toasters

toasters@lists.teaparty.net

3 participants
13514 discussions

timing of upgrading disk fw
by Jay Soffian 27 Sep '99

27 Sep '99

I have a question about the timing on upgrading disk firmware. With the recent DOT's when you do a DOT upgrade, after you reboot and a disk firmware upgrade is needed, DOT warns you at boot time, at which point you can do a disk_fw_update. This is when I've upgraded disk firmware. However, the NOW documentation isn't clear if this is the appropriate time to upgrade the disk firmare. So, my question is, when is the best time to upgrade the disk firmware: 1) After you've run install_netapp, but before you've run 'download'. 2) After you've run download. 3) After you've rebooted on the new DOT version. Also, are there any cluster considerations associated with the choice of timing? I noticed when upgrading a cluster this weekend that I received downrev messages from the NetApps until both partners had the same disk firmware. j. -- Jay Soffian <jay(a)cimedia.com> UNIX Systems Engineer 404.572.1941 Cox Interactive Media

2 2

RE: tech support waits
by Davis, Barry 27 Sep '99

27 Sep '99

I would like to introduce myself. I am Barry Davis, the new Director of E-Service at NetApp. My sole purpose in life is to make the NOW site as effective as possible in allowing customers to be self sufficient. The responsibility for fixing our data integrity problems is considered a major impediment to this, and, as such, I am taking the lead on resolving the issues. I have recently made a couple of moves to start to solve the problems that you and others have seen with our contact and site information. I have two people who are attacking this problem from two different angles. As with any fast growing corporation, we have some processes that no longer work effectively and we need to change them to ensure accurate information is entered at the time of order. In addition, we are focusing resources on identifying and fixing existing inaccuracies. This effort will take another couple of months to complete. However, we will always be reliant on the customer to keep the site records up to date as the systems move, and the user profiles up to date as the responsible people at your site change. We will verify your information when you contact us and soon we will be allowing you to review and update this information on the NOW site. Another major change underway is the implementation of a new Web interface to NetApp's case management system. This change is scheduled to cut over on 10/4 and will allow customers to update case information on a real time basis. I'm confident you will see constant improvement over time and I welcome your feedback. Good sites need a community of users who are willing to comment on what is working and criticize what is not. -----Original Message----- From: Jim Davis [mailto:jdavis@cs.arizona.edu] Sent: Tuesday, September 21, 1999 7:29 AM To: toasters(a)mathworks.com Subject: Re: tech support waits On Tue, 21 Sep 1999, Shaun T. Erickson wrote: > NetApp's customer database, or perhaps the people who maintain it, seem > incapable of tracking proper contact info on multiple customers within a > single company at a single given site. I wonder if some major snafu struck the customer database recently. The time before last that I called, they had me listed -- in a different state. And at a different university. And at a different phone. The whole record for me was pretty much bogus and the phone person ended up reentering most of it.

3 2

RE: CIFS, UNIX and ACLs
by Norman, Paul 27 Sep '99

27 Sep '99

If there was some way to make the release happen sooner, trust me, I'd do it. Unfortunately we can't, so the only choice we have is to ship it when its ready. We did a triage on the bugs and did some heavy soul searching to see if we could defer some work. Its not just severity that determines if a bug needs to be included. We look at the call records against the bug. Every time someone calls into CS its logged and included in the bug report. The 5.3 codeline is still on EA and we really want to make it GA. We have a weekly report that gets circulated with every customer call against 5.2 and another with calls against 5.3. The criteria for moving into GA has doubled between 5.2 release and 5.3 release. There just aren't any easy answers. Our goal is that each time we put out a release we can quantitatively see that its the highest quality release we've ever done. Each time we set the bar higher and then work like the devil to reach it. Paul Norman, Product Manager Direct: (408) 822-6288 Network Appliance E-Mail: pnorman(a)netapp.com 495 East Java Drive Corp: (408) 822-6000 Sunnyvale, CA 94089 Web: WWW.NetApp.Com > -----Original Message----- > From: Graham C. Knight [mailto:grahamk@ast.lmco.com] > Sent: Sunday, September 26, 1999 1:24 PM > To: Norman, Paul > Cc: 'Eyal Traitel'; Day, Matt; toasters(a)mathworks.com > Subject: Re: CIFS, UNIX and ACLs > > > "Norman, Paul" wrote: > > > > So expecting to see something in November would be a reasonable > > assumption. > > > > I'm not sure how this relates to other shops, but here at > Lockheed we will be in a Y2K configuration freeze starting > November 1. Lots of other companies I know about are in the > same boat. You might want to keep that in mind when it comes > to OS release dates as Y2K approaches. > > Graham >

