toasters

toasters@lists.teaparty.net

1 participants
13514 discussions

RE: UNCORR PROC MCHK 98
by Bulfer, David 04 Mar '99

04 Mar '99

This is not a memory error on and F630. For an F630, an MCHK 98 means "Processor Hard Error". It is a SW problem associated with SNMP. Access NOW and check out bug 11610. David Bulfer -----Original Message----- From: G D Geen [mailto:geen@msp.sc.ti.com] Sent: Wednesday, March 03, 1999 1:46 PM To: 'toasters(a)mathworks.com' Cc: Peter Pross; Mike Ball Subject: Re: UNCORR PROC MCHK 98 We were told that this was a memory issue as well. This was not so in our case. Ours occurred when a network device discovery was run from the Spectrum server. This did not affect the system running version below 5.1.1. If you are running some sort of network monitoring tools such as Cabletron's Spectrum server, the SNMP call made by the discovery may be causing your problem as it did ours. NetApp took ownership of this issue and created a patch to fix our problem. Though this problem had been reported by other vendors, Cabletron does not consider it a bug in *their* code. -gdg Peter Pross wrote: > > Hi, > > I believe this may be memory errors. I think you aloud 1 in a blue moon, if > more replace mem. Check with netapps. > > Cheers, > > Peter > > __^__ > ( ___ > )--------------------------------------------------------------------------- > ------ > | / | Peter Pross Title: Unix Systems > Administrator > | / | Nortel Networks Montreal Email: pross(a)nortel.ca > | / | 16 Place du Commerce Voice: 514-765-7973 > | / | Nun's Island, Quebec, Fax : 514-761-8710 > > | / | Canada H3E 1H6 ESN : 852-7973 > > |___| > > (_____)--------------------------------------------------------------------- > ----------- > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Mike Ball [SMTP:mball@rtp.opensystems.com] > > Sent: March 3, 1999 2:06 PM > > To: 'toasters(a)mathworks.com' > > Subject: UNCORR PROC MCHK 98 > > > > Does anyone have an idea of what the below error is pointing to on my F630 > > running 5.21? > > > > "Wed Mar 3 09:26:49 EST [rc]: relog syslog UNCORR PROC MCHK 98 > > pc:fffffc0000482260 cia:0 mm:4090 eia:1820f550 fs:ff00 eis:945000000 isr: > > 0 pci0:3010106 pci1:4000" > > > > I discovered my system was locked up this morning when I came in. After > > rebooting i discovered the following error in my messages file. > > > > -- --------------------------------------------------------------- G D Geen mailto:geen@ti.com Texas Instruments Phone : (972)480.7896 System Administrator FAX : (972)480.7676 --------------------------------------------------------------- Life is what happens while you're busy making other plans. -J. Lennon

3 2

RE: Gb-ether and Extreme: closure! :-)
by Garrett Burke 04 Mar '99

04 Mar '99

Hi Bruce, You'll find the same thing happens if you setup port mirroring. When you turn mirroring off the port isn't in any VLAN and hence doesn't pass any packets. Couldn't find it mentioned in any of the Extreme docs...must doc it for my colleagues..now where's my clone and a 48hr day As an aside, have you run a filer into a 100Mb/s port on a S48? I'm seeing CRC errors on the port that my F230 is on. Netapp are investigating, just wondering if anyone else is seeing/has seen this. Regards, GB > ---------- > From: Bruce Walker[SMTP:bmw@visgen.com] > Sent: 04 March 1999 09:02 > To: toasters(a)mathworks.com > Subject: Re: Gb-ether and Extreme: closure! :-) > > > But what happens when you unconfigure a trunked port on a Summit, > apparently, is that the port ends up not being on *any* VLAN. The > port is "alive" but nothing is routed to or from it. > >

