toasters

toasters@lists.teaparty.net

13531 discussions

RE: Cisco pings NetApp
by Plawner, Marom 25 Nov '99

25 Nov '99

Yes, we have that, too. If you use *nix and do a 'ping -f' to the filer, it responds with about 87% packet loss. I asked our local supplier about this and they told me this is an intended design, and does not affect the performance of the machine. -----Original Message----- From: Krzysztof Miller [mailto:tytus@lucent.com] Sent: Thursday, November 25, 1999 9:54 AM To: toasters(a)mathworks.com Subject: Cisco pings NetApp Hi, I ahve two filers F740 and F520. It happens for both of them. Cisco router pings filer and sucess rate is about 90%. We have switched network and it doesn't matter if filer has 100Mb halfduplex or full duplex. If Cisco pings SUN machine (the same network) success rate is 100 %. Does anybody seen something similiar ? best regards -- _____________________________________________________________ Krzysztof M. Miller, CIO Poland email : tytus(a)lucent.com phone : +48 52 3491845 fax : +48 52 3463033 mobile: +48 601 358032 _____________________________________________________________

1 0

Wincenter Pro, excel 97 and netapp problem
by Krzysztof Miller 25 Nov '99

25 Nov '99

Hi, I am new on this list. Let me introduce myself - my name is Krzysztof Miller, I work for Lucent Technologies CIO dept, in Poland. We have F520 running 5.1.2 . Did anybody had problems with Wincenter Pro (or Cytrix Winframe) and NetApp ? We have following problem - when excel 97 session is open when you log off from wincenter, it deletes file, which is opened. NCD support suggest to upgrade system to 4.3.4D9, but I have 5.1.2 regards -- _____________________________________________________________ Krzysztof M. Miller, CIO Poland email : tytus(a)lucent.com phone : +48 52 3491845 fax : +48 52 3463033 mobile: +48 601 358032 _____________________________________________________________

3 2

reading tar format tapes
by Artur Shnayder 23 Nov '99

23 Nov '99

Hello, I wonder if anybody had experience with reading tar format tapes from device, that connected to Network Appliance. I tried from Solaris machine "tar xvf netapp:nrst0a" ... and got "netapp:nrst0a: No such file or directory". ufsdump utility works fine. Thanks. -- ~*-,._.,-*~`^`~*-,._.,-*~`^`~*-,._.,-*~`^`~*-,._.,-*~`^`~*-,._.,-*~`^ Artur Shnayder Voice: (609)655-5105 x12 System Manager Fax: (609)655-5114 Email: artur(a)cgen.com Compugen Inc URL: http://www.cgen.com ~*-,._.,-*~`^`~*-,._.,-*~`^`~*-,._.,-*~`^`~*-,._.,-*~`^`~*-,._.,-*~`^

3 4

RE: reading tar format tapes
by Bond, Andrew 23 Nov '99

23 Nov '99

It's documented as bug # 16390: %%% TITLE: Filer responds to rmt status inquiry with an error code %%% DESCRIPTION: Filers support the rmt protocol and thus a tape drive attached to a filer can act as a target rmt tape drive. The rmt driver on the filer will respond to a status inquiry (S option) with an error code. This behavior breaks ufsdump on Solaris 7 since it requests the status of the target rmt drive and receives an error back if the rmt device is attached to a filer. %%% WORKAROUND: Do not select rmt devices on Netapp's filers as target output devices for ufsdump on Solaris 7. The fix is currently scheduled for 5.3.5. Andrew > -----Original Message----- > From: owner-dl-toasters(a)netapp.com > [mailto:owner-dl-toasters@netapp.com]On Behalf Of Dave Atkin > Sent: 23 November 1999 08:31 > To: Artur Shnayder > Cc: toasters(a)mathworks.com > Subject: Re: reading tar format tapes > > > On Mon, 22 Nov 1999, Artur Shnayder wrote: > > > Hello, > > I wonder if anybody had experience with reading tar format > tapes from > > device, > > that connected to Network Appliance. > > I tried from Solaris machine "tar xvf netapp:nrst0a" ... and got > > "netapp:nrst0a: No such file or directory". > > ufsdump utility works fine. > > > > > > Netapp's implementation of the rmt protocol is at best > "minimalist" and > at worst wrong. Earlier this year I spent a few happy hours with a > protocol analyser and found that filers don't respond properly to tape > drive status requests and hence some clients won't talk to > them. That may > be the problem in this case. > > I reported this to Netapp some time ago but I don't know if anything > happened. It's probably fixed in a future major release of their > no-upgrades-needed OS! > > ------------------------------------------------------ > Dave Atkin, Head of Technical Services > Computing Service, University of York, YORK YO10 5DD > Phone: +44-1904-433804 (ddi) Fax: +44-1904-433740 > Email: D.Atkin(a)york.ac.uk > ------------------------------------------------------ > >

