toasters

toasters@lists.teaparty.net

1 participants
13523 discussions

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

Manual time change while using NTP...
by Eyal Traitel 14 Apr '00

14 Apr '00

Hi ! Just wanted to share with you that these steps seems to help when trying to change time manually (if you need to change time more than the timed.max_skew...) - 1. rsh toaster0 options timed.enable off 2. rsh toaster0 rdate timehost 3. rsh toaster0 options timed.enable on Pls. comment / whatever, Eyal.

2 2

Need new backup solution
by Brian Hostetter 14 Apr '00

14 Apr '00

Hi, We have been facing some explosive growth during the past 6 months and have grown past our current backup solution. We are currently backing up via a linux box that has our 740 nfs mounted. Backups are taking sometimes 24-30 hours for incrementals and all weekend for fulls. What I am looking for is info on how others are backing up 200G volumes on 740's or 760's. I just purchased a pair of 760's and am going to need a nice stable reliable backup system for them. Ideas? --Brian

8 10

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