toasters

toasters@lists.teaparty.net

13515 discussions

RE: IIS and netapp in existing unix world
by Benn, Paul 15 Apr '00

15 Apr '00

Clarification: With the later versions of Data ONTAP you can leave oplocks on. Regards, Paul -----Original Message----- From: Benn, Paul [mailto:paul.benn@netapp.com] Sent: Friday, April 14, 2000 2:11 PM To: 'Mathew Anderson'; toasters(a)mathworks.com Subject: RE: IIS and netapp in existing unix world There are a number of NetApp customers back ending their IIS servers with filers. Make sure you disable oplocks if you are pointing more than one IIS machine to the same data on the filer. When using IIS 4.0, the recommended release of Data ONTAP is 5.3.5P2 or later. You can configure the home directory with any user account you wish; in the lab we usually use the account that the IIS installation app creates. Just make sure it has the appropriate share level and NTFS level permissions (usually read-only for IIS). As I recall, the IUSER* account is configured without a password (I like to change that) and IIS will let you configure the home directory with an incorrect password (even though it may match when you're prompted to verify it). You should be fine using a qtree with mixed permissions. We just published an IIS white paper which should be helpful for initial setup. It can be found at: http://www.netapp.com/tech_library/3078.html Regards, Paul Benn Network Appliance -----Original Message----- From: Mathew Anderson [mailto:mathew@nm.net] Sent: Friday, April 14, 2000 1:35 PM To: toasters(a)mathworks.com Subject: IIS and netapp in existing unix world Hello -- I have a 740 in production in a unix environment. I am looking forward to using this as a backend server for my NT web farm. I created a qtree and set it with mixed permissions (I also would like to set my linux web farm up and mount the same partitions). The problem that I am having is that IIS 4, (on NT4-sp6a) gives the error: Unable to enumerate files and directories because the following error occurred: Access is denied for the home directory setting, I am using a network directory and connecting to the share. I can do the a net view \\machine without a problem. An additional question is, what user should I be connecting as? and with unix permissions set for the volume (and mixed for the qtree) should there be a problem with IIS looking at the mount? I can mount the filesystem without a problem. Thanks for any help. Mathew Anderson Systems Administration NM Technet Oso Grande Technologies, Inc. mathew(a)nm.net mathew(a)osogrande.net

1 0

RE: How do I move /vol/vol0?
by Brookes, Matt 15 Apr '00

15 Apr '00

Actually, you don't have to destroy the old volume until you're happy with the transition, though you might want to offline it. It's also possible to rename the old volume to something other than vol0, and to rename the new volume to vol0, this should save some hassle with exports & other config info. You may still run in to problems with stale file handles if you have clients with active mounts, but I guess since this isn't something you'll be doing regularly that shouldn't be a big deal. (That's why management created weekends, right? ;-) Regards, Matt. ________________________________________________________________ Matthew Brookes mailto:mbrookes@netapp.com Systems Engineer http://www.netapp.com Network Appliance (Sales) Ltd. Tel: +353 1 4064600 Rathfarnham Gate Fax: +353 1 4064601 Dublin 14, IRELAND Mob: +353 86 8575127 "Anyone looking for storage on the Net turns to Network Appliance" Fortune, December 1999. > -----Original Message----- > From: Fox, Adam [mailto:Adam.Fox@netapp.com] > Sent: 14 April 2000 19:42 > To: 'Cliff Nadler'; toasters(a)mathworks.com > Subject: RE: How do I move /vol/vol0? > > > > > > I'm in a situatio where we have one F760 with 4 shelves of > > 9Gb SCSI disk, and > > three shelves of 36Gb FC attached disks. The FC disks were > > added later, so the > > original install of vol0 was done to the SCSI disks. > > > > We'd like to get rid of the SCSI disks (and use one shelf of > > FC to hold it), > > but I'm concerned since we have /vol/vol0 on it. Has anyone > > moved /vol/vol0 off > > SCSI to FC before, and if so, what problems did you run into? > > > > Many customers have used vol copy to move the data over. Just > make sure that the destination fiber-based volume is at least as > large as the original SCSI volume. You vol copy the data over. > Set the new volume to be the root volume. Then you can destroy > the SCSI volume. I'd probably type download, just to be safe. > Then I'd reboot...the filer won't actually destroy the old vol0 > and start using the new volume until you actually reboot. Then > if you want to keep the vol0 name, you can rename the new root > volume. > > This has worked for many customers that I've talked to. Has anyone > seen differently? > > -- Adam Fox > NetApp Professional Services, NC > adamfox(a)netapp.com >

