toasters

toasters@lists.teaparty.net

2 participants
13520 discussions

file locking problem
by Jason D. Kelleher 01 May '98

01 May '98

This past Saturday we moved our mail spool from a SunOS 4.1.3_U1 system to our NetApp F330 running ONTAP 4.3.3. Since then, we've had problems with procmail processes hanging on open file locks. This only occurs when someone leaves mailtool or dtmail running. Does anyone have any idea why mailtool won't handle file locking when mounting the spool from a NetApp, but will when mounting from a SunOS system? Any insight would be greatly appreciated. jason --- Jason D. Kelleher kelleher(a)susq.com Susquehanna Investment Group 610.617.2721 (voice) 401 City Line Ave, Suite 220 610.617.2916 (fax) Bala Cynwyd, PA 19004-1122

2 1

Re: file locking problem
by sirbruce＠ix.netcom.com 30 Apr '98

30 Apr '98

On 04/30/98 10:59:37 you wrote: > > > > This past Saturday we moved our mail spool from a SunOS 4.1.3_U1 >system to our NetApp F330 running ONTAP 4.3.3. Since then, we've had >problems with procmail processes hanging on open file locks. This only >occurs when someone leaves mailtool or dtmail running. > > Does anyone have any idea why mailtool won't handle file locking >when mounting the spool from a NetApp, but will when mounting from a >SunOS system? > > Any insight would be greatly appreciated. I would try applying the numerous patches for 4.1.3_U1, particularly the NFS patches and the mailtool patches from your descriptions. I might also check out upgrading to 4.1.4 and it's associated patches. Actually, I'm assuming your clients are the same flavor as your old mail spool server. If you have Solaris 2.x clients, there are patches for them as well. If the problem still persists you can talk to Netapp, probably get them a trace and they can find out who isn't doing locking correctly. Bruce

1 0

Re: syslog.conf
by varun＠netapp.com 29 Apr '98

29 Apr '98

> From dfinkels(a)siac.com Wed Apr 29 10:05:13 1998 ... > > Gentle readers, > Before I ask NetApp directly, I was curious if anyone knew of > the > syslog level that NetApp filers use? I want to redirect syslog daemon > messages to a remote host but keep the NetApp-specific messages in a > different file from the regular UNIX system messages. I was hoping it > used something like level1 or level2. If anyone knows the answer I'd be > most appreciative to this kind person. > I'm not sure you can log NetApp specific messages to a different file since the filer uses the same levels as regular Unix systems - (see na_syslog.conf(5)). What you could do is log NetApp specific messages to a remote system and grep for the filer's hostname in the remote system's messages file. It's probably easiest to drive this with a cron script. You might also be interested in Swatch which is a tool (publically available, I think) that allows you to monitor messages files and trigger on user defined events.

1 0

syslog.conf
by dfinkels＠siac.com 29 Apr '98

29 Apr '98

Gentle readers, Before I ask NetApp directly, I was curious if anyone knew of the syslog level that NetApp filers use? I want to redirect syslog daemon messages to a remote host but keep the NetApp-specific messages in a different file from the regular UNIX system messages. I was hoping it used something like level1 or level2. If anyone knows the answer I'd be most appreciative to this kind person. -- Daniel Alex Finkelstein Infrastructure Enhancement Group Systems and Technologies Support phone 212.383.2951 pager 917.427.1630 Securities Industry Automation Corporation

1 0

subscribe
by Lisa Malgeri 29 Apr '98

29 Apr '98

1 0

RE: RAM and NVRAM for F330
by sirbruce＠ix.netcom.com 27 Apr '98

27 Apr '98

On 04/27/98 10:24:26 you wrote: > >> Sounds very much like a shipping issue to me. > > >NetApp Field Support 101: >------------------------- >Practice saying: > >"Of Course We test this hardware! It must be a shipping problem!". > >We've only had one in here for 6 months and I've already learned >that. I don't know if there's anything to it, but it sounds like >a prevalent enough story that NetApp should change their >shipping/handling/packing procedures. Sounds like they've >identified it as a problem to many of us, so how long before >it's fixed? > >-Jeff >(2 bad drives and an EMU shelf with a bad slot in two weeks) If you really want this question answered, you should probably contact Netapp directly, not email this list. While there are employees of Netapp that answer questions here from time to time, it's certainly not the usual channel of communication for addressing issues such as the one you bring up. Bruce

