toasters

toasters@lists.teaparty.net

3 participants
13514 discussions

Oopps! How do I get out of this?
by Cliff Nadler 25 Apr '00

25 Apr '00

I have a filer which has both SCSI 9G (4 shelves) and FCAL 36Gb (2 shelves). Unfortunately, I was in a rush to add some disk to a volume and added my last SCSI disk to a volume that was all FCAL. How can I get this disk out of the volume and restore it to hot spare capability? I have 4 space 36G FCAL drives, but it's not enough to do a volcopy and just delete the old volume. here's the sysconfig -r output for the volume: RAID group 0 RAID Disk HA.ID HA SHELF BAY CHAN Used (MB/blks) Phys (MB/blks) --------- ----- ------------ ---- -------------- -------------- parity 0a.10 0a 1 2 FC:A 34500/70656000 34732/71132960 data 0a.9 0a 1 1 FC:A 34500/70656000 34732/71132960 data 0a.11 0a 1 3 FC:A 34500/70656000 34732/71132960 data 0a.12 0a 1 4 FC:A 34500/70656000 34732/71132960 data 8a.4 8a 0 5 8600/17612800 8683/17783240 data 0a.5 0a 0 5 FC:A 34500/70656000 34732/71132960 Thanks, -- -------------------------------------------------------------------------- Cliff Nadler Collective Technologies, Inc. (a Pencom Company) cnadler(a)colltech.com (617)-443-1144 -------------------------------------------------------------------------- To win, you must treat a pressure situation as an opportunity to succeed, not an opportunity to fail Gardner Dickinson

4 4

RE: Oopps! How do I get out of this?
by Mohler, Jeff 25 Apr '00

25 Apr '00

> -----Original Message----- > From: Sims, Aaron [mailto:Aaron.Sims@netapp.com] > Sent: Tuesday, April 25, 2000 12:03 PM > To: toasters(a)mathworks.com > Subject: RE: Oopps! How do I get out of this? > > > One other thing to note is that if you follow the procedure > below, the 4GB SCSI > drive will become useless since DataONTAP marks the drive as > bad. The system > will not allow the drive to be reinserted into the filer. > > Aaron Aaron is 100% correct, but there is a way out. But they are steps that should _only_ be taken with a NetApp engineer either handy in person, or on the phone. Please contact technical support on this issue.

1 0

RE: IIS and netapp in existing unix world
by Mathew Anderson 25 Apr '00

25 Apr '00

Thanks for the help on this. I have upgraded ontap (first for everything.. painless... really painless.. rather nice!) I set up a PDC for my NT machines. now the question that I have is, how to add in a windows domain, (without rerunning setup) and use the server manager to manger the netapp. I get "access denied" on the NT machine when trying to connect to the netapp (720, Ontap 5.3.5R) with the server manager. Reading the SAG it appears that you can EITHER have nfs or cifs client administration.. The IIS white paper (http://www.netapp.com/tech_library/3078.html) is rather helpful, for those that are trying to use the netapp as a backend data store, thanks Paul for pointing me to this!) Thanks!! Mathew Anderson Systems Administration NM Technet Oso Grande Technologies, Inc. mathew(a)nm.net mathew(a)osogrande.net

1 0

F740, Enclosure Services error message
by John Stoffel 24 Apr '00

24 Apr '00

Hi all, We're got a F740 running 5.3.4 and we're getting endlessly repeating messages in the logs that look like this: Sun Apr 16 03:00:00 EST [statd]: *** NOTICE *** Configuration error on disk storage shelf attached to slot 7. Please check drive placement. Sun Apr 16 03:07:07 EST [statd]: *** NOTICE *** Configuration error previously reported on disk storage shelf attached to slot 7 has been corrected. Sun Apr 16 03:18:52 EST [ses_admin]: No more valid paths to Enclosure Services in shelf 1 on host adapter 7. I've filed a call with NetApp, but no response yet. Any clues on what's happening here? Thanks, John x27548

5 5

Sybase ASE & NetApp Filer [My Experiences].....
by Shahryar G. Hashemi 24 Apr '00

