toasters

toasters@lists.teaparty.net

1 participants
13523 discussions

RE: CIFS, UNIX and ACLs
by Sam Schorr 24 Sep '99

24 Sep '99

Michael, 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. 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. --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 ]

2 1

Code Release confusion
by Graydon Dodson 24 Sep '99

24 Sep '99

I know that NetApp has been working on making the code release process easier to understand but I am still having problems. Any work NetApp can make to clean this up would be appreciated. I need to upgrade from 5.2.1P2 to a 5.3* release. My problem is finding the "correct" 5.3* release for my needs. I want something stable, we have had some bad experiences in the past. I also need support for the Legato Networker client. Legato states that 5.3D11 is the minimum supported release. Obviously I probably want something newer & more stable like 5.3.2R1 So I do a bit of research on NOW, and things just get more confusing. 5.3: No way to tell if this contains all the bug fixes in 5.2.1P1 5.3D*: The "D" releases (5.3D10 5.3D11) seem to have been built from 5.3 and may therefore not include all the fixes from the previous "D" release. 5.3.1: Again no way to tell if 5.3.1 includes all the bug fixes in 5.3D11 5.3.1D*: The first "D" releases (5.3.1D2 5.3.1D4 5.3.1D6) are built from 5.3.1 But later "D" releases (5.3.1D8 5.3.1D10 5.3.1D11 ...) are built from their preceding "D" release so their fixes ARE cumulative, unlike the earlier 5.3.1D* releases. 5.3.2: The NOW webserver refuses my NOW account access to this release I can get no data on it except the limited stuff in the pubs. 5.3.2R1: This is the release that Tech Support has told me for over a month now will become "recommended later this week". Still there is no way to tell what bugs are fixed in this release, all the documentation talks about is bugs fixed in 5.3.2, not 5.3.2R1. Of course what is important to me is if all the bugs fixed in 5.3D11 are also included in 5.3.2R1. I have found no way to verify this. 5.3.2D*: These "D" releases are built upon the previous "D" release so their fixes should be cumulative. There is no way to tell (unless you want to trust the file dates) if these releases are "newer" that the "R" release or if they contain the same fixes as the "R" release. Using "Bugs Online" is hopeless, most of the bugs I try to look up (11002, 13087, 10733, ...) return "not found", and when they are found, there is no info about which "R" release they are in. (if any) What I REALLY need to know is if all the 5.3D11 fixes are in 5.3.2R1 and the 5.3.2D* releases. It is impossible to determine this from NOW. If NetApp wants to help lower calls to the help line making this information available online would help. Graydon Dodson grdodson(a)lexmark.com Lexmark International Inc.

1 0

WinNT NFS clients + toasters - can't create files
by John Stoffel 24 Sep '99

24 Sep '99

Guys, I'm working with people to figure out why they can't write their files from the WinNT 4.x PC side to directories in Toasters (running 5.2.1). I've confirmed their problem as well on my PC and a seperate toaster as well. On the PC, I can NFS mount the filesystem without any problems, and I can view/open files on there as well. But if I try to create a new file, or save changes to an existing file, I just get the following error on the PC: Check the drive to make sure the door is closed and it contains the correct disk or CD. (G:\JOHN\FOO.DOC) I'm running NetManage NFS version 7.0.2, do I need a newer version of this software possibly? One thing I've found out is that if I make the directory the files are in world writeable, then people can update files without any problems. But if the mode is only 775, even the owner of the file can't save changes from the PC (inside Word 97) to that file he owns. I know the group authenication is correct because the files get the right owner and group membership when they are created in a world writeable directory. We only have the NFS license for our toasters, maybe we need to spring for and get the CIFS license as well to take care of this problem, but we'd like to find a solution before going that step. Thanks for any help or suggestions, John John Stoffel - Senior Unix Systems Administrator - Lucent Technologies stoffel(a)lucent.com - http://www.lucent.com - 978-952-7548 john.stoffel(a)ascend.com - http://www.ascend.com

