toasters

toasters@lists.teaparty.net

13520 discussions

Re: "ypset" needs added to common command set
by Devi Nagaraj 19 Oct '99

19 Oct '99

Hi, NIS has been revamped in Data ONTAP 5.3.3 ( which is a special release available upon request). This supports multiple preferred NIS servers. All these are available in the soon to be released Data ONTAP 5.3.4. Thanks, -Devi At 03:58 PM 10/19/99 -0500, sirbruce(a)ix.netcom.com wrote: >On 10/19/99 15:13:26 you wrote: >> >>I would like to see the "ypset" command added to the common Data Ontap >>command >>set. We have several Netapps where we need to use the "ypset" command but in >>order to run the command and make it permanent, you have to go into >>rc_toggle_basic mode. For a permanent fix we have to add "rc_toggle_basic", >>"ypset nisserver", "rc_toggle_basic" to the rc file. Is there any plans to >>make "ypset" part of the common Data Ontap command set? > >There has been an open bug/RFE on this since before NIS was even >released. :) > >There was some talk recently on the list about them revising their >approach to some of these commands but I didn't see a firm date set. > >Bruce > > > >

1 0

Re: mailboxes on toaster
by tkaczma＠gryf.net 19 Oct '99

19 Oct '99

On Tue, 19 Oct 1999, Jim McCoy wrote: > >> 2) Inode cost should not be overlooked. You get at most 32 million per > >> volume, so if you have a lot of mailboxes a maildir or other > >> one-file-per-message scheme will chew through your inode limit long > before > >> you run out of disk space on that volume. > > > >BTW, how did you arrive at that number? > > > Experimentally and asking netapp. It may be that they have increased the > max value for maxfiles a while back and I did not notice, but at least up to > the early 5.1.2 series 32 million was the most inodes per volume allowed (we > ran into this the hard way when trying to use a filer to keep track of user > database entries for MyYahoo; it was a very painful experience...) That is interesting indeed. I couldn't find a mention of this on NOW or NetApp's main site. Perhaps it's there and I simply didn't use the right keywords in the search. As I understand it, modern NetApps use 32-bit inode numbers. This gives us 2^32 inodes. 32 million is roughly 2^25 that is 2^7 times less than alegedly supported by the inode numbers. 32 million is a far cry from roughly 4.3 billion supported by 32-bit addressing. Furthermore the new NetApp hardware is 64-bit which makes far larger addresses possible. Tom

2 1

Re: "ypset" needs added to common command set
by sirbruce＠ix.netcom.com 19 Oct '99

19 Oct '99

On 10/19/99 15:13:26 you wrote: > >I would like to see the "ypset" command added to the common Data Ontap >command >set. We have several Netapps where we need to use the "ypset" command but in >order to run the command and make it permanent, you have to go into >rc_toggle_basic mode. For a permanent fix we have to add "rc_toggle_basic", >"ypset nisserver", "rc_toggle_basic" to the rc file. Is there any plans to >make "ypset" part of the common Data Ontap command set? There has been an open bug/RFE on this since before NIS was even released. :) There was some talk recently on the list about them revising their approach to some of these commands but I didn't see a firm date set. Bruce

1 0

Easiest way to migrate data off of Filer
by Yicheng Li-R37424 19 Oct '99

19 Oct '99

Hi, We're running an F540 with Ontap 5.3.2D3, setup for NFS and CIFS services. Most (~95%) of our NFS clients are Solaris 2.6 machines. I would like to know if there is an easy way to migrate home-dir data off of the filer and onto a Sun server (Enterprise 450 with Solaris 2.6). Doing a plain 'cp' tends to skip over .* files and is a bit tricky about retaining permissions. We also have a script 'copy_dir' that uses the copy_io command, but it takes an extraordinarily long time. We're talking a 6 Gb home directory taking more than 12 hours to copy (over a 100 Mbs connection, too). I am sure that there is no problems with the network, and I suspect that the copy_io is getting hung up trying to copy over each version of the .snapshot directories. Invariably, I will get a stale NFS error and eventually time out. Is there any way getting past the .snapshot directories during copies? I imagine that other Solaris admins must have run into this problem before. ---------- Yicheng Li (480)413-6636 WISD Engineering Network

2 1

"ypset" needs added to common command set
by Mike Ball 19 Oct '99

19 Oct '99

I would like to see the "ypset" command added to the common Data Ontap command set. We have several Netapps where we need to use the "ypset" command but in order to run the command and make it permanent, you have to go into rc_toggle_basic mode. For a permanent fix we have to add "rc_toggle_basic", "ypset nisserver", "rc_toggle_basic" to the rc file. Is there any plans to make "ypset" part of the common Data Ontap command set? Thank you, Mike