2 1

version
by Mark D Fowle 27 Sep '99

27 Sep '99

What is the current release rev level of 5.3.2 ? Mark Fowle Unix/Metaphase/Oracle Administration Caterpillar - BCP

1 0

RE: CIFS, UNIX and ACLs
by Norman, Paul 26 Sep '99

26 Sep '99

First thing, all postings to Toasters are "non-official". If you want a sanctioned response to a query send it to support(a)netapp.com. Many folks in NetApp monitor Toasters and try to help out when we can, but its run by customers for the benefit of customers. Its your list, not NetApp's. This is just one aspect of the unique relationship NetApp has with its customers. NetApp may be a small computer company at a $400 Million run rate today, but we have a vision. Our Vision isn't just growing to be a billion dollar company although we certainly intend to do that. The fanatics here at NetApp, myself included, intend to convert the computing world into Appliance Fanatics. So if you own a NetApp box you're part of the team and NetApp folks treat you as such rather than just a customer. NetApp people are not allowed to talk about un-announced products in public forums. We are supposed to have NDAs in place before discussing future offerings. In fact we generally refer to all future releases by code name rather than actual name in case the numbers change. Matt's response was a minor slip of the lip...err finger? NetApp has changed the way we release software. We will not be generating "P" releases which were rollups of "D" patch releases. Instead we intend to issue periodic (quarterly) maintenance releases which rollup most, but not all D patches. The good news is that maintenance releases go through full regression testing. [Wait, let me get into my flame suit] Yes, I know we have released product only to find a serious bug in some feature which customers hit almost instantly after upgrading. I know sometimes it feels like we didn't test the simple things, but believe me, we test the heck out of each release. We've dramatically increased the size of our QA group in the last year. In my 29 years in the computer business I've never seen a sharper, more dedicated bunch of people. We've managed to accumulate the best talent in the Valley, not just in QA but throughout all of the company. We really take it to heart when a release has bugs. We've increased out test coverage and raised the bar on the quality requirements for each successive release. Now I said not all D patches get into a maintenance release. This is why we ask customers running a D patch release to check with CS before, REPEAT BEFORE, they upgrade to any newer release. Some D patches are not considered ideal solutions to a problem and we'd prefer to rewrite things rather than patch them. Rewriting takes longer and it sometimes isn't possible to get it done in time to make the maintenance release. Maintenance releases do not add major new functionality. In general maintenance releases are bug fixes and minor enhancements to existing features. We do allow new hardware options such as a roll of a NIC card or a larger capacity disk, but we wouldn't for instance allow an increase in the maximum capacity a filer can support. Occasionally there are minor improvements, for instance improving the scalability of NIS to handle very large environments or adding vif support to gigabit interfaces, but you won't see dramatic changes like changing the admin interface to eliminate rc_toggle_basic commands although a minor enhancement like history editing could happen. The big changes come in major releases. Bet you are wondering when the heck this Marketing dweeb is actually going to answer the question. So without breaking the rules I think I can say the following. The last maintenance release for 5.3 codeline was early August, therefore the next maintenance release should be out in about three months since that's the new system. So expecting to see something in November would be a reasonable assumption. You could assume it won't have any major new features but may contain new hardware options and perhaps minor enhancements. Being realistic, plans can change, so although you could assume the above will happen, you shouldn't count on it. Paul Norman, Product Manager Direct: (408) 822-6288 Network Appliance E-Mail: pnorman(a)netapp.com 495 East Java Drive Corp: (408) 822-6000 Sunnyvale, CA 94089 Web: WWW.NetApp.Com > -----Original Message----- > From: Eyal Traitel [mailto:r55789@email.sps.mot.com] > Sent: Saturday, September 25, 1999 2:57 AM > To: Matt Day > Cc: toasters(a)mathworks.com > Subject: Re: CIFS, UNIX and ACLs > > > Matt, > > Could you state an non-official due date for 5.3.4 ? > What will we see (fetures) ? > > Eyal. > > > > > Matt Day wrote: > > > Michael van Elst <mlelstv(a)xlink.net> wrote: > > >On Fri, Sep 24, 1999 at 12:33:17PM -0700, Sam Schorr wrote: > > >> We tried to do this but there is a known bug in OnTap > that prevents Samba > > >> from correctly opening a CIFS share on the filers. > > > > > >this is interesting, are there any details about this bug ? > > > > Samba's client isn't officially supported by Netapp, and there is at > > least one bug that fouls up smbclient pretty badly (bug #12563). > > But that bug, and all the other smbclient problems that I'm > aware of, > > will be fixed in the upcoming 5.3.4 release. I just tried smbclient > > 2.0.5a against a filer here running a 5.3.4 test build and every > > command seemed to work. Be aware, though: that's about all the > > smbclient testing we've ever done, so no guarantees. > > > > I think smbfs should be OK, too, but I haven't tried it in > quite a while. >