24 Apr '00

Greetings, I spent about 3+ days trying to get ASE & NetApp Filer to work properly. The platform I used was a Dual PIII 450 [1GB RAM] running Linux [RedHat 6.2] with 2.2.14 kernel and ASE 11.9.2.2 ESD #2 [EBF #8944]. The system has 2 Intel EtherExpress 10/100 cards. The NetApp Filer is a F720. I setup a direct network connection between the Linux server and the NetApp Filer [running 100 Base-T w/Full Duplex]. First of all I have to say the instructions located at http://www.netapp.com/tech_library/3040.html were only tested on Solaris and not any other flavor or UNIX. Some of the NFS options were different or did not exist under Linux so it took me a while to get that done. Basically you need to have the "lockd" [NFS Lock Daemon] running and also use the "nolock" option for the NFS mount in order to make it work. After that I learned that you can only create the devices under the mount point [i.e. if your mount point is "/sybase" your devices must be "/sybase/<device>] or it will fail. Again none of this was located in the documentation. The creation of the server and devices was a lot better than creating file(s) on a RAID filesystem but about the same with using "partitions" on a RAID drive [with no filesystem]. Since ASE uses O_SYNC option [wait until the O.S. have verified your write before going forward] for filesystem files it ensure [to a point] that corruption of the database is minimized. However Sybase says that using filesystem files is still not a solution until ASE 12.0 [read below]. I had a working production database using this server and decided to do a little experiment. I did a backup of my database and then did a "reboot" of my system without shutting down Sybase. When the system came back up I tried to restart ASE but found out that the "sysusages" information for my database was corrupted. Working with Sybase I tried everything possible but had to drop/re-create my database from scratch. I called and informed NetApp of my problems and asked them to investigate it. It has been over 7 business days and I have not heard any further information from them. All in all I do not believe that using filesystem files is a solution for ASE on any platform. With ASE 12.0 they now switch to D_SYNC [wait until the write has been comitted to the file before continuing on] for filesystem files. This of course will make using filesystem files more of an option *but* it will also slow things down [you won't take the OS at it's word anymore] since you will guarantee that data will be written to your filesystem devices. Until NetApp can prove to me that their solution is faster than locally attached RAID using "partitions"/"raw I/O" [raw I/O is part of Linux 2.4.X kernel and probably ASE 12.5 for Linux] where we can do asynchronous read/write [filesystem will *always* be synchronous] I would not recommend it to anyone. Yours, Shahryar -- Shahryar Ghazneini Hashemi | E-Mail: shahryar(a)n2h2.com DBA - Operations Group | Telephone: +1 206 834-1739 N2H2 Inc. | FAX: +1 206 336-2971 900 4th Avenue Suite #3400 | Pager: +1 206 609-6154 Seattle, WA 98164 U.S.A. | E-Mail Pager: shahryar911(a)n2h2.cm Cell Phone: +1 206 930-2030 | Alt Pager: page_shahryar(a)chiefmojo.com ******************************************************************************

3 3

Re: Sybase ASE & NetApp Filer [My Experiences].....
by jrg＠acm.org 24 Apr '00

24 Apr '00

>On Sun 23 Apr, 2000, "Shahryar G. Hashemi" <shahryar(a)n2h2.com> wrote: >>All in all I do not believe that using filesystem files is a solution for ASE >>on any platform. With ASE 12.0 they now switch to D_SYNC [wait until the >>write has been comitted to the file before continuing on] for filesystem >>files. This of course will make using filesystem files more of an option >>*but* it will also slow things down [you won't take the OS at it's word >>anymore] since you will guarantee that data will be written to your filesystem >>devices. Well, DBA acquaintances always say that Sybase don't support recovery from non-raw partition ASE setups and so won't run Production databases on anything but. I think, regarding D_SYNC, that perhaps you mean O_DSYNC? Don't know how that plays out with NFS, as (for version 2) NFS operations are synchronous anyway (but the Filer's NVRAM allows it to return completion before data is resident on disk.) NetApp's Tech Note document specifically uses Version 2, though not apparently for reasons of data integrity (Can the author of that Tech Note, or anyone else, comment on this?) I must add that I'm interested to see that Sybase now support ASE on Linux for production use, as of release 11.9.1, if you part with the appropriate sum of money. On Mon 24 Apr, 2000, "Bruce Sterling Woodcock" <sirbruce(a)ix.netcom.com> wrote: >Since you're fond of testing, why don't you test this yourself? (a bit harsh, but I agree with Bruce that if you've got your test-rig then it seems like you're probably in the best place to do the testing with your Linux system.) James.

