toasters

toasters@lists.teaparty.net

1 participants
13523 discussions

RE: NOW website
by Davis, Barry 30 Mar '00

30 Mar '00

We've been making lots of changes lately. I thought you might be interested to hear about them. We've added a natural language search engine, chat capability, case notification, release comparison tool, newsletters, etc....Check out the "Headlines" section at http://now.netapp.com/NOW/products/head/ for more info. P.S. Look for the "..." links at the end of each description for the full details. Yes, we will be changing that also. ;-) --------------------------------------- Barry Davis - Director of eService Network Appliance, Inc. Email: barry.davis(a)netapp.com Get answers NOW! - NetApp On the Web - http://now.netapp.com > -----Original Message----- > From: Jay Orr [mailto:orrjl@stl.nexen.com] > Sent: Thursday, March 23, 2000 8:28 AM > To: toasters(a)mathworks.com > Subject: NOW website > > > Dunno if anyone had noticed, but as of the 11th they got rid of > JavaScript. > > I just logged in with LYNX and it let me. Still gives lots of cookies, > though. I'm going to check it out some more, but nice to see > they finally > took care of this. > > > ----------- > Jay Orr > Systems Administrator > Fujitsu Nexion Inc. > St. Louis, MO >

1 0

RE: NetApp and HP MC Service Guard
by Dave Mills 30 Mar '00

30 Mar '00

Alan, I have installed and config'd Service Guard a few times. The data disks are shared between systems with an exclusive "lock" which guarantees that only 1 node can access the shared disks at a time. The locking mechanism is LVM based. Specifically, only certified HP disks support the locking. Since the Netapps is an NFS Server, it is outside the scope of LVM and would not play well in a SG environment. NFS locks are 'advisory' - my process hopes your process adheres to pre-extablished rules. Netapps has cluster configs which allow for redundancy of the filer and its DASD. This alone would be redundancy of DASD, where SG attempts to eliminate ALL single points of failure. Another potential issue. NFS clients (HP-UX included) are not usually happy when the NFS server hangs, panics,... I worked on a SG environment where each node in the cluster was both a NFS client and NFS server to the other nodes. This sort of became a nightmare to implement. HP has an NFS Toolkit for Service Guard which supports ONLY an NFS server, not the client. On the other hand (the non-supported hand ;>) ), if you configured SG properly, the adoptive node (adopting the application during failover) would do an NFS mount to the filer and be able to access the data, if it were not corrupted. If you do decide to go ahead with this unsupported environment, I would be very interested in hearing the results. Dave Mills Cypress Systems -----Original Message----- From: Alan Beauchemin [mailto:Alan.Beauchemin.B@bayer.com] Sent: Thursday, March 30, 2000 8:22 AM To: - *toasters(a)mathworks.com Subject: NetApp and HP MC Service Guard I have a project involving four HP systems requiring continuous availability. I would like to use MC Service Guard but I am not sure if I can use this software with a NetApp. Is anyone using this failover software in a NetApp / HP environment? I would also be curious of other methods of high availability from the server side with a NetApp? Thanks Alan

1 0

RE: rc registry registry rc
by Thompson, Tim 30 Mar '00

30 Mar '00

> All options and variables, persistent or not, should be > documented and modifiable via plain-text files. > ... > I decided to keep a "master" file under SCCS control, and run The desire to have all configuration aspects accessible in a single text-based way - which can make change control easier (something we've heard previously on toasters) and which can make it easier to implement management applications - is an explicit goal of the registry mechanism. The current implementation does not manage all configuration aspects, so a user interface to it is perhaps premature. We used it to implement a few features (automatically-persistent options, saving of DHCP info, easier creation of filerview screens, etc.) in the last few releases. But it's not quite ready to be the user-accessible-all-configuration-in-one-place mechanism, so there is no user interface to it, yet. ...Tim Thompson...Network Appliance, Inc...tjt(a)netapp.com...

1 0

benchmark
by Rainchik, Aleksandr (MED, Non GE) 30 Mar '00

30 Mar '00

Hi, I was using Postmark to measure NFS performance in Solaris <-> NetApp configuration. Very good tool, I think. http://www.netapp.com/tech_library/3022.html http://www.netapp.com/tech_library/postmark.html I even ported it to Windows NT :) But, I think there should be something more Windows-native. I just want to measure remote disk performance, NFS or CIFS connected. NetBench seems to be to compicated... Any suggestions? Thank you.