3 2

RE: Backup formats
by Norman, Paul 25 Sep '99

25 Sep '99

I didn't see a response to this, which is a bit unusual as the FSR guys are pretty quick to talk to folks on Toasters. As long as I'm here let me take a crack at answering. FAServer is the original name of filers before we moved to the Fxxx nomenclature. there were 400, 450, 1300, 1400 and perhaps other FAServers that I don't know about. They were this Darth Vader black pedestal sort of things that looked really cool. I just took a look on the web and couldn't find a picture of one, although if you read some of the older tech reports I am sure you'll see them mentioned. When our new facility is fully built we plan on having a little Filer Museum with samples of all the older machines - hopefully they'll also have a web based tour you can take to see where it all started. 1) The original BudTool used an rsh mechanism to get the filer to kick off a dump/restore. By piping the output back to BudTool, Budtool could effectively get a dump stream routed wherever it liked. Budtool put some header info on the stream, but otherwise it was just dump/restore. So the answer to (1) is its regular dump/restore format, which is a Unix derivative. It will restore to a filer or to a Sun machine with UFS restore but on the Sun you lose all the Windows attributes since Sun doesn't know what they are. Initially when folks just had one filer they needed to know they could get at their data if the filer broke, hence the Sun compatibility. Nowadays people aren't nearly as concerned about being stranded. 2) NDMP actually uses dump/restore as the underlying mechanism to handle the data, so its format is the same as dump/restore with a bit of header info. It tracks inodes which are logical pointers but not pointers to physical disk locations, so you can dump from any filer and restore to any other filer to your heart's content. 3) I think I just answered this. FAServer is like doing an "rsh filer.name dump" piped to a tape. NDMP uses a different protocol to invoke dump and direct the stream elsewhere. I think people are pushing you toward NDMP most new development (features/functions) will be done on NDMP as it is an industry standard and it works on other hardware vendors gear too. Paul Norman, Product Manager Direct: (408) 822-6288 Network Appliance E-Mail: pnorman(a)netapp.com 495 East Java Drive Corp: (408) 822-6000 Sunnyvale, CA 94089 Web: WWW.NetApp.Com > -----Original Message----- > From: Jay Orr [mailto:orrjl@stl.nexen.com] > Sent: Thursday, September 23, 1999 9:44 AM > To: toasters(a)mathworks.com > Subject: Backup formats > > > Hi all! > > I remember a spate of conversation about backup formats. > Currently we have > two F330's now running 5.3.2r1 and have two sun servers > running budtool. > One is at 4.6, the other is 4.6.1. > > I found out as of 4.6.1 that they are no longer supporting the > "dump.FAServer" dump. I have never been able to find > documentation on what > exactly this is (nor could the tech I spoke with at legato), > but that is > how the filers have been backed up. > > Now, if someone could be kind enough to answer a few confused > questions : > > 1) is the FAServer dump like a tar snapshot? One selling > point on other > backup software I've been pitched is that NDMP can only be > restored to the > toaster, it's a non-standard format and can't be restored to > a host then a > toaster. > > 2) Does NDMP save info of where on the hard disk it is? I > thought I read > that somewhere, which means you can't backup one filer then > restore it on > another... > > 3) Can someone give me a comparison of the different methods > of backing up > a toaster? I.e. what is FASserver and NDMP? > > Thanks! > > ----------- > Fujitsu - Nexion, St. Louis, MO > Jay Orr (314) 579-6517 >

