toasters

toasters@lists.teaparty.net

1 participants
13523 discussions

Quota panic in 7.2.5
by JONES P.S. 20 Jun '08

20 Jun '08

We've just moved to Ontap 7.2.5 to solve a panic problem with our previous 7.2.2 release. However we've immediately been hit with another panic which appears related to quota initialisation. The bug number/title says :- 300385 / Quota doesn't seems to be prealloc while handling multiuser members But we have less than 1000 entries in our user quota file for this volume, although it is mixed mode and draws from a user population of around 25,000 across AD and NIS. Currently we are running without quotas; not good for an extended period because we have downstream repercussions related to snapvault replicas which are designed to be 'near limit'. Just a warning for anyone with similar user numbers to be aware of. ... Paul Paul Jones, B.Sc, M.Sc, Ph.D. - Head of Systems Services, Information Technology Service, Durham University, South Road, Durham DH1 3LE Email: p.s.jones(a)durham.ac.uk, Phone/Fax: 0191 334 2749/2701

10 10

Flaw with SATA disks - not suitable for deduplication environment
by Chong, Jenson 13 Jun '08

13 Jun '08

Hi, Anybody have insights on this article? Does our ONTAP "Lost Write Protection" address this issue? Regards, Jenson A bit of a flaw with SATA disk drives June 03, 2008 By Jerome Wendt Network World Asia High-capacity serial ATA (SATA) disk drives are now a mainstay in many storage systems and make it feasible for almost any company to obtain a storage system with terabytes of capacity at a reasonable cost. Yet these systems reveal a specific, known deficiency of SATA disk drives that demand companies exercise caution as to what environments they deploy these systems into. A minor flaw with SATA disk drives that high capacity storage systems expose is their bit error rate. Bit errors occur infrequently - about once for every 100 trillion bits. However RAID technology, which is normally used by storage systems to protect against data loss, does not detect if a specific bit on a SATA drive becomes unreadable. While this is normally not a problem on smaller systems, as storage systems add more capacity, the issue becomes more acute. On systems with more than 10TB of capacity the probability of a specific bit of data becoming unreadable is a distinct possibility. On systems with over 100TB, it becomes almost a certainty. So the question becomes: Does losing access to one bit of data really matter? Often, it doesn't unless one stores deduplicated data on these systems which is now the fastest growing trend in data storage. When data is deduplicated, the storage system's need to read every bit of data becomes paramount. The inability to access even a bit of data can result in multiple files becoming unreadable since they all may depend on a specific bit of data to complete their reconstruction. High capacity SATA-based storage systems are the answer to many companies' archiving and backup problems. But SATA bits can bite and using SATA drives to store large amounts of deduplicated data is not always the match made in heaven that vendors make them out to be. Jerome Wendt is the president and lead analyst at DCIG Inc. You may read his blogs at www.dciginc.com <http://www.dciginc.com/> .

5 5

CIFS trace
by Steffen Kammerer 13 Jun '08

13 Jun '08

Hi all, i have enabled #options cifs.trace_login on #options cifs.trace_dc_connection on I have a share called BI on the filer which I try to mount with correct or wrong password and get always this message: Fri Jun 13 16:02:24 CEST [XXXXXXXX: auth.trace.authenticateUser.loginAccepted:info]: AUTH: Login by NULL user from 10.10.46.2 accepted. If I look at other shares like home shares I get a lot more log files: XXXXXXX> 16:19:50 CEST [xxxxxxx: auth.trace.mapNTToUnix:info]: AUTH: Mapping Windows user dewmew$ to Unix user pcuser. XXXXXXX> 16:19:50 CEST [xxxxxxx: auth.trace.authenticateUser.loginAccepted:info]: AUTH: Login by dewmew$ from 10.10.38.102 accepted. XXXXXXX> 16:19:50 CEST [xxxxxxx: auth.trace.authenticateUser.loginTraceIP:info]: AUTH: Login attempt by user dewmew$ of domain BRAINLAB f XXXXXXX> machine 10.10.38.102 (DEWMEW). xxxxxxx> 16:19:50 CEST [xxxxxxx: auth.trace.spnegoAuthentication.statusMsg:info]: AUTH: SPNEGO- Attempting to map PC user to UNIX user de Whats wrong with my BI share?? What means NULL user? Kind Regards, Steffen