3 2

Re: newbie asking about autoloaders
by rbutler＠pdc.com 04 Mar '99

04 Mar '99

> From bmw(a)visgen.com Wed Mar 3 19:26:09 1999 > From: Bruce Walker <bmw(a)visgen.com> > Subject: Re: newbie asking about autoloaders > To: kfischer(a)rsinc.com (Kathy Fischer) > Date: Wed, 3 Mar 1999 20:20:43 -0500 (EST) > Cc: toasters(a)mathworks.com > X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4 PL24 ME5a] > Content-Type: text > Sender: owner-toasters(a)mathworks.com > Content-Length: 1536 > > Kathy Fischer writes: > > > > Can anyone out there recommend an autoloader (DLT type), or warn against any > > for use with the toaster? > > If it doesn't have to be DLT, the Exabyte Mammoth tapes get excellent > performance and are cheaper. I am getting better than 5 Mbytes/sec > continuous xfer, which lets me backup 65 Gigs in about 4 hours > using dump on the filer. This is to an Exabyte F220 autoloader > (10 tapes) running in dumb mode, attached directly to an F720. > > Well almost directly; I have a Rancho differential SCSI to single-ended > converter mashed in between the Exabyte and the F720. I ordered > both the F720 and the Exabyte at the same time and failed to notice > that the 720's come with differential SCSI! I sure croaked that > filer bad when I connected a plain 68pin to 50pin HD SCSI kluge > adapter to it. Kernel fault and core dump. > > Supposedly, BudTool works with the Exabyte too, but I may never be > able to find that out :-) > > On the performance thing: it's important that the filer be able to > get the data rate up high enough to prevent the DLT tapes from > shoe-shining which brings down their effective xfer rate a lot. > I had a DLT4000 drive for a while before I bought the F220 and it > shoe-shined a lot when driven from an F330 filer. It only managed > to do about as well as the 4mm DAT drive it was temporarily replacing. > > I kinda like helical scan technology for that start/stop ability. > > Cheers! > -- > -bmw | Double helix in the sky tonight > | Throw out the hardware > | Let's do it right -- Steely Dan; Aja > Hi, BudTool supports most all libraries that are manufactured. This includes the Exabyte 220. There are a number of DLT libraries with DLT7000 and DLT4000 tape drives in them. In my opinion, DLT is the defacto standard in the industry. Mammoth may be a little cheaper, but was never really accepted widely by the market. The top three Tape Library manufacturers are StorageTek, ATL, and Breece Hill. Any tape library from these manufacturers will give you very good service for the long term. If you go with 8mm technology such as the Mammoth or Sony AIT, then Exabyte or Spectrologics makes excellent tape libraries to fill this nitch. As an aside, the top three Tape Library manufacturers I mentioned above (STK, ATK and BH) decided to only support DLT tape technology for OpenSystems (UNIX) and passed on Mammoth and AIT. Randy Butler System Engineering Supervisor - Western Region PDC Solutions, Inc. phone: 972-446-2644 x15 Systems Engineering Solutions FAX: 972-245-9320 1445 MacArthur Drive, Bldg. 1, Suite 116 Carrollton, TX 75007 E-mail: rbutler(a)pdc.com //////////// //////////// ////////// // /// // // /// // // //// // /// // // /// // /// // /////////// // /// // // // /// // // // /// /// /// //// ///////////// /////////////

1 0

Sun Trunking
by Mohler, Jeff 04 Mar '99

04 Mar '99

Im looking for a reference to the Sun Trunking software..and Im unable to locate so far. Sorry for the off topic, but if anyone has a reference...thanks.

1 0

RE: VIF command
by Mohler, Jeff 04 Mar '99

04 Mar '99

> What switch are you using (mfg/model)? There are many differences in how > load > balancing is implemented. I have even found differences in different > model > switches from the same manufacturer. All that I have seen are based on > MAC > addresses - Either source, destination or a combination. Some mfg's let > you > choose which to use. If your client base is reasonably large with random > MAC > address and equal loads, then the traffic will be balanced. Small client > pools > or most traffic being generated/requested by a few clients can skew the > load. > Some implementations have standby ports in the trunk, which seems like > what you > are seeing. I believe Extreme allocates one port out of the trunk as a > standby. > Perhaps this is configurable. --- Its a FEC blade in a Cisco 5505.