1 0

RE: CIFS, UNIX and ACLs
by Mohler, Jeff 25 Sep '99

25 Sep '99

Matt, Could you state an non-official due date for 5.3.4 ? What will we see (fetures) ? Eyal. --- Although Ive not seen anything specific..I put in a note about an X-10 controller to control other "appliances" with. It was not met favorably. *grin* --- Jeff 'ThisIsWhyImNotAProgrammer' Mohler Professional Services Engineer

1 0

Re: CIFS, UNIX and ACLs
by Matt Day 25 Sep '99

25 Sep '99

Michael van Elst <mlelstv(a)xlink.net> wrote: >On Fri, Sep 24, 1999 at 12:33:17PM -0700, Sam Schorr wrote: >> We tried to do this but there is a known bug in OnTap that prevents Samba >> from correctly opening a CIFS share on the filers. > >this is interesting, are there any details about this bug ? Samba's client isn't officially supported by Netapp, and there is at least one bug that fouls up smbclient pretty badly (bug #12563). But that bug, and all the other smbclient problems that I'm aware of, will be fixed in the upcoming 5.3.4 release. I just tried smbclient 2.0.5a against a filer here running a 5.3.4 test build and every command seemed to work. Be aware, though: that's about all the smbclient testing we've ever done, so no guarantees. I think smbfs should be OK, too, but I haven't tried it in quite a while.

3 2

F330 & ONTAP versions
by Reidenbach, Edward 25 Sep '99

25 Sep '99

Jay, Thanks for the inquiry. As a matter of company policy, we do not comment about unannounced products. This said, the following information should give you some understanding of our plans. The F330 was officially EOA'ed on 4/30/98. The end of support (EOS) date for software compatible with the F330 is 2 years from that date or April 30, 2000 What EOS for software means is that NetApp will test all new releases of software for compatibility with the EOA'ed platform for two years after that platform's EOA date. In the case of the F330, if NetApp releases new software before April 30, 2000, it will be tested for compatibility with the F330. Ed > -----Original Message----- > From: Jay Orr [mailto:orrjl@stl.nexen.com] > Sent: Thursday, September 09, 1999 9:34 AM > To: toasters(a)mathworks.com > Subject: F330 & ONTAP versions > > > I was talking with a tech today fixing problems I experienced > upgrading > our F330 from 4.2a to 5.3.2r1, and I asked if this was the > last release > for the F330's, since after February you can't purchase a > software support > for these filers. He said he hadn't heard about the > end-of-support on the > F330's, but mentioned that 5.4 is scheduled for Feb. > > My question is, will 5.4 be available for the F330's or is 5.3.2r1 the > last release that'll work on the F330s ?? > > ----------- > Fujitsu - Nexion, St. Louis, MO > Jay Orr (314) 579-6517 >

