toasters

toasters@lists.teaparty.net

2 participants
13529 discussions

RE: Failure of rm -rf
by Gordon Goins 09 Nov '99

09 Nov '99

Remove ggoins(a)adic.com <mailto:ggoins@adic.com> Gordon M. Goins System Engineer ADIC http://www.adic.com -----Original Message----- From: Brian Rice [SMTP:brice@gnac.com] Sent: Monday, November 08, 1999 2:13 PM To: toasters(a)mathworks.com Subject: Re: Failure of rm -rf I've started seeing exactly this sort of failure in rm -rf's as of 5.3.2D3. rm: Unable to remove directory foo/bar/baz/gorp: File exists rm: Unable to remove directory foo/bar/baz: File exists rm: Unable to remove directory foo/bar: File exists rm: Unable to remove directory foo: File exists Someone asserted that these files were probably open. But they're not... or at least they're no more or less likely to be open than any of the other files I have rm -rf'ed with no problem in the past. The problem is non-deterministic. Re-running the rm -rf does help, but of course having to repeatedly re-issue rm commands as root does pose quite a new set of problems. :-\ Brian

1 0

Re: Strange routing problem
by jrg＠acm.org 09 Nov '99

09 Nov '99

On Mon 8 Nov, 1999, Mike Mueller <Mike.Mueller(a)jpl.nasa.gov> wrote: >Cisco 2924 switch that the NetApps and other hosts are connected to also >shows this same behavior. This has led us to suspect a problem with the >Cisco switches or router, but we have pretty much eliminated any hardware I've seen really weird behaviour from some Cisco switches (no real detail, I don't run them) where hosts can't talk to each other but can both reach 'the outside'. Our networks group have mentioned a problem where some 10baseT devices out there attempt to negotiate full-duplex (possible, but not common) and screw up the entire switch - of course, this tends to happen on our office networks and not our production ones - so definitely worth talking with Cisco and looking through subsequent IOS release notes I think. James.

1 0

Re: LISA Conference
by Cheryl Cruddace 08 Nov '99

08 Nov '99

I asked whether anyone was going to LISA a few months ago and a few beer drinkers answered affirmatively. Is anyone still interested in getting together for a bar-hopping-birds-of-a-feather. If so there is usually a bulletin board that we could post to at the conference center. Mind you this is all in the interest of sharing priceless tidbits of technical information so that I can go home and rip open those boxes and build our new F740's with gusto and a lot more knowhow than when I built the F630. (My boss doesn't know that the filers build and run themselves so he thinks I am on a fact finding mission!) Cheryl Cruddace LLNL

5 5

Quad cards on Network Appliance
by Mittal, Ashish 05 Nov '99

05 Nov '99

I have a quad network card on a F720 connected to 2 sun and one hp unix box. every once in a while i loose the connectivity to these boxes and when i try to re-mount i have lots of problems. Bringing the ports up and down using ifconfig does not help. Sometimes one port will come up and the others will not...so it is very intermittent. Has anyone had this problem before...any possible solutions.... Ashish Mittal

2 1

Macs and Filers.
by yann.golanski＠ThePLAnet.net 04 Nov '99

04 Nov '99

Does anyone know if it is possible for a cluster of Macs to see a filer? If that's not possible directly, do you know of any free-ware or not code that would allow it? Anyone here had experience in doing something like that? Cheers. -- Yann Golanski Internet Systems Developer yann.golanski(a)theplanet.net The Planet Online

3 2

Re: LISA Conference
by jrg＠gbnet.net 04 Nov '99

04 Nov '99

On Thu 4 Nov, 1999, fubar(a)mathworks.com (Kendall Libby) wrote: >We could get tanked and then go raid the Auspex party. EMC, too, if >they actually have a party/BOF. ;-) from the current scheduled BoFs, Tuesday Nov 9, 6pm-7pm "Data Management in a Mixed Unix and Windows NT Environment" Paul Levine, Auspex Systems, Inc. a chance to actually discuss all this SecureShare business, etc, once and for all! A colleague is going to be instigating testing of all the players for sharing data to NT systems and Unix, soon, so I've gotta go, haven't I? (and then we can wander along to the Sheraton, afterwards. How convenient!) There are also some other potentially interesting BoFs, including: - Large Scale Storage Management - Automated Backup Integration: Solutions and Ideas James.

