is evil!! ;)
by Green, Arthur 13 Jun '00

13 Jun '00

> > Humm... I just noticed the ONTAP 5.3 System Administrator's Guide > that came with our new filer has 666 pages - should I be afraid? > What happens if you read it backwards? > :-o > > ----------- > Jay Orr > Systems Administrator > Fujitsu Nexion Inc. > St. Louis, MO > -- Arthur Green Internet Operations Manager Ocean Communications ********************************************************************** This email and any files transmitted with it are confidential and intended solely for the use of the individual or entity to whom they are addressed. If you have received this email in error please email the system manager at Administrator(a)Ocean.ie This footnote also confirms that this email message has been swept by MIMEsweeper for the presence of computer viruses. www.mimesweeper.com **********************************************************************

1 0

SV: Spam from ScottUCE@aol.com
by Öberg Mats 13 Jun '00

13 Jun '00

Got the same one.... ---- Mats -----Ursprungligt meddelande----- Från: Brian Tao [mailto:taob@risc.org] Skickat: den 13 juni 2000 06:38 Till: toasters(a)mathworks.com Ämne: Spam from ScottUCE(a)aol.com Anyone else get this spam? At first, I was puzzled by the sender's address... "ScottUCE" seems to imply the guy knows he is spamming people with this advert. Then I realized the unfortunate (yet ironically appropriate) name of the business... >;-) -- Brian Tao (BT300, taob(a)risc.org) "Though this be madness, yet there is method in't" ---------- Forwarded message ---------- Received: from imo-r17.mx.aol.com (imo-r17.mx.aol.com [152.163.225.71]) by tor-vs1.nbc.netcom.ca (8.9.1/8.9.1) with ESMTP id AAA17365 for <taob(a)risc.org>; Tue, 13 Jun 2000 00:30:37 -0400 (EDT) From: ScottUCE(a)aol.com Received: from ScottUCE(a)aol.com by imo-r17.mx.aol.com (mail_out_v27.10.) id f.42.6b6d5ee (16789); Tue, 13 Jun 2000 00:12:51 -0400 (EDT) Message-ID: <42.6b6d5ee.26770ec1(a)aol.com> Date: Tue, 13 Jun 2000 00:12:49 EDT Subject: Netapp F330 systems and parts available MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit To: undisclosed-recipients:; X-Mailer: AOL 5.0 for Windows sub 108 Dear Netapp user: We have a number of F330 systems available that can be configured to your requirements and priced VERY inexpensively. F330 parts are also available, CHEAP, for sale as add-ons, upgrades, spares and spares kits. All equipment is genuine Netapp, fully tested, and carries a six-month exchange warranty. Low-cost extended warranties are also available. Please contact me if we can be of any assistance. (If appropriate, would you please forward this message to individuals in your organization whom are responsible for your Netapp hardware decisions.) Sincerely, Scott Fischmann Union Computer Exchange, Inc. 6233 Idylwood Lane Minneapolis, Minnesota 55436 www.unioncomputer.com PHONE: 952 935 7282 FAX: 952 935 5056 Union Computer Exchange buys, sells, leases and maintains used Network Appliance hardware. You can save thousands of dollars on your next Netapp purchase.

1 0

RE: Recreating a Volume
by jeff.mohler＠netapp.com 13 Jun '00

13 Jun '00

You pretty much got it! Tape can be suibstituted for an NFS/CIFS host as well..etc..etc. :-----Original Message----- :From: Ferdie Mazon [mailto:ferdie@san.rr.com] :Sent: Monday, June 12, 2000 5:46 PM :To: toasters(a)mathworks.com :Subject: Recreating a Volume : : :I added too many drive to a volume. I need to reclaim these :drives for my :other volumes. The volume in question happens to be my root :volume. Here's :my guess as to what I need to do: : :Copy the /etc directory to another volume and mark it as root :Reboot the Filer (760) :Copy all the data from the volume onto tape :Destroy the volume :Recreate the volume :Copy data from tape to new volume :Copy /etc directory to new volume and mark it as root (optional) : :Am I missing anything? Are there any articles or white papers on this :topic? : :Thanks, :Ferdie Mazon :

1 0

Recreating a Volume
by Ferdie Mazon 13 Jun '00

13 Jun '00

I added too many drive to a volume. I need to reclaim these drives for my other volumes. The volume in question happens to be my root volume. Here's my guess as to what I need to do: Copy the /etc directory to another volume and mark it as root Reboot the Filer (760) Copy all the data from the volume onto tape Destroy the volume Recreate the volume Copy data from tape to new volume Copy /etc directory to new volume and mark it as root (optional) Am I missing anything? Are there any articles or white papers on this topic? Thanks, Ferdie Mazon