1 0

Veritas netbackup 3.2 and Ontap 5.3.2(D3)
by Menachem Kaiser 24 Sep '99

24 Sep '99

Hi, Has anyone started using Veritas netbackup version 3.2 with Ontap 5.3.2(D3) or just plain Ontap 5.3.2. Before upgrading our backup software, we would like to here from other sites that have experienced this upgrade. Thanks Manny

4 4

Backup formats
by Jay Orr 23 Sep '99

23 Sep '99

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: IIS and Netapp Compatibility
by Sam Schorr 22 Sep '99

22 Sep '99

Jay, Yes, we are doing this very thing. We have 12 IIS servers (and several others) using regular UNC path calls to user content created and stored on 2 F740's and 2 F760's. You do not, and should not, use mapped drives as these only persist with a user logged into your IIS servers. The IUSR#### NT Account user that IIS runs under will be the security context for access to the UNC. All you need do is make a share on the filer through the documented Server Manager function, make sure the NT user account IIS runs under has at least Change rights to the share, then use that in you IIS setup or ASP's, dll's, whatever. -----Original Message----- From: Michael van Elst [mailto:mlelstv@xlink.net] Sent: Tuesday, September 21, 1999 1:51 PM To: Jay Querusio Cc: toasters(a)mathworks.com Subject: Re: IIS and Netapp Compatibility On Tue, Sep 21, 1999 at 01:03:15PM -0400, Jay Querusio wrote: > Hi, > > Is anyone using IIS as a front end to the Netapp. We would like to have IIS > through a mapped drive serve ASP, JavaScript, and Html pages that are stored > on the Netapp. Can this be done and is anyone doing it now? We are using a F740 as storage for two IIS4.0 Webservers (and a couple of Apache/Solaris webservers). IIS refers to the websites via UNC paths, not with a mapped drive. > If so, does anyone know if there are any bench mark tests out there that we > could try? Sorry, no. > We are currently running 5.3D20 We are using ONTAP 5.12. -- 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

RE: Remote Backup Options
by Melvin, Grant 22 Sep '99

22 Sep '99

Hi Menachem, I think this link is what you are looking for. http://now.netapp.com/knowledge/contents/TIP/TIP_605.shtml <http://now.netapp.com/knowledge/contents/TIP/TIP_605.shtml> Cheers, Grant

1 0

RE: Remote Backup Options
by Melvin, Grant 22 Sep '99

22 Sep '99

Hi Benjy, Veritas added support for 3-way NDMP backups to NetBackup (NBU) 3.2. Data ONTAP has supported 3-way NDMP backups since we supported NDMP v2 in 4.x. HOWEVER, during certification of NBU 3.2 & 5.3.2 we recognized that 3-way restores weren't functioning completely in *every* scenario that we tested with NBU & we tracked this down to issues on *both* sides. These issues are being addressed, but won't be certified/supported until a follow-on release of Data ONTAP is released (currently scheduled for the end of October '99). Cheers, Grant -----Original Message----- From: Benjy Feen [mailto:benjy@feen.com] Sent: Monday, August 02, 1999 10:23 AM To: Steve Kappel Cc: toasters(a)mathworks.com Subject: Re: Remote Backup Options Steve: Since you seem to know both sides of the NDMP debate here, let me ask you: is there ANY NetBackup/NetApp configuration which allows 3-way NDMP backups? On Mon, 2 Aug 1999, Steve Kappel wrote: > >Speaking of remote backup, my backup team tells me that Veritas backups of > >Filers via NDMP don't work with the current release (5.3.x) of DOT. Any > >word on when (date please) this will be fixed? If already fixed, can > >someone let me know so I could get the appropriate version from Tech. > > OnTap 5.3.2 will be qualified for local (not 3-way) backup/restores > with NetBackup 3.2 very soon. 5.3.2 should be out "any day now". > > > __________________________________________________________________________ > Steve Kappel steve.kappel(a)veritas.com > VERITAS Software steve.kappel(a)iname.com (Personal) > Benjy Feen benjy(a)feen.com There is no spoon.