2 1

RE: Another 7.2.5 quota bug
by Christopher Mende 12 Jun '08

12 Jun '08

You should be able to use the revert_to command in order to get to 7.2.3, but should check w/ support first. Christopher Mende Sr Solutions Architect Peak UpTime +1 913 523 4263 -----Original Message----- From: Conner, Neil <neil(a)mbari.org> Sent: Thursday, June 12, 2008 12:31 To: Pascal Dukers <pascal.dukers(a)asml.com>; Toasters <toasters(a)mathworks.com> Subject: Re: Another 7.2.5 quota bug I downgraded to 7.2.4 last night and that solved the problem. It was a real show stopper for me because the only way to quiet the errors was to turn quotas off. On 6/11/08 11:20 PM, "Pascal Dukers" <pascal.dukers(a)asml.com> wrote: > > > > Conner, Neil wrote: >> >> Since upgrading from 7.2.3 to 7.2.5 on a pair of clustered 3020s, the >> consoles has been overrun with the following errors: >> >> [toaster: quota.softlimit.normal:notice]: Soft file limit returned to >> normal for tree 92 on volume vol0 >> >> The syslog buffers are getting overrun, messages are getting dropped, and >> the syslog is ready to fill the root volume. >> >> We don¹t set file quotas at all. Tried stopping and restarting quotas and >> disabling SNMP all to no avail. Support has no fix for this so they >> recommended I downrev to 7.2.4. I can¹t revert back to 7.2.3 because >> something changed in WAFL. >> >> Anyone else seen this? >> >> > > > I have hit exactly the same bug on multiple filers and also don't use (soft) > file limits. Hopefully support comes with a workaround in 7.2.5 and/or a > patch soon.

3 2

Another 7.2.5 quota bug
by Conner, Neil 12 Jun '08

12 Jun '08

Since upgrading from 7.2.3 to 7.2.5 on a pair of clustered 3020s, the consoles has been overrun with the following errors: [toaster: quota.softlimit.normal:notice]: Soft file limit returned to normal for tree 92 on volume vol0 The syslog buffers are getting overrun, messages are getting dropped, and the syslog is ready to fill the root volume. We don¹t set file quotas at all. Tried stopping and restarting quotas and disabling SNMP all to no avail. Support has no fix for this so they recommended I downrev to 7.2.4. I can¹t revert back to 7.2.3 because something changed in WAFL. Anyone else seen this?