1 0

RE: Disk-to-disk backups? (was Re: Need new backup solution)
by mitch＠netline.com 14 Apr '00

14 Apr '00

/* Andrew Bond [abond(a)netapp.com] writes: */ >I'm not clear how a hacker could destroy data in snapshots - remember that >they are read-only, and that's why they have proved useful in cases of >virus attack. > I can't say what Bruce was thinking, but a cracker could do the obvious: snap delete <vol-name> name once they gain access to the filer either directly or via the admin host. That pretty much destroys data in a snapshot. :-) -- do svidaniya, ~mitch

1 0

RE: IIS and netapp in existing unix world
by Benn, Paul 14 Apr '00

14 Apr '00

There are a number of NetApp customers back ending their IIS servers with filers. Make sure you disable oplocks if you are pointing more than one IIS machine to the same data on the filer. When using IIS 4.0, the recommended release of Data ONTAP is 5.3.5P2 or later. You can configure the home directory with any user account you wish; in the lab we usually use the account that the IIS installation app creates. Just make sure it has the appropriate share level and NTFS level permissions (usually read-only for IIS). As I recall, the IUSER* account is configured without a password (I like to change that) and IIS will let you configure the home directory with an incorrect password (even though it may match when you're prompted to verify it). You should be fine using a qtree with mixed permissions. We just published an IIS white paper which should be helpful for initial setup. It can be found at: http://www.netapp.com/tech_library/3078.html Regards, Paul Benn Network Appliance -----Original Message----- From: Mathew Anderson [mailto:mathew@nm.net] Sent: Friday, April 14, 2000 1:35 PM To: toasters(a)mathworks.com Subject: IIS and netapp in existing unix world Hello -- I have a 740 in production in a unix environment. I am looking forward to using this as a backend server for my NT web farm. I created a qtree and set it with mixed permissions (I also would like to set my linux web farm up and mount the same partitions). The problem that I am having is that IIS 4, (on NT4-sp6a) gives the error: Unable to enumerate files and directories because the following error occurred: Access is denied for the home directory setting, I am using a network directory and connecting to the share. I can do the a net view \\machine without a problem. An additional question is, what user should I be connecting as? and with unix permissions set for the volume (and mixed for the qtree) should there be a problem with IIS looking at the mount? I can mount the filesystem without a problem. Thanks for any help. Mathew Anderson Systems Administration NM Technet Oso Grande Technologies, Inc. mathew(a)nm.net mathew(a)osogrande.net

1 0

Ontap 5.4
by Jay Orr 14 Apr '00

14 Apr '00

Any word if ontap 5.4 will be out this month? The reason I ask is Netapp told us they are discontinuing software support at the end of this month because the F330's were declared EOL a year ago. However, last I had talked to anyone about this it was believed that 5.4 would be out before they discontinued software support. What is the plans for ontap versions and F330 and support? Anyone know? ----------- Jay Orr Systems Administrator Fujitsu Nexion Inc. St. Louis, MO

1 0

IIS and netapp in existing unix world
by Mathew Anderson 14 Apr '00

14 Apr '00

Hello -- I have a 740 in production in a unix environment. I am looking forward to using this as a backend server for my NT web farm. I created a qtree and set it with mixed permissions (I also would like to set my linux web farm up and mount the same partitions). The problem that I am having is that IIS 4, (on NT4-sp6a) gives the error: Unable to enumerate files and directories because the following error occurred: Access is denied for the home directory setting, I am using a network directory and connecting to the share. I can do the a net view \\machine without a problem. An additional question is, what user should I be connecting as? and with unix permissions set for the volume (and mixed for the qtree) should there be a problem with IIS looking at the mount? I can mount the filesystem without a problem. Thanks for any help. Mathew Anderson Systems Administration NM Technet Oso Grande Technologies, Inc. mathew(a)nm.net mathew(a)osogrande.net