2 1

Multiple entries in a directory
by Dave Atkin 22 Sep '99

22 Sep '99

We recently used the "rsh filer1 dump ... | rsh filer2 restore ..." method to copy lots of user files to a new filer. We got a small number of errors, like: RESTORE: Warning: cannot rename /fsb/soci/cmm104/ini/PINERC to /fsb/soci/cmm104/ini/RSTTMP01071733 (8.3 name ~MKN0100.7~0): No such file or directory and then at the end: RESTORE: bad entry: incomplete operations RESTORE: name: ./cmm104/ini/RSTTMP01071733 RESTORE: parent name ./cmm104/ini RESTORE: sibling name: ./cmm104/ini/host-news.york.ac.uk RESTORE: entry type: LEAF RESTORE: inode number: 1071733 RESTORE: flags: TMPNAME When we looked at the source directories, we found that they had two identical entries, pointing to different inodes: # cd /usr/fsa/soci/cmm104/ini # ls -li total 48 2411623 -rwxr--r-- 1 cmm104 soci 11222 Apr 21 1998 PINERC 707049 -rwxr--r-- 1 cmm104 soci 11222 Apr 21 1998 PINERC The files were all PINERC files as generated by the PC-Pine application. Some were old but others were quite recent. Anyone else seen anything like this? [We ran wacky on the source filestore a couple of months ago to fix a different problem]. We're running 5.2.2P1. Dave Atkin ------------------------------------------------------ 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

RE: tech support waits
by Skinner, Alistair 21 Sep '99

21 Sep '99

Todd, Thanks for the feedback. Glad you like the improvements on NOW! In fact we've many more in the pipeline, including realtime case updates (they're still batched up today). You should see some more changes roll out next month. Hey, don't give up on submitting your cases through NOW! yet either. As a direct result of your feedback, we've changed the process for handling them. You're right we can't expect you to use it if we don't provide consistent response. So as of yesterday (Monday 20th) all cases submitted through NOW! get expidited service, which is tracked and reported daily to me. Thanks for your continued support and feedback. Alistair -----Original Message----- From: Todd C. Merrill [mailto:tmerrill@mathworks.com] Sent: Thursday, September 16, 1999 2:02 PM To: Skinner, Alistair Cc: 'toasters(a)mathworks.com' Subject: Re: tech support waits On Thu, 19 Aug 1999, Todd C. Merrill wrote: > I am getting frustrated with the response time from tech support. [rest of diatribe deleted] On Thu, 19 Aug 1999, Skinner, Alistair wrote: > Our preferred method of online access is through the web. Using the email > option from within a case view gives you a pre-formatted subject line to > make sure the email is attached to the case in our system. The comments field > can also be used. Unfortunately currently there can be up to a day delay between > you > submitting something and it getting into our system as these updates are > batched. > We expect to have an enhanced version implemented in the next two months which > will > include immediate updates directly to the case. I have a good response and a bad response to this response. First, the good. I like what has been done to the NOW site. Getting to a final destination (ONTAP updates, case searches, etc.) requires a lot less clicking and the responsiveness seems much improved. Bravo. However, I recently entered a case into the system via the NOW site for a tech support issue. *Nine* days later I got first response from an engineer on the case. (Luckily, it wasn't a critical issue.) With a response time like that, I am not encouraged to use the web/email way of calling in for tech support. [0] Throw some more manpower on the phones, 'cause that's how I'll be entering tech support cases in the future. [1] (There's not much else to say on this case, but if you want to talk to me about it, Alistair, give a call.) [0] This is generally true of most tech support calls I make, to NetApp or other companies. Email/web requests are treated as second class, lower-priority calls. If you (enter-your-favorite-company's-tech- support-organization-here) want us to save you time by entering data into your system, the least you could do is respond to the calls with equal priority. [1] [1] Forgive the attitude. Having a bad week....bad weather....bad machines....bad network....stress headaches. Grrrr.... Until next time... The Mathworks, Inc. 508-647-7000 x7792 3 Apple Hill Drive, Natick, MA 01760-2098 508-647-7001 FAX tmerrill(a)mathworks.com http://www.mathworks.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