5 5

NetApp and HP MC Service Guard
by Alan Beauchemin 30 Mar '00

30 Mar '00

I have a project involving four HP systems requiring continuous availability. I would like to use MC Service Guard but I am not sure if I can use this software with a NetApp. Is anyone using this failover software in a NetApp / HP environment? I would also be curious of other methods of high availability from the server side with a NetApp? Thanks Alan

1 0

RE: rc registry registry rc
by Thompson, Tim 30 Mar '00

30 Mar '00

> we get these messages on reboot of one netapp > ** Option wafl.default_unix_user is being set to "pcuser" in /etc/rc, > ... > ** Option wafl.default_unix_user is being set to "root" in /etc/rc, > anyone know what causes such schizo behaviour? I'm getting additional info from John, offline, to attempt to see what's going on. (Besides the obvious action of opening a trouble ticket on the issue.) > wher is a netapp's registry? It's a mechanism introduced in 5.3 for making options and other things persistent. It should be invisible, for the most part. ...Tim Thompson...Network Appliance, Inc...tjt(a)netapp.com...

3 2

Server capacity and performance
by Brian Hostetter 30 Mar '00

30 Mar '00

Hello, I am running into a problem where I am getting NFS not responding errors from our f740 (512M ram, 32M nvram). After the error pops up it is immediatly available again, but performance is getting really bad on our filer. My question is does the amout of disk space used effect filer performance substantially? Yesterday we got to 96% full (2x18G shelves). I trimmed it down as much as possible, but am still seeing horrible performance. I have ordered a new 36G shelf, but that may be a few weeks away and I would like to find a stop gap solution. Could my performance problems be related to space, or are they probably just sheer volume of ops problems. TIA, --Brian

4 3

RE: benchmark
by Dani Tal 30 Mar '00

30 Mar '00

I think the original quotation is : There are two reasons why standards are wonderful: a. There are so many of them b. You can choose. Dani Tal -----Original Message----- From: Mitch Wright [mailto:mitch@larionov.netline.com] Sent: Thu, March 30, 2000 3:23 AM To: toasters(a)mathworks.com Subject: Re: benchmark /* Karl Swartz [kls(a)netapp.com] writes: */ >Aren't standards wonderful? :-) > I wish I could remember whom to attribute this quote to, but it goes: The wonderful thing about standards is that there are so many of them to choose from. -- do svidaniya, ~mitch

1 0

RE: add/remove users from NT4 domains [from unix]?
by Muhlestein, Mark 30 Mar '00

30 Mar '00

Check out "rpcclient" in the Samba stuff. Especially in the TNG branch. Mark Muhlestein -- mmm(a)netapp.com -----Original Message----- From: James N. Maze [mailto:mazejn@ornl.gov] Sent: Wednesday, March 29, 2000 8:38 PM To: toasters(a)mathworks.com Subject: add/remove users from NT4 domains [from unix]? Does anyone know of a library or set of utilities for Unix [commercial/free] that lets you add/remove users from NT4 global groups? Such would allow me to move a Web application from a NT Web server to my Unix/Apache/NetApp Web server. Thanks!

1 0

RE: Permissions
by Muhlestein, Mark 29 Mar '00

29 Mar '00

What version are you running? You may be hitting the issue described in bug 21019. If so, you need to get a version that supports the cifs.perm_check_ro_del_ok option (probably 5.3.4R3P2 or 5.3.5P2). The issue here is that some customers consider it a bug to allow a read-only file to be deleted, since that violates NT delete semantics, while others (like yourself) consider it to be a bug not to obey UNIX delete semantics (i.e. you just need w-x in the parent). The option was introduced to allow this behavior to be customized. Mark -----Original Message----- From: Jeff Stampes [mailto:Jeff.Stampes@xilinx.com] Sent: Wednesday, March 29, 2000 1:27 PM To: toasters(a)mathworks.com Subject: Permissions Situation: touch a file from a UNIX box chmod 444 file from UNIX box rm -f file from NT box over CIFS share Result: Permission Denied..Booooooo touch a file from a NT box chmod 444 file from UNIX box rm -f file from NT box over CIFS share Result: file is quietly removed...Yeeeeeah! The former behavior is undesirable, as we have multiple platforms in our compile releasing the same platform independent files at different times. Any suggestions? -Jeff

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