2 2

Re: How to identify a hot disk
by Blackmor, Chris 11 Jun '08

11 Jun '08

My understanding of reallocate is that it will put a definite load on your filer and shouldn't be run during prime time. ----- Original Message ----- From: owner-toasters(a)mathworks.com <owner-toasters(a)mathworks.com> To: 'Page, Jeremy' <jeremy.page(a)gilbarco.com>; toasters(a)mathworks.com <toasters(a)mathworks.com> Sent: Thu Jun 05 10:57:12 2008 Subject: RE: How to identify a hot disk It’s good you are at 50% aggr usage, as you’ll need 50% free space in each volume you run the reallocate on. I think running the reallocate is the best first step as it is fairly un-intrusive and you can run it during the day unless you are hammering the filer constantly. When we run it we use the parameter –f to force reallocation without caring how well it is already laid out. Not sure about your question on A-SIS. HTH, - Hadrian From: owner-toasters(a)mathworks.com [mailto:owner-toasters@mathworks.com] On Behalf Of Page, Jeremy Sent: Thursday, June 05, 2008 7:13 AM To: toasters(a)mathworks.com Subject: RE: How to identify a hot disk Thu Jun 5 10:06:02 EDT [gvr-array02: wafl.scan.layout.advise:info]: WAFL layout ratio for volume nfs2 is 4.01. A ratio of 1 is optimal. Based on your free space, 1.42 is expected. Would you say I need to do a reallocate? I’m not sure why this is so fragmented, this file system has never been more then 50% full, could A-SIS have something to do with it? Jeremy M. Page____________________ Systems Architect * email:Jeremy.Page@gilbarco.com - ( phone: 336.547.5399 - 6 fax: 336.547.5163 - ( cell: 336.601.7274 ________________________________ From: Uddhav Regmi [mailto:uddhav.regmi@worldnet.att.net] Sent: Thursday, June 05, 2008 9:38 AM To: Page, Jeremy; toasters(a)mathworks.com Subject: RE: How to identify a hot disk hmmm very interesting.... looks like those are max out do wafl scan measure layout and see where you stand.... if needed do reallocate..... I have seen hundreds of cases where it helped a lot -uddhav From: owner-toasters(a)mathworks.com [mailto:owner-toasters@mathworks.com] On Behalf Of Page, Jeremy Sent: Thursday, June 05, 2008 8:27 AM To: toasters(a)mathworks.com Subject: Re: How to identify a hot disk Not sure why but I have two disks that are maxed out while the rest are far lower utilization. What would cause this, the raid groups where created all at the same time, there are 10 disks per raid group and 3 groups in the aggragate. /aggr0/plex0/rg0: 1c.16 2 0.94 0.18 1.00 42250 0.49 12.18 1396 0.27 11.83 521 0.00 .... . 0.00 .... . 1c.32 6 2.56 0.49 1.00 104545 1.80 4.18 1323 0.27 11.83 634 0.00 .... . 0.00 .... . 1c.48 98 116.05 114.20 1.62 18481 1.53 4.24 1743 0.31 11.00 2649 0.00 .... . 0.00 .... . 1c.17 41 55.21 54.76 2.17 5697 0.27 20.17 1537 0.18 16.25 600 0.00 .... . 0.00 .... . 1c.33 49 72.07 71.62 1.84 4760 0.27 20.67 871 0.18 16.75 1239 0.00 .... . 0.00 .... . 1c.49 45 61.42 60.97 2.18 4047 0.22 23.00 913 0.22 14.40 931 0.00 .... . 0.00 .... . 1c.64 5 117.40 116.86 1.61 307 0.36 15.25 1336 0.18 18.00 319 0.00 .... . 