1 0

searching for 230 ethernet card...
by Linda Walton 22 Nov '99

22 Nov '99

I realize the 230 is in the "end of life" cycle at Network Appliance and that new parts are not available. Does anybody have an unused ethernet card for a 230 that I can buy or trade for? Happy Thanksgiving to all, Linda Walton

1 0

Re: more disks in certain raidgroup
by Aaron M. Sims 22 Nov '99

22 Nov '99

On Nov 21, tomi.rautio(a)nokia.com wrote: > > Hello there, > > is it possible to add mode disks in certain raidgroup. > > I already have raidgroup 0 and 1, all disks in same/one vol0. > > Raid group0: 14 disks and group1:28 disks and I want to add more disks in > group0, How? Sorry you can't. To the best of my knowledge, you can only add disks to the raid group most recently created. And by the way, 28 disks in one raid group??? IMHO, that's a lot. What kind of reconstruct times are you seeing for that? I have always used 7 max. It gives pretty good reconstruct times. -- Aaron M. Sims | "The reason why bad things happen to you is | because you're a dumbass!" ams(a)gtf.org | - Red Foreman, That 70s Show |

5 5

more disks in certain raidgroup
by tomi.rautio＠nokia.com 20 Nov '99

20 Nov '99

Hello there, is it possible to add mode disks in certain raidgroup. I already have raidgroup 0 and 1, all disks in same/one vol0. Raid group0: 14 disks and group1:28 disks and I want to add more disks in group0, How? Thanks, Tomi.Rautio

1 0

Re: NetApp CEO
by Mohan Movva 20 Nov '99

20 Nov '99

Ontap requires Upgrade but much less than most of the other OS available. In could be a generalised statement in comparison to Microsoft Products. Mohan. ----- Original Message ----- From: John Tatar <tatar(a)dis.anl.gov> To: <toasters(a)mathworks.com> Sent: Thursday, November 18, 1999 1:47 PM Subject: NetApp CEO > Yesterday, I was at my health club working out and watching CNBC. Here > is the CEO of Netapp talking about their last quarter and their product > line. What struck me was his statement about the product (This is not > an exact quote - but a good approximation. > > Interviewer: So you don't have do things like upgrade the OS > > NetApp CEO: No, our products are like a refrigerator, how often do you > have to upgrade your refrigerator. > > Could someone at NetApp sign up the CEO for NetApp 101: Data ONTAP > System Administration - Multiprotocol. ;-) > > > JT > > -- > > =================================================================== > > John J. Tatar > > Systems & Network Engineering Section > > Advanced Computer Applications Group > > Decision & Information Sciences Division > > Argonne National Laboratory > > > > mailto:tatar@dis.anl.gov or john(a)tatar.com > > Office: 630-252-3242 > > Fax: 630-252-5128 > > Pager: 630-266-1063 > > =================================================================== > > >

1 0

RE: options cift.home_dir question
by Jones, Bill 20 Nov '99

20 Nov '99

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 This worked great. Thanks. Bill - -------------------------------------- Bill Jones System Support Analyst Network Associates, Inc. bjones(a)nai.com Business PGP Fingerprint F95E 2D96 37E8 01D0 E9AA CBD2 FA68 15D8 63C2 1BE3 Personal PGP Fingerprint 8713 EB44 EE05 8915 B470 D57D D9DB 5A46 1B1D 0BA2 > -----Original Message----- > From: Uren, Jim [mailto:jim.uren@netapp.com] > Sent: Friday, November 19, 1999 5:52 PM > To: 'Jones, Bill'; 'toasters(a)mathworks.com' > Subject: RE: options cift.home_dir question > > > Hi Bill, > From your filer console type > options cifs.home_dir "" > to clear the homedir path, > Jim Uren > > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: PGP Personal Privacy 6.5.1 iQA/AwUBODbF2fpoFdhjwhvjEQI1GgCfVw1pieDuKgCxMEaU6ufe6UIIgcgAoLsr SC2V7Yddecr9A53G1CFhvljS =T8At -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