1 0

RE: VIF command
by Naden, Barbara 04 Mar '99

04 Mar '99

What switch are you using (mfg/model)? There are many differences in how load balancing is implemented. I have even found differences in different model switches from the same manufacturer. All that I have seen are based on MAC addresses - Either source, destination or a combination. Some mfg's let you choose which to use. If your client base is reasonably large with random MAC address and equal loads, then the traffic will be balanced. Small client pools or most traffic being generated/requested by a few clients can skew the load. Some implementations have standby ports in the trunk, which seems like what you are seeing. I believe Extreme allocates one port out of the trunk as a standby. Perhaps this is configurable. Barbara -----Original Message----- From: Mohler, Jeff [mailto:jeff.mohler@wilcom.com] Sent: Thursday, March 04, 1999 7:01 AM To: 'Sam Cramer'; Mohler, Jeff Cc: 'toasters(a)mathworks.com' Subject: RE: VIF command > If you unplug one of the busy links, does one of the idle links pick up > the > slack? > > Sam --- Yes, a spare link picks up the dead one, and holds onto it when you restore the dead link.

1 0

Re: 5.2.1 blues
by sirbruce＠ix.netcom.com 04 Mar '99

04 Mar '99

On 03/03/99 08:42:57 you wrote: > >I mean, instead of running 5.1.2P1, P2, D1, D2, D3, D4, D5, D6, or D7 >(deep breath) >I'd like to run 5.1.2 with the patches i feel i'd like to have. I think that's an even worse idea. If you think that Netapp's QA is bad now (and I'm not saying it is), you've just increased their workload exponentially because they have to test each combination of patches to make sure they all work together in whatever combination a user might pick. My experience is that Netapp's patches for specific problems are generally very good, but there always seem to be a couple of large bugs in new releases that many customers run into right away that should have been caught in testing. Bruce

3 2

RE: VIF command
by Mohler, Jeff 04 Mar '99

04 Mar '99

> If you unplug one of the busy links, does one of the idle links pick up > the > slack? > > Sam --- Yes, a spare link picks up the dead one, and holds onto it when you restore the dead link.

1 0

Re: VIF command
by Sam Cramer 04 Mar '99

04 Mar '99

Jeff writes: > I created me a vif interface made up of four 100Mb Ethernet interfaces. > > I see, that only the first two interfaces really do anything, the second two > show no errors, but dont DO anything. It's my understanding that etherchannel switches use a proprietary protocol to distribute load over the links. This protocol often involves a hash of the source and destination addresses. It may be that you have a pattern of access from specific clients that doesn't hash well, and so doesn't distribute the load over all the links. > Im thinking it hasnt reached a 'threshold' to fire up more links. I don't believe that total network load needs to hit a certain threshold in order to use all the links. If you unplug one of the busy links, does one of the idle links pick up the slack? Sam

2 1

RE: NFS 2 -vs-3
by Mohler, Jeff 04 Mar '99

04 Mar '99

Nothing makes me think 2 is -better-, just that I see more "V2 is better" type arguments. Im just ferreting out actual facts *grin* > -----Original Message----- > From: kls(a)netapp.com [SMTP:kls@netapp.com] > Sent: Tuesday, March 02, 1999 10:17 PM > To: jeff.mohler(a)wilcom.com > Cc: toasters(a)mathworks.com > Subject: Re: NFS 2 -vs-3 > > > In a really short list, other than the attribute cache, why is vers 2 > NFS > > better than vers 3? > > What makes you think V2 is better than V3? > > > I will be working with directories with fewer than a dozen LARGE files > on > > each mount. > > With few files per directory, I can't think of anything in favor of > V2, and with large files I can think of various advantages to V3, > larger packet sizes being the major one. > > -- Karl

3 2

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