0.00 .... . 1c.65 4 71.76 71.17 1.83 292 0.27 20.67 1298 0.31 10.43 370 0.00 .... . 0.00 .... . 1c.80 4 49.50 49.05 2.36 333 0.22 22.80 1333 0.22 14.60 712 0.00 .... . 0.00 .... . 1c.81 5 95.14 94.69 1.71 292 0.22 22.80 1325 0.22 14.60 548 0.00 .... . 0.00 .... . /aggr0/plex0/rg1: 1c.66 1 0.67 0.00 .... . 0.31 19.29 1311 0.36 10.50 238 0.00 .... . 0.00 .... . 1c.83 1 0.67 0.00 .... . 0.31 19.29 1415 0.36 10.50 190 0.00 .... . 0.00 .... . 1c.82 4 48.60 48.24 2.21 320 0.22 22.80 1553 0.13 21.33 234 0.00 .... . 0.00 .... . 1c.19 51 67.89 67.44 1.92 5315 0.22 22.80 1281 0.22 13.20 788 0.00 .... . 0.00 .... . 1c.18 55 72.75 72.34 1.90 4996 0.22 23.00 1122 0.18 16.00 1109 0.00 .... . 0.00 .... . 1c.35 30 36.10 35.52 2.67 3190 0.31 15.86 1802 0.27 11.33 588 0.00 .... . 0.00 .... . 1c.34 41 52.97 52.43 2.04 4207 0.31 16.29 1570 0.22 13.60 750 0.00 .... . 0.00 .... . 1c.51 100 119.82 119.46 1.57 25873 0.22 22.80 1588 0.13 21.33 2313 0.00 .... . 0.00 .... . 1c.50 59 72.03 71.44 1.83 7750 0.27 19.33 1233 0.31 10.86 1289 0.00 .... . 0.00 .... . 1c.67 4 94.60 94.15 1.68 279 0.18 24.50 1071 0.27 12.33 338 0.00 .... . 0.00 .... . /aggr0/plex0/rg2: 1c.85 1 0.94 0.00 .... . 0.54 12.00 1806 0.40 10.11 538 0.00 .... . 0.00 .... . 1c.84 1 0.94 0.00 .... . 0.54 12.00 1729 0.40 10.11 495 0.00 .... . 0.00 .... . 1c.21 47 67.40 66.90 1.86 4701 0.27 19.17 1452 0.22 14.20 845 0.00 .... . 0.00 .... . 1c.20 56 73.56 73.02 1.79 4866 0.18 25.50 1039 0.36 9.63 870 0.00 .... . 0.00 .... . 1c.37 51 68.79 68.21 1.76 6072 0.27 19.17 1174 0.31 11.43 988 0.00 .... . 0.00 .... . 1c.36 42 50.85 50.18 2.31 3807 0.40 12.78 1852 0.27 13.33 800 0.00 .... . 0.00 .... . 1c.53 59 75.85 75.18 1.86 5024 0.36 14.25 2237 0.31 10.43 493 0.00 .... . 0.00 .... . 1c.52 18 21.27 20.77 3.83 2205 0.27 19.17 1496 0.22 14.20 465 0.00 .... . 0.00 .... . 1c.69 5 71.76 71.00 1.96 296 0.40 12.78 2087 0.36 9.63 610 0.00 .... . 0.00 .... . 1c.68 5 71.58 71.13 1.84 352 0.22 23.60 1314 0.22 14.80 514 0.00 .... . 0.00 .... . This message (including any attachments) contains confidential and/or proprietary information intended only for the addressee. Any unauthorized disclosure, copying, distribution or reliance on the contents of this information is strictly prohibited and may constitute a violation of law. If you are not the intended recipient, please notify the sender immediately by responding to this e-mail, and delete the message from your system. If you have any questions about this e-mail please notify the sender immediately. This message (including any attachments) contains confidential and/or proprietary information intended only for the addressee. Any unauthorized disclosure, copying, distribution or reliance on the contents of this information is strictly prohibited and may constitute a violation of law. If you are not the intended recipient, please notify the sender immediately by responding to this e-mail, and delete the message from your system. If you have any questions about this e-mail please notify the sender immediately.