2 1

Monitoring NetApp filers
by Tuc 22 Apr '00

22 Apr '00

Hi, Again thanks for the help last time. We ended up reloading both filers from scratch (And getting a core dump within hours....But it was something simple which forced us to upgrade to P2) and putting the root on 2 volumes, and data on 5 volumes. We've so far added it serving content to 4 of the 8 servers, and are going to work this weekend to add the other 4. I was wondering what people do to directly monitor the filer (We use NOCOL for alot of other monitoring, so NOCOL solutions welcome) and to monitor the server themselves (These are web servers, so those are acceptable solutions). Thanks, Tuc/TTSG

1 0

RE: Sybase & Netapps
by van Agt, Cyril 21 Apr '00

21 Apr '00

Hello Derek, This whitepaper from the NetApp WWW site may help : Integrating Sybase Adaptive Server for UNIX with a NetApp Filer http://www.netapp.com/tech_library/3040.html best regards, Cyril Van Agt, Systems Engineer, Network Appliance. -----Original Message----- From: Derek Kelly [mailto:derek.kelly@genomecorp.com] Sent: Thursday, April 13, 2000 8:49 PM To: toasters(a)mathworks.com Subject: Sybase & Netapps Not too long ago I remember seeing someone out there who was planning to store Sybase data on Netapps. I wonder if that person (or others) could share the outcome of this project with the list. We are beginning to jump into this arena and are looking for feasibility and potential pitfall info before we begin. The setup will be data from Compaq Alpha ES40's and/or DS20's with DEC Unix 4.0 running Sybase 11.9.2 through a Cisco Catalyst 6509 to a Netapp F760 with gigabit nic's installed at each end of the pipe. I have seen documentation related to using Oracle in such a fashion, but not much on Sybase. We will be doing the same setup with Oracle so any info in that area will be much appreciated as well. Cheers, Derek Kelly www.genomecorp.com

1 0

.nfs00* Files remain on the Filer
by Fabio Pietrosanti 20 Apr '00

20 Apr '00

hi all, i notice that on my NetApp F740 there are a lot of file named .nfs***, for example .nfs0048c2f20000043a . most are empty, but there are someone very big, and in some particular case, i can't delete it, without moving the file subdirectory by subdirectory since i arrive on the unix phisical disk. What about these files ? :) --- Fabio --- System Administrator --- NaiF @ --- Pietrosanti --- fabio(a)telemail.it --- IrcNet .--------------------------------------------------- | Matrice s.r.l. Tel +39 02 67382595 | Via Copernico, 8 Fax +39 02 6700894 | Milano http://www.matrice.it | -------------------------------------------------- | PGP Key (DSS) on http://naif.itapac.net/naif.asc .---------------------------------------------------

5 5

RE: Possible CIFS bug?
by Hawley, Rob 19 Apr '00

19 Apr '00

We store the time as GMT in UNIX format, but we have to report it in NT, or DOS format. The NT article you cited is not complete. The time is reported in time zone corrected GMT or as local wall clock time depending on the type of request. Both require the client and server agree on the time zone configuration. Here is a quote on File Times from MSDN If the original date and time of day are specified in the local time for your time zone, you can convert the resulting file time to UTC by using the LocalFileTimeToFileTime function. Always make sure the file times you set using SetFileTime are valid UTC-based times. The FileTimeToLocalFileTime and LocalFileTimeToFileTime functions use the current settings for the time zone and daylight saving time. Therefore, if it is daylight saving time, these functions will take daylight saving time into account, even if the time you are converting is in standard time. You should also consult Q158588 Please verify that both the client and server are set to the correct time zone. If this does not solve the problem then please contact NetApp customer support so we can get to the bottom of what you are seeing. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ mailto: hawleyr(a)netapp.com US Mail: Network Appliance Inc. Phone: 408-822-6661 495 East Java Drive FAX: 408-822-4521 Sunnyvale, CA 94089 -----Original Message----- From: Marc A Levy [mailto:malevy@dnrc.bell-labs.com] Sent: Wednesday, April 19, 2000 5:55 AM To: toasters Subject: Possible CIFS bug? After the daylight savings time change a few weeks back I noticed something odd on the drives I have mapped to a NetApp. On a weekly basis (or so) I like to synchronize my home directory on the NetApp with a copy I keep on my home computer. I have been using a shareware program called "FileSync" which compares two directory trees based on file name, size, and date. There is also a option to do a binary compare (takes much longer, obviously). So, on to the problem: After the time change from EST to EDT, all of the files on the NetApp are exactly one hour older than on my home computer. Based on a little experimentation I did on the PC, I found that when the option to adjust for daylight savings time is disable on the Windows NT machine, all time appearances on the files (including the ones on filer) change by 1 hour. A article on the MSKB states that NT stores all file times in GMT, and converts the display based on the time zone setting on the PC. I am told that the NetApp stores this information in a UNIX format where it is a 32-bit integer which is "the number of seconds since Jan 1, 1970" I would suspect that CIFS converts this to GMT for compliance with Windows based on the time zone setting. It would seem there is a error in this conversion where the GMT on the file changes with the Time Zone setting (EST vs EDT). The calculation for GMT should be such that no matter what your time zone setting (even if you move your filer from EST to PST) the stamp on the file should remain constant. So, is this a bug? or some specific problem I am having? Thanks, Marc

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