1 0

chown behaviour on filer NFS mounts -- help!
by Jason Ruiter 14 Apr '00

14 Apr '00

Greetings, How should chown (or fchown) behave when used on an NFS mounted filer share? I'm trying to set up an anonymous FTP server, using an NFS mounted directory as my file space. It works fine, until I try to configure anonymous uploading. Whenever I try this, I get a "fchown: not owner" error. I look at the code (wu-ftpd 2.6) and it looks like it fails on a series of fchown calls. How can I expect fchown to work? Is this OS dependent? Does the filer respond to these calls in a predictable way? I have a 720 running DataOnTap 5.3.2R1. Thank you. Jason Ruiter Systems Administrator jruiter(a)erim.org

2 1

RE: chown behaviour on filer NFS mounts -- help!
by Fox, Adam 14 Apr '00

14 Apr '00

> Greetings, > > How should chown (or fchown) behave when used on an NFS > mounted filer share? > > I'm trying to set up an anonymous FTP server, using an NFS > mounted directory > as my file space. It works fine, until I try to configure anonymous > uploading. Whenever I try this, I get a "fchown: not owner" > error. I look > at the code (wu-ftpd 2.6) and it looks like it fails on a > series of fchown > calls. > > How can I expect fchown to work? Is this OS dependent? Does the filer > respond to these calls in a predictable way? > > I have a 720 running DataOnTap 5.3.2R1. By default, only root can chown files. There is an option called wafl.root_only_chown which is set to on by default. If you turn it off and have a client that allows non-root users to chown (most modern version of UNIX do, SunOS 4.x, for example does not), then the owner of the file can chown a file as well. Now, if your ftpd is running as root, you have to be sure that the filesystem is exported with root permissions to the ftp server. Otherwise, the filer (actually any NFS server) will map root (uid 0) to nobody. Nobody will probably never own files so the process would receive a "Not Owner" message even though the process is running with an effective UID of 0. I haven't looked at the ftpd code in a while, but this is my first guess based on the info you provided. Hope this helps. -- Adam Fox NetApp Professional Services, NC adamfox(a)netapp.com

1 0

RE: Disk-to-disk backups? (was Re: Need new backup solution)
by Bond, Andrew 14 Apr '00

14 Apr '00

Hi Bruce, I'm not clear how a hacker could destroy data in snapshots - remember that they are read-only, and that's why they have proved useful in cases of virus attack. Anyone who has used tapes much will know that it's not that unusual to have problems retrieving the data, quite apart from the management of the tapes and backup software. I think the issue between use of tapes or disk for backup revolves mainly around archival. Snapshots will give you maybe a few weeks of backups, and SnapMirror can replicate this for disaster recovery, but if you need to archive for either legal reasons, or because your data is volatile (high rate of change) or needs to be kept for a long time, the amount of disk required may be too large for your computer suite, and removable media is still necessary. This issue is discussed further in a White Paper at http://www.netapp.com/tech_library/3066.html Regards, Andrew > -----Original Message----- > From: owner-dl-toasters(a)netapp.com > [mailto:owner-dl-toasters@netapp.com]On Behalf Of Bruce Sterling > Woodcock > Sent: 13 April 2000 22:58 > To: Fred Ab; toasters(a)mathworks.com; bet(a)rahul.net > Subject: Re: Disk-to-disk backups? (was Re: Need new backup solution) > > > Not only that, but if a hacker breaks in and all your backups > are online, they can just as easily destroy them too. Or they > can become corrupted due to a failure. Tapes are much more > stable (unless you pass a magnet over them) and you can > store them, as you said, offsite. > > Snapshots are great for near-term recovery, and mirrors > are even good for single-point disasters, but you always > want tapes available in the event of a catastrophe. > > Bruce > > >

1 0

How do I move /vol/vol0?
by Cliff Nadler 14 Apr '00

14 Apr '00

I'm in a situatio where we have one F760 with 4 shelves of 9Gb SCSI disk, and three shelves of 36Gb FC attached disks. The FC disks were added later, so the original install of vol0 was done to the SCSI disks. We'd like to get rid of the SCSI disks (and use one shelf of FC to hold it), but I'm concerned since we have /vol/vol0 on it. Has anyone moved /vol/vol0 off SCSI to FC before, and if so, what problems did you run into? 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

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