7 8

Re: strange behaviour, Linux and NFS on NTFS qtree
by Webster, Stetson 11 Jun '08

11 Jun '08

Use 'ifstat -z' to zero the stats and see if the errors are still currently occurring. If they are occurring, and if still CRC's, check hardware starting with the easiest first: cable. This would be why UDP *seems* to work while TCP "blows the whistle" on the errors. ----- Original Message ----- From: James Beal <james.beal(a)sanger.ac.uk> To: Webster, Stetson Cc: dh3(a)sanger.ac.uk <dh3(a)sanger.ac.uk>; toasters(a)mathworks.com <toasters(a)mathworks.com>; Blakemore, Steven Sent: Wed Jun 11 13:40:52 2008 Subject: Re: strange behaviour, Linux and NFS on NTFS qtree Webster, Stetson wrote: > > Any errors or strange numbers in 'ifstat -av' ? > netapp1a*> ifstat -v e4a -- interface e4a (7 days, 10 hours, 23 minutes, 16 seconds) -- RECEIVE Frames/second: 311 | Bytes/second: 2251k | Errors/minute: 4864 Discards/minute: 0 | Total frames: 277m | Total bytes: 63451m Total errors: 36939k | Total discards: 0 | Multi/broadcast: 108k No buffers: 0 | Non-primary u/c: 101k | Tag drop: 0 Vlan tag drop: 0 | Vlan untag drop: 0 | Mac octets: 132g UCast pkts: 1187m | MCast pkts: 17000 | BCast pkts: 91533 CRC errors: 36939k | Bus overrun: 0 | Alignment errors: 0 Long frames: 0 | Jabber: 0 | Pause frames: 0 Runt frames: 0 | Symbol errors: 0 | Jumbo frames: 0 TRANSMIT Frames/second: 433 | Bytes/second: 1506k | Errors/minute: 0 Discards/minute: 0 | Total frames: 563m | Total bytes: 3323g Total errors: 0 | Total discards: 0 | Multi/broadcast: 7559 Queue overflows: 0 | No buffers: 0 | Frames queued: 0 Buffer coalesces: 4 | MTUs too big: 0 | Mac octets: 3462g UCast pkts: 2452m | MCast pkts: 2922 | BCast pkts: 4637 Bus underruns: 0 | Pause frames: 0 | Jumbo frames: 0 LINK_INFO Current state: up | Up to downs: 1 | Speed: 10000m Duplex: full | Flowcontrol: full It's using a 10Gig card with no vif's ( I believe ) . When we stress the system we see the following on the console , although when we do this test we don't see the problem ( We see it when I throw about 1000 cores at the system and the 10Gig card is at about 60% and the CPU is around 100% ). I have asked our presales engineer about this. >> >> >> XXX restart_tx >> restart_offloadq >> XXX restart_tx >> XXX restart_tx >> restart_offloadq >> XXX restart_tx >> XXX restart_tx > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: Dave Holland <dh3(a)sanger.ac.uk> > To: Webster, Stetson > Cc: toasters(a)mathworks.com <toasters(a)mathworks.com> > Sent: Wed Jun 11 11:58:38 2008 > Subject: Re: strange behaviour, Linux and NFS on NTFS qtree > > On Wed, Jun 11, 2008 at 11:30:22AM -0400, Webster, Stetson wrote: > > What ONTAP release, what Linux kernel, what NFS mount options? > > I knew I'd missed things... > > It's ONTAP 7.2.4. I can upgrade to 7.2.5 if that'll help. > > The Linux kernel is 2.6.18-6-686 (Debian 4.0, 2.6.18.dfsg.1-18etch4), > and the problem also shows with 2.6.8-2-686-smp and > 2.6.5--286tg3susesfs. > > I noticed this when mounting with proto=tcp,vers=3,rsize=8192,wsize=8192. > I'd also tried UDP, and the problem persisted. > > But after your email I tried vers=2 and the problem goes away (with both > TCP and UDP) which is interesting indeed. Although with the crazy size > files and filesystems around here, NFSv3 is very desirable. > -- james beal -- The Wellcome Trust Sanger Institute is operated by Genome Research Limited, a charity registered in England with number 1021457 and a company registered in England with number 2742969, whose registered office is 215 Euston Road, London, NW1 2BE.

1 0

Re: strange behaviour, Linux and NFS on NTFS qtree
by Webster, Stetson 11 Jun '08

11 Jun '08

Any errors or strange numbers in 'ifstat -av' ? ----- Original Message ----- From: Dave Holland <dh3(a)sanger.ac.uk> To: Webster, Stetson Cc: toasters(a)mathworks.com <toasters(a)mathworks.com> Sent: Wed Jun 11 11:58:38 2008 Subject: Re: strange behaviour, Linux and NFS on NTFS qtree On Wed, Jun 11, 2008 at 11:30:22AM -0400, Webster, Stetson wrote: > What ONTAP release, what Linux kernel, what NFS mount options? I knew I'd missed things... It's ONTAP 7.2.4. I can upgrade to 7.2.5 if that'll help. The Linux kernel is 2.6.18-6-686 (Debian 4.0, 2.6.18.dfsg.1-18etch4), and the problem also shows with 2.6.8-2-686-smp and 2.6.5--286tg3susesfs. I noticed this when mounting with proto=tcp,vers=3,rsize=8192,wsize=8192. I'd also tried UDP, and the problem persisted. But after your email I tried vers=2 and the problem goes away (with both TCP and UDP) which is interesting indeed. Although with the crazy size files and filesystems around here, NFSv3 is very desirable. thanks, Dave -- ** Dave Holland ** Systems Support -- Infrastructure Management ** ** 01223 496923 ** The Sanger Institute, Hinxton, Cambridge, UK ** -- The Wellcome Trust Sanger Institute is operated by Genome Research Limited, a charity registered in England with number 1021457 and a company registered in England with number 2742969, whose registered office is 215 Euston Road, London, NW1 2BE.