1 0

RE: Legato Clienk Pak for Netapps
by Melvin, Grant 04 Nov '99

04 Nov '99

Hi Scott, > Just received the new client pak for Netapps. Much to my chagrin, I find > out it doesn't support the F500 series filers. Anyone know why this is the > case? Its due to bug 13252, a description is online. Unfortunately, we had a strange JVM/platform interaction: Under Data ONTAP Release 5.3 or 5.3.1, running NDMP or other Java-based software on F520 or F540 systems can cause system panics or watchdog resets due to an interaction between the Java runtime environment and the F520/F540 hardware/firmware. This has been resolved in Data Ontap 5.3.4. Legato are going to certify 5.3.4R1, due in a few weeks, with the Client Pak, which will then also support F500 series filers. Cheers, Grant -----Original Message----- From: Scott Mikusko [mailto:guerilla@concentric.net] Sent: Thursday, November 04, 1999 12:14 PM To: toasters(a)mathworks.com Subject: Legato Clienk Pak for Netapps Comrades, Just received the new client pak for Netapps. Much to my chagrin, I find out it doesn't support the F500 series filers. Anyone know why this is the case? And after upgrading all my systems to 5.2.3 three weeks ago, I find out I need to upgrade to at least 5.3.2. Lovely. And I see that the client does not allow backups of the snapshots, which is what I'm currently writing to tape. Apart from these annoying issues, what does anyone have to say about the client software for the Netapp? I have a system here that is taking nearly 40 hours to do a full backup, and 20 hours for incrementals to backup via NFS mounts to the backup server. I'm hoping that the client pak will help improve the time it takes to get my filers backed up. The filers themselves are not too terribly busy, I just have very large file systems. Anyone have any stats on the performance of the client software vs NFS mounting the filers to a backup server? Curious. Thanks! -Scott -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= Scott T. Mikusko Scrape the clouds of rouge from his face, Systems Engineer and he's white as noise Concentric Network Corporation All About Eve Internet Guerilla -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=

1 0

Legato Clienk Pak for Netapps
by Scott Mikusko 04 Nov '99

04 Nov '99

Comrades, Just received the new client pak for Netapps. Much to my chagrin, I find out it doesn't support the F500 series filers. Anyone know why this is the case? And after upgrading all my systems to 5.2.3 three weeks ago, I find out I need to upgrade to at least 5.3.2. Lovely. And I see that the client does not allow backups of the snapshots, which is what I'm currently writing to tape. Apart from these annoying issues, what does anyone have to say about the client software for the Netapp? I have a system here that is taking nearly 40 hours to do a full backup, and 20 hours for incrementals to backup via NFS mounts to the backup server. I'm hoping that the client pak will help improve the time it takes to get my filers backed up. The filers themselves are not too terribly busy, I just have very large file systems. Anyone have any stats on the performance of the client software vs NFS mounting the filers to a backup server? Curious. Thanks! -Scott -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= Scott T. Mikusko Scrape the clouds of rouge from his face, Systems Engineer and he's white as noise Concentric Network Corporation All About Eve Internet Guerilla -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=

1 0

Official NetApp Fan Club Reception at the LISA Conference
by Benn, Paul 04 Nov '99

04 Nov '99

The official NetApp Fan Club reception at the LISA Conference is scheduled for Schooners (in the Sheraton), Tuesday from 8-12. All NetApp users on dl-toasters are invited.

1 0

RE: LISA Conference (NetApp reception)
by Benn, Paul 04 Nov '99

04 Nov '99

Hey gang.... I just heard from the guy that does our shows: NetApp will be having a reception on Tuesday evening from 8-12 at the Schooners bar in the Sheraton. Have Fun! Paul Benn Network Appliance -----Original Message----- From: Benjy Feen [mailto:benjy@feen.com] Sent: Thursday, November 04, 1999 10:47 AM To: toasters(a)mathworks.com Subject: Re: LISA Conference On 3 Nov 1999, Darrell Fuhriman wrote: > How 'bout just get tanked? I'd like to support this proposal. As many of you know, there are a number of bars on Pine St. They're uphill from the convention center, so the return trip will be on gravity-assist. I'd like to recommend to NetApp that they take steps to provide enhanced beverage throughput for this year's hospitality suite. 1. More blenders (N + 1 blenders?) 2. A caching system; just like DLT tape operations, beverage production is most efficient when given the opportunity to continue streaming despite momentary breaks in demand. The cache also helps minimize the impact of the high-latency nature of pina colada/margarita blending. 3. Hopefully, metrics from last year were saved in order to provide for predictive engineering. -- Benjy Feen | benjy(a)feen.com | http://www.monkeybagel.com

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