1 0

RE: options cifs.home_dir question
by Jones, Bill 20 Nov '99

20 Nov '99

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 I understand the way in which homedirs are working on the filer, and I am confident that the permissions are set correctly. There are really two issues at hand. #1. Users see their homedir when the list available shares when the connect to the server (Start -> Run -> \\filer or using Windows Explorer through Network Neighborhood). The user then looks in the share with their user name, and sees all the files stored in their homedir. They panic thinking that somehow their data is being shared out on the network for everyone to see. They run to me and say, "HELP! There's a share on FILER with my name on it!!!!" and I get to explain this to them amid the many other projects going on. Even the more savvy users come by and ask, "What's up with this?" and I get to explain it once again.. And yes, we'll ignore that this was all explained in an email a week or so ago. #2. Our local domain will soon be migrated to a resource domain. Users will then log in to the corporate-master-globular-user domain. The filer will stay a memeber of the resource domain, because it _is_ a local resource. and cifs.home_dir does not work across domains. So, spending the time to educate the user community is a wasted effort. :} I want cifs.home_dir off. I cannot set it to null because that is not a valid pathname. I am almost to the point of creating a volume, pointing cifs.home_dir at it, and then killing the volume. I have concidered killing the CIFS.HOMEDIR share under server manager, but I have this horrible fear that in doing either one I will cause my filer to panic or crash. Bill > -----Original Message----- > From: Uren, Jim [mailto:jim.uren@netapp.com] > Sent: Friday, November 19, 1999 6:13 PM > To: 'Jones, Bill' > Subject: RE: options cift.home_dir question > > > Hi Bill, > I replied to this question via toasters. But I have > a further question. If you have time to answer (sounds > like you are harrassed and busy) :) > I'd like to know a little more about the problem. > > When the cifs.home_dir option is set to some legal path, > users can have home directories. But each homedir is > individual. Suppose your homedir path is /vol/vol0/home. > Underneath home there are directories bill and susie. > > When bill accesses the filer he will see all the filer's shares > and also a share called "bill" that is at /vol/vol0/home/bill. > If susie looks at the share list, it will also have all the > "real" shares and also a share called susie which is at > /vol/vol0/home/susie. But bill doesn't see a share called > "susie", and susie doesn't see "bill". > > Also, the sysadmin can set the permissions/ACLs on each > user's homedir to give them ownership privileges. Then, > the user can the security to restrict access to files > from others. > > So I wonder if your users browse the filer with Explorer > or do "net view \\filer" from a DOS prompt and see a share > with their name and think everyone else sees it too? > Jim Uren > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Jones, Bill [mailto:Bill_Jones@NAI.com] > > Sent: Friday, November 19, 1999 5:21 PM > > To: 'toasters(a)mathworks.com' > > Subject: options cift.home_dir question > > > > > > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- > > Hash: SHA1 > > > > How do I turn it off??? > > > > It seemed like a good idea at the time, but now users are > > concerned that their homedirs are a share for everyone to see. > > The question load is getting very repetitive and annoying!!!! > > > > Thanks in advance. > > > > Bill > > > > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- > > Version: PGP Personal Privacy 6.5.1 > > > > iQA/AwUBODX4t/poFdhjwhvjEQL8pgCfZx9qsvekgCGtS11y79pLADYCvRMAnijQ > > V88oVOycQszl87SJ2zFwC7F5 > > =kZjI > > -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- > > > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: PGP Personal Privacy 6.5.1 iQA/AwUBODauYPpoFdhjwhvjEQLXbACeP9dFHMoyGuF4Ft5yxL1S2r9n7wwAoOPE GS/LeyV7AEttM0FW4UtNS+sc =PO1A -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

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