1 0

ONTAP 5.3 is evil!! ;)
by Jay Orr 12 Jun '00

12 Jun '00

Humm... I just noticed the ONTAP 5.3 System Administrator's Guide that came with our new filer has 666 pages - should I be afraid? :-o ----------- Jay Orr Systems Administrator Fujitsu Nexion Inc. St. Louis, MO

4 4

RE: NDMP Incremental backup issue
by Garrett Burke 12 Jun '00

12 Jun '00

Hi Stephen, Would I be correct in presuming that this will also affect 'ndmpcopy' incrementals? We are using level 0 ndmpcopy to move data to another filer with the idea being to run a level 1 when we have downtime of the main system. Thanks, GB > -----Original Message----- > From: Stephen Manley [SMTP:stephen@netapp.com] > Sent: Friday, June 09, 2000 9:03 PM > To: toasters(a)mathworks.com > Cc: stephen(a)netapp.com > Subject: NDMP Incremental backup issue > > Some of you may recall Matt Phelps encountering some trouble with > NDMP incremental backups. > > We've identified the problem as bug 23356. > The bug description will soon be available ONLINE at NOW. > > In a nutshell, the problem is this: > An NDMP incremental dump will not include files with an mtime which is set > to a time BEFORE the timestamp of the last level 0 dump, > but created AFTER the timestamp of the last level 0 dump. > > ******************************************************************* This email and any files transmitted with it are confidential and are solely for the use of the individual or organisation to whom they are addressed. If you have received this mail in error please notify the system administrator at +353 1 6399700 or by email to hostmaster(a)msc.ie This email message has been swept for computer viruses. Managed Solutions Corporation, Enterprise Customer Relationship Management, Workflow and Contract Administration. Tel: 353 1 639 9700 Fax: 353 1 639 9701 Don't forget to visit our website at http://www.managed-solutions.com ********************************************************************

2 1

Re: NDMP Incremental backup issue
by Larry Nail 12 Jun '00

12 Jun '00

We use Norton AntiVirus 5.0 to scan our filers every evening. Norton has no way to exclude the ~snapshot from bescanned, so they're scanned every evening without incident. Of course, it fails when it tries to repair, but that is not a problem. > -----Original Message----- > From: Stephen Manley [mailto:stephen@netapp.com] > Sent: Friday, June 09, 2000 5:38 PM > To: scl(a)sasha.acc.virginia.edu > Cc: stephen(a)netapp.com; toasters(a)mathworks.com > Subject: Re: NDMP Incremental backup issue > > > > > > > > The history of this bug: > > > > > > Some customers were encountering problems with various Windows > applications > > > using the Win32 API. > > > > > > Apparently, the ctime of an accessed file is updated by a large > number > > > of Windows apps (even if the file is only read) because the apps > > > don't understand "last changed time". > > > > > > Thus, users with virus scanners would find that their incremental > dumps > > > included all files in the system... > > > > This sounds like a similar problem with the unix "file" command on > some > > systems. The "file" command tells you what type of file you have. > > Usually "file" has to read the first few bytes of the file to figure > it > > out. This, of course, trips the atime. But then "file" tries to > cover > > its tracks by setting the atime back to its original value. > > Unfortunately, this trips the ctime, which also causes a needless > > incremental dump of the file. So are you saying that virus scanners > also > > save the atime and set it back? Makes sense because otherwise the > atime > > of all the files on the system are reset whenever a virus scan is run. > > > But resetting the atime trips the ctime, causing all files to be > included > > in an incremental dump. > > > > But there are important reasons to dump files whose ctimes have > changed, > > so ignoring ctime isn't the answer. > > Agreed. > That's why the workaround of "ignore_ctime" is not a standard > documented option, and should not be used by most NetApp customers. > > Those who have used it understand the ramifications of their > decision. > > Longer-term solutions to the problem are mentioned in the > bug description for burt 17767. One possibility is to allow > CIFS users to choose to use the "Archive bit" semantic. > > The archive bit is the Windows way of not worrying about any > of the mtime/ctime business. I believe it is cleared when > the file is backed up, and set when the file is modified... > > Priority 1 was to fix burt 23356, so that those of you > who aren't worried about burt 17767 are not affected by it. > > We are working on the "right" answer for 17767. > > Stephen Manley > NDMP Time Keeper > > > > P.S. > > A possible workaround would be to have the virus scanner check a > snapshot. > > Then the virus scanner can't change any timestamps at all since the > > snapshot is strictly read only. Of course, the virus scanner might > croak > > when its attempt to reset atimes in a snapshot fails. > > BTW -- this was a suggested approach for the virus scanners. I don't > have data on the success rate of this choice. >

1 0

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