1 0

RE: CIFS, UNIX and ACLs
by Muhlestein, Mark 24 Sep '99

24 Sep '99

There is no way to manage NT security from UNIX clients that I am aware of, either from NetApp or a third party. We have an outstanding RFE on that issue (14140, which I have updated to include your request), but no shipping version of OnTap supports that functionality. You can do it easily from an NT client, of course. Mark Muhlestein -- mmm(a)netapp.com -----Original Message----- From: Michael van Elst [mailto:mlelstv@xlink.net] Sent: Friday, September 24, 1999 4:22 PM To: Sam Schorr Cc: 'Michael van Elst'; toasters(a)mathworks.com Subject: Re: CIFS, UNIX and ACLs On Fri, Sep 24, 1999 at 02:58:10PM -0700, Sam Schorr wrote: > Michael, Hi Sam, > I do not have the specifics on the bug. It came out ina conversation with a > Netapp engineer that ranged over a number of topics. We had been told that > 5.3.2 had support for Samba, but that turned out not to be true. If you did > use Samba to connect to a CIFS share on a 5.3.2 box, you would not be able > to see any file extensions or directory ACLs. well, with Samba2.0.5 and ONTAP 5.1.2, I cannot even open a session. > As for your setup to allow WinNT ACL access, I guess I'm not quite clear on > why this would be a problem. As I pointed out, we allow users to upload > files and directories using the NFS mount, which the netapp translates to > Unicode and does the necessary ACL mappings to handle the shift to CIFS as > long as the parent directory has been defined as a CIFS share. The Unicode > support is part of 5.2.3 and 5.3.2, but that may be an issue for you. Let me clarify the problem a bit more. The NT application is IIS4.0 with Frontpage extensions. Two (or more) NT-accounts need to access the files on a website: an anonymous account that is used by IIS4.0 when somebody browses through the site and one or more dedicated frontpage accounts that are allowed to modify the site. This is done by creating appropriate access control lists for all files and directories in the particular webspace. The webspace is also accessible from a UNIX host via NFS which performs the initial configuration and also hosts other applications that write to the webspace. Files created this way are owned by the frontpage account but do not have access lists, instead the filer does the usual UNIX mode -> ACL translation. The written files must be accessible by the annonymous user which means that the appropriate access lists must be created. There is no way to make it work with the translated UNIX modes. Currently we do this by running a slow script on the NT box, but I would prefer to handle all these maintenance tasks on the UNIX side. Setting access lists can be done by speaking the NT dialect of the SMB protocol to the filer, which unfortunately happens to be undocumented. I am now searching for a piece of software, commercial product or even some other kind of information that lets me do this. Regards, Michael van Elst > > Hope I've been of some help. > > --srs > > -----Original Message----- > From: Michael van Elst [mailto:mlelstv@xlink.net] > Sent: Friday, September 24, 1999 2:29 PM > To: Sam Schorr > Cc: 'Michael van Elst'; toasters(a)mathworks.com > Subject: Re: CIFS, UNIX and ACLs > > > On Fri, Sep 24, 1999 at 12:33:17PM -0700, Sam Schorr wrote: > > Michael, > > Hi Sam, > > > We tried to do this but there is a known bug in OnTap that prevents Samba > > from correctly opening a CIFS share on the filers. > > this is interesting, are there any details about this bug ? > > > We had to revert to > > using NFS mounts, but this has not caused any problems for NT access. > > Essentially, we are allowing people to ftp files into > > directories/subdirectories that are primarily accessed through CIFS shares > > from a Linux system. I don't know what you may lose doing it this way - > we > > haven't had any issues. > > My problem is to prepare files and directories for WinNT clients. > I can easily create the directories and write files using NFS, > but I cannot set WinNT access lists which are important for > the application. > > Regards, > Michael van Elst > > > > > > --srs > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Michael van Elst [mailto:mlelstv@xlink.net] > > Sent: Friday, September 24, 1999 5:10 AM > > To: toasters(a)mathworks.com > > Subject: CIFS, UNIX and ACLs > > > > > > Hello everyone, > > > > I'm looking for a method to access a CIFS share residing on a NetApp- > > Filer from a UNIX client. In particular I am interested in maintaining > > NTFS-style ACLs. > > > > Is anybody doing this successfully ? > > > > Regards, > > -- > > i.A. Michael van Elst / phone: +49 721 6635 330 > > Xlink - Network Information Centre \/ fax: +49 721 6635 349 > > Vincenz-Priessnitz-Str. 3 /\ link http://nic.xlink.net/ > > D-76131 Karlsruhe, Germany /_______ email: > hostmaster(a)xlink.net > > [ Xlink Internet Service GmbH, Sitz Karlsruhe > ] > > [ Amtsgericht Karlsruhe HRB 8161, Geschaeftsfuehrer: Prof. Michael Rotert > ] > -- > i.A. Michael van Elst / phone: +49 721 6635 330 > Xlink - Network Information Centre \/ fax: +49 721 6635 349 > Vincenz-Priessnitz-Str. 3 /\ link http://nic.xlink.net/ > D-76131 Karlsruhe, Germany /_______ email: hostmaster(a)xlink.net > [ Xlink Internet Service GmbH, Sitz Karlsruhe ] > [ Amtsgericht Karlsruhe HRB 8161, Geschaeftsfuehrer: Prof. Michael Rotert ] -- i.A. Michael van Elst / phone: +49 721 6635 330 Xlink - Network Information Centre \/ fax: +49 721 6635 349 Vincenz-Priessnitz-Str. 3 /\ link http://nic.xlink.net/ D-76131 Karlsruhe, Germany /_______ email: hostmaster(a)xlink.net [ Xlink Internet Service GmbH, Sitz Karlsruhe ] [ Amtsgericht Karlsruhe HRB 8161, Geschaeftsfuehrer: Prof. Michael Rotert ]

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