2 1

Re: mailboxes on toaster
by George Kahler 19 Oct '99

19 Oct '99

Greetings... armijo(a)cs.unm.edu writes: > > > > Please include any other suggestions. > > > > ok, > > assuming the toaster is the bottleneck, you may also want to turn off atime > updates, make sure the toaster is homed on each network on which it has > clients, would adding more nvram benefit help? are you running 100tx-fd, or > better? for that matter, is network, cpu, or disk i/o the real > bottleneck? Guys, much appreciate all of your responses to my question regarding maildir and mbx. The filer (520) has been smoking for a year now but us being a university depending on government funding it is hard to get new iron in here. I was looking for a quick and relatively pain-free fix; mbx seemed like a good candidate. The nvram/ram is maxed out at 8/256 and network is on 100/full. Disk shortage is another problem because I can't get the proper Seagate 9 GB SCSI disks to keep the OS happy. (some time ago I was asking those of you that run ST39173 what firmware rev they are using; no response) I am being told now, that a new filer from Dell might be an option at MUCH cheaper price. Q: anyone out there that has experience with Dell filers? are they just reselling the NetApp filers ? Thanks, George ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- George Kahler e-mail: george(a)yorku.ca Sr. Systems Administrator humans: (416) 736-5257 x.22699 Computing Services, York University machines: (416) 736-5830 Ontario, Canada, M3J-1P3

3 2

Re: Legato Networker Clientpak for Netapp filers
by Michael Salmon 19 Oct '99

19 Oct '99

+----- On Tue, 19 Oct 1999 09:38:17 +0200, "Schepers, Jan" writes: | Hello people, | | currently there is a Legato Networker Clientpak available | for Network Appliance Filers. Check: | | http://www-ftp.legato.com/Products/html/clientpak_for_netapps.html | | In our environment the Networker server is running on HP-UX but | Legato claims that it is available for W/NT and Solaris only. | | The first question is whether somebody wants to share experience | with the clientpak? I have recently installed it but I haven't had enough experience yet to send any info to the list. The manual doesn't mention that the backup is started using rsh, not nsrexecd so your hosts.equiv must include the backup server. | Secondly, Networker is a client/server application so did anybody | ever try the C/S combination Netapp/HP-UX rather then Netapp/Solaris? | Did it work? Why not? What were the problems? The server can be whatever you like but you must have a sparc/solaris or intel/nt machine if you want to install the s/w or recover files. I don't think that this s/w in it's current state will convince anyone to buy a toaster. BTW na_recover is not pleasant, I consider it to be at best alpha quality in it's user interface. I think that I should be paid for using this software rather than having to pay for a client license. /Michael

1 0

Legato Networker Clientpak for Netapp filers
by Schepers, Jan 19 Oct '99

19 Oct '99

Hello people, currently there is a Legato Networker Clientpak available for Network Appliance Filers. Check: http://www-ftp.legato.com/Products/html/clientpak_for_netapps.html In our environment the Networker server is running on HP-UX but Legato claims that it is available for W/NT and Solaris only. The first question is whether somebody wants to share experience with the clientpak? Secondly, Networker is a client/server application so did anybody ever try the C/S combination Netapp/HP-UX rather then Netapp/Solaris? Did it work? Why not? What were the problems? The outcome of the above may help convert somebody to NA. TIA - Yann

1 0

RE: now.netapp.com now needs javascript/cookies?
by Graydon Dodson 18 Oct '99

18 Oct '99

I don't want to feed a flame war here, but I agree that NOW access should NOT require java/javascript. GUI browsers aren't the only tools used to access this site, Some of us automate, (one of the major advantages of a CLI) and have perl scripts for pulling info from the site. Cookies complicate these programs, java/javascript makes them unworkable. > Michael Ryan wrote: > >a toaster tidbit: NOW uses cookies not only to manage Session state in IIS but >also to maintain Authentication and Authorization across our newly expanded >backend. That's why the Cookies have domain ".netapp.com" and not >"now.netapp.com." Using cookies for authentication/authorization is a bad idea. The NOW site is basically insecure to start with (no SSL, all authentication info sent in the clear). The only value the cookies have is to avoid presenting multiple login challenges to the user as they move from server to server. But this can lower security even further because a "cracker" may not need to guess a username:password, just a currently valid cookie. P.S. I don't care what you do with the corporate site (www.netapp.com) but for us folks who pay for the support site, it would be nice if "easy to use" was a priority. My $0.02 Graydon Dodson grdodson(a)lexmark.com Lexmark International Inc.

1 0

RE: now.netapp.com now needs javascript/cookies?
by sirbruce＠ix.netcom.com 18 Oct '99

18 Oct '99

On 10/18/99 10:59:17 you wrote: >that said, IMHO, i think it's key for NTAP to review and >architect, again, how NOW should handle general interactions with modern text >browsers (including the absence of javascript). Why review and architect *again*? Surely these issues were forseeable before, and yet obviously you didn't care. Did you even bother to *ask* the customer base and research this before hand? No. So either admit that you guys made a mistake, or stop paying lipservice. BTW, while you are rearchitecting, rip out IIS. You will be better off in the long run. Bruce

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