1 0

RE: Budtool to backup netapp
by Weeks, Thomas 27 Apr '98

27 Apr '98

So is ANYONE satisfied with any 3rd party NDMP colutions? IT's a nice fast protocol.. but I'm not seing a lot of support... Is the major advantage with NDMP (besides speed) that it backs up both your ACLs AND your UFS file permissions? Is there any other wayt o do this? Tom D Tek > -----Original Message----- > From: Jason D. Kelleher [SMTP:kelleher@susq.com] > Sent: Thursday, April 23, 1998 9:55 AM > To: Alan Phoenix > Cc: 'toasters(a)mathworks.com' > Subject: Re: Budtool to backup netapp > > In message <17AD4E991EBDD111B6E000A0C99DD8350BA1(a)ntmail05.pc.sas.com>, > Alan > Phoenix writes: > >Has anyone tried using Budtool to backup a netapp? > > Yup. We've been using BudTool to backup our F330 for about 5 > months. We spent a month or two working the kinks out of it before we > let it touch our filer. Here's what we found: > > 1) BudTool's reporting is horrible. End of story. Anyone who > tells you otherwise is either deranged or hasn't actually used > the product. Fortunately, if you know Perl, writing a script > to > parse the logfile and send out a readable report (and page on > fatal errors) is fairly trivial. > > 2) BudTool's built in scheduling could only have been written by a > fool who liked GUIs and never actually had to support a backup > solution in a production environment. cron and a small shell > script handled this problem. (AMANDA has the best backup > scheduling in my opinion. Someday there'll be a vendor who > picks up on it.) > > 3) User level restores aren't supported for NDMP and only work for > UNIX clients if your willing to throw security out the window. > When doing a restore via NDMP, the destination for the restore > has to be on a filer. If your users need to be able to restore > data from tape, pick another product. If you're willing to > pull > stuff off tape for them (the GUIs not bad, but not great > either) > occasionally, then you'll be ok. > > 4) Having one BudTool server control a directly connected 100 tape > DLT400 jukebox, a 5 tape stacker connected to our F330, and a 5 > tape stacker connected to our research departments number > cruncher is pretty nifty. Having all the tape and file > histories in one place is nice too. > > 5) BudTool has a utility called btcp which will copy all your most > current backup requests (Lev 0s and all necessary incrementals) > to a set of tapes for offsite storage. It doesn't just dd a > bunch of tapes. Very nice. Unfortunately, btcp is a little > brain-dead and tries to copy _all_ the requests to one set of > tapes. If you have a couple hundred GB worth of backups, this > can take a really long time. Again, a little shell script > fixed > this problem. > > > All in all, I don't think I've ever been 100% satisfied with any > software product. But BudTool gets the job done (with a little help). > > > jason > > --- > Jason D. Kelleher kelleher(a)susq.com > Susquehanna Investment Group > All opinions expressed are my own, etc, etc...

1 0

RE: RAM and NVRAM for F330
by Jeff Stampes 27 Apr '98

27 Apr '98

> Sounds very much like a shipping issue to me. NetApp Field Support 101: ------------------------- Practice saying: "Of Course We test this hardware! It must be a shipping problem!". We've only had one in here for 6 months and I've already learned that. I don't know if there's anything to it, but it sounds like a prevalent enough story that NetApp should change their shipping/handling/packing procedures. Sounds like they've identified it as a problem to many of us, so how long before it's fixed? -Jeff (2 bad drives and an EMU shelf with a bad slot in two weeks)

1 0

RE: RAM and NVRAM for F330
by sirbruce＠ix.netcom.com 27 Apr '98

27 Apr '98

On 04/27/98 02:48:22 you wrote: >Oddly, out of our 8 netapps, the only one that hasn't had a RAM or >Disk failure is the one with Kingston RAM, Dallas Semiconductor NVRAM >and a number of Seagate drives, all sourced as 'third party'. > >Of our 4 new f230's we got about 5-6 months ago, we've had one dead >NVRAM board, about 2 with bad RAM and I believe 2 ill disks. These >are just off the top of my head and possibly not counting the DOA RAM >issues and another dead NVRAM board I seem to remember hearing about. >Most of these were barely even cracked open by us since receiving them >from NetApp but the problems persisted even after reseating, etc. > >Humourously, the ones with bad RAM sure worked swell when we stuffed >them with cheap Kingston RAM while waiting for the NetApp replacement >'Heavily Tested and Approved' RAM was being shipped. > >We paid extra for this? Yep. For better quality when it leaves Netapp than the parts you get third party. Sounds very much like a shipping issue to me. I'd talk to Netapp support and have them coordinate with shipping to see if that's where the problems are. Given when you say these things occurred, it's quite possible the problems have already been corrected. Perhaps have Netapp ship the seperately, requiring you to install it just like you do third-party RAM, might be a better solution for your given environment. Bruce

1 0

RE: RAM and NVRAM for F330
by sirbruce＠ix.netcom.com 27 Apr '98

27 Apr '98

On 04/16/98 15:48:18 you wrote: > >On Thu, 16 Apr 1998, Weeks, Thomas wrote: > >> RAM on the filer is being run to the very MAX of its specs >> (maybe more)... I hear that they have a fairly high failure rate on RAM >> that would otherwise work FINE in slower, less demanding systems (PC's). > >'scuse me??? Really? I find this somewhat hard to believe... > >60ns RAM is widely available, are you saying they're pushing the envelope >on that? > >I very much doubt the memory architecture on a NetApp is anything more >sophisticated than Sun's memory architecture (and I almost guarantee Sun's >memory architecture blows away low-end NetApps)...and Sun seem able to use >fairly standard parts without too much failure. > >Maybe I'm just missing the big picture... Part of it is history. Back in the "old days", which is to say only 2-3 years ago in computer time, there were lots of vendors you could get 60ns RAM from that weren't quite up to snuff under heavy loads. And those vendors that did often produced RAM that stood up to their tests, but not to Netapp's. As the industry has progressed, I'm sure today's 60ns RAM chips are of higher quality, so failures may be less common than they once were. But yes, Netapp seriously pushes the performance of memory under high load, even if that is now more easily within the tolerances of most memory chips. Another thing to consider is that if you don't run your filers under very high load, it's probably very easy for you to "get away" with lower-quality memory. But don't be surprised if your filer starts getting memory errors once you start running your CPU at 100%, or your cache age at 1, or you have a disk failure and have to do reconstruction while in service, etc. Bruce

2 1

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