1 0

Re: strange behaviour, Linux and NFS on NTFS qtree
by Webster, Stetson 11 Jun '08

11 Jun '08

What ONTAP release, what Linux kernel, what NFS mount options? ----- Original Message ----- From: Dave Holland <dh3(a)sanger.ac.uk> To: Toasters <toasters(a)mathworks.com> Sent: Wed Jun 11 09:56:10 2008 Subject: strange behaviour, Linux and NFS on NTFS qtree Hello, I'm seeing some strange behaviour with a FAS3040 filer I have on evaluation at the moment. I have an NTFS-style qtree exported by NFS and CIFS. Debian Linux clients see odd behaviour relating to open() and stat64() system calls. This strace output from "vim" captures it in a nutshell: uname({sys="Linux", node="acheron", ...}) = 0 stat64("ffff", 0xbfb4d030) = -1 ENOENT (No such file or directory) stat64("ffff", 0xbfb4d0b0) = -1 ENOENT (No such file or directory) access("ffff", W_OK) = -1 ENOENT (No such file or directory) open("ffff", O_RDONLY) = -1 ENOENT (No such file or directory) readlink("ffff", 0xbfb4c7cc, 1023) = -1 ENOENT (No such file or directory) open(".ffff.swp", O_RDONLY) = -1 ENOENT (No such file or directory) open(".ffff.swp", O_RDWR|O_CREAT|O_EXCL, 0600) = -1 EACCES (Permission denied) stat64(".ffff.swp", {st_mode=S_IFREG|0777, st_size=0, ...}) = 0 Note that the open(O_RDWR...) call fails with EACCES; but the following stat64() call succeeds. The file ffff.swp was created on disk despite the reported failure of the open() call. This behaviour is seen using "vim" to edit files, and causes an error message about the swap file being present (due to the swap file being created even though the open() return value implies it was not). Trying the same "vim" command on a Tru64 NFS client, correct behaviour is seen: the open(O_RDWR...) succeeds and a filehandle is returned. I asked Netapp support and they suggested a mixed-style qtree. But I've read on this list about the last-change-wins problem on permissions and ACLs, and I'd really rather not go there. I've worked through the troubleshooting guide: http://now.netapp.com/NOW/knowledge/docs/olio/guides/ontap_troubleshooting with no luck. Is there anything else I can configure (on the filer or on the clients) to avoid this problem? Thanks for any suggestions! Dave -- ** Dave Holland ** Systems Support -- Infrastructure Management ** ** 01223 496923 ** The Sanger Institute, Hinxton, Cambridge, UK ** -- The Wellcome Trust Sanger Institute is operated by Genome Research Limited, a charity registered in England with number 1021457 and a company registered in England with number 2742969, whose registered office is 215 Euston Road, London, NW1 2BE.

4 4

CIFS quota question
by Zeeshan 11 Jun '08

11 Jun '08

Hello all... I have a 100GB XXX CIFS share in a FlexVol qtree. The qtree size is 100GB. The qtree has only USER quota restriction of 1GB per user. When the number of AD users (who have been allocated XXX share as storage) exceeds 100, a. Will ONTAP give me some sort of a warning like: The volume or qtree has been fully allocated or almost full???Although the space used by users data is much less than 100GB, but allocation for 100 users has been made? b. Will the AD be able to create more than 100 users and allocate XXX share as storage for each user???or will ONTAP disallow AD to allocate XXX share to more than 100 users??? Thanx

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