toasters

toasters@lists.teaparty.net

3 participants
13514 discussions

Snapdrive alternative
by Steve Rieger 25 Apr '08

25 Apr '08

We found that snapdrive is not very stable. Are there any alternatives ? Setup is as follows Win 2k3 servers Sql dbs 3070c running 7.2.2 With fiber Sent via BlackBerry from T-Mobile

8 9

snapmirror speed limit ?
by Mailing Lists 25 Apr '08

25 Apr '08

hi all is there a limit, on the netapp side of things, that would prevent snapmirror traffic from increasing beyond 30mbits/sec ? -- eats the blues for breakfast, does unix for rent, plays harp for food, will play the flute for kicks rides for the freedom scrapes for the challenge

6 5

RE: Snapdrive alternative
by Webster, Stetson 25 Apr '08

25 Apr '08

Yes. It's simple. Just stop the db's, confirm completion of the stop, take a snapshot, restart db's. Pardon brevity, typos, etc; sent from mobile. -----Original Message----- From: Steve Rieger [mailto:lists@up-south.com] Sent: Thursday, April 24, 2008 07:32 PM Pacific Standard Time To: toasters(a)mathworks.com Subject: Snapdrive alternative We found that snapdrive is not very stable. Are there any alternatives ? Setup is as follows Win 2k3 servers Sql dbs 3070c running 7.2.2 With fiber Sent via BlackBerry from T-Mobile

2 1

internal and External SATA Disks in FAS2050
by Hisham H. Sanad 25 Apr '08

25 Apr '08

I have FAS2050 with 2 SATA disk shelves , the system has no internal disks. I want add 6 disks to the internal cage , is that possible,? Can I use the new 6 disks and the 14 disks from disk shelf together in the cage, I mean are the same "shape , type" Best Regards Hisham Sanad cid:image001.jpg@01C7E3E9.837C6040

2 1

RE: Strange message on a Snaplock Compliance volume
by Webster, Stetson 25 Apr '08

25 Apr '08

I highly recommend that you run this by the support center and get a specialist to review this. Chances are, it would be in the 'messages' log as well, hence in Autosupport. Pardon brevity, typos, etc; sent from mobile. -----Original Message----- From: Milazzo Giacomo [mailto:G.Milazzo@sinergy.it] Sent: Thursday, April 24, 2008 04:05 PM Pacific Standard Time To: toasters(a)mathworks.com Subject: Strange message on a Snaplock Compliance volume Hi all It does not happen often toh ave something to do with Snaplock, overall if it's the 'compliance' one, but this happened to me yesterday. Once started the compliance clock and created the apposite aggregate with the -L options I've created a volume for test and I've fixed the minimum and maximum retention period to just one day (I don't remember the way to set this less, i.e. minutes) and then I started some test. Every file or folder creation has gone fine but a couple of time some message on console beat my attention... "Volume 'volname' Snaplock scan determined upgraded volume expiry date: 01.01.2003" 2003??? Data Ontap is 7.2.4 What's going on?

1 0

NetApp backup with HP Data Protector
by Xishan 24 Apr '08

24 Apr '08

Hello all... I am trying to get a tape backup of IBM N3600 (running ontap 7.2.2L1) from an HP MSL 6000 running 'HP OpenView Data Protector'. While adding the filer as a client to data protector, it asks for an agent to be installed on the filer. But the filer does not communicate with windows based backup server. What agent or patch etc do i need to install? and on the backup server side or the filer? Thanx --------------------------------- Be a better friend, newshound, and know-it-all with Yahoo! Mobile. Try it now.

3 2

Strange message on a Snaplock Compliance volume
by Milazzo Giacomo 24 Apr '08

24 Apr '08

Hi all It does not happen often toh ave something to do with Snaplock, overall if it's the 'compliance' one, but this happened to me yesterday. Once started the compliance clock and created the apposite aggregate with the -L options I've created a volume for test and I've fixed the minimum and maximum retention period to just one day (I don't remember the way to set this less, i.e. minutes) and then I started some test. Every file or folder creation has gone fine but a couple of time some message on console beat my attention... "Volume 'volname' Snaplock scan determined upgraded volume expiry date: 01.01.2003" 2003??? Data Ontap is 7.2.4 What's going on?

1 0

Re: Licensing Question
by Scott Baker 24 Apr '08

24 Apr '08

You obviously don't dial in to the NTAP conference calls. Likewise you also don't understand how margin is calculated. Costs to develop, maintain and extend the functionality of WAFL and ONTAP are included in the margin costs. Years ago, before about 2004, NTAP offered something no one else could offer, and could demand extremely high margins (70+ %). Today there are too many commercial alternatives, which offer excellent support and cost far less over time. IMHO NTAP stock is suffering because of their Draconian strong arm techniques which cause old equipment to become worthless because of the cost to relicense it. It's time NTAP management reevaluate their licensing practices and figure out ways to get new customers using their equipment. Failure to do so will be at their peril, and will lead them down the path of other great companies such as DEC. ----- Original Message ---- From: Glenn Dekhayser <gdekhayser(a)voyantinc.com> To: Scott Baker <buyandsell2k5(a)yahoo.com>; "Darragh, Stephen J (CSC) (US SSA)" <stephen.j.darragh(a)baesystems.com>; toasters(a)mathworks.com Sent: Thursday, April 24, 2008 8:39:37 AM Subject: RE: Licensing Question Message Margins are one thing; more important and telling is the net, which reflects the costs Netapp incurs to maintain and support ONTAP, as well as continue to develop new feature sets that benefit their paying customers. And remember that Netapp is not a .org. They are entitled to make a profit. If you don't like that, go download linux and whatever other free software you like, just don't expect to get the kind of support Netapp provides. Again, no enterprise software developer (SAP, Oracle, etc) that I know of allow the uninhibited transfer of license ownership and/or support. Why should Netapp be any different? Glenn From: owner-toasters(a)mathworks.com on behalf of Scott Baker Sent: Tue 4/22/2008 9:06 PM To: Darragh, Stephen J (CSC) (US SSA); toasters(a)mathworks.com Subject: Re: Licensing Question In order to raise the price of NTAP stock. As soon as the hardware is traded-in it's useless, unless you put a new license on it and pay up the wazoo for that new license. Why do you think their margins are so high. Read the annual reports. ----- Original Message ---- From: "Darragh, Stephen J (CSC) (US SSA)" <stephen.j.darragh(a)baesystems.com> To: toasters(a)mathworks.com Sent: Tuesday, April 22, 2008 8:54:49 AM Subject: RE: Licensing Question Hello, Why wouldn't you allow the software to move with the hardware even if its not the original owner? I am sure you have valid reasons and it would be nice if you could convey those to all these people who use your product. Thank you Stephen Darragh -----Original Message----- From: owner-toasters(a)mathworks.com [mailto:owner-toasters@mathworks.com] On Behalf Of Warmenhoven, Dan Sent: Monday, April 21, 2008 10:14 PM To: Kryder, Andy Cc: ScottUCE(a)aol.com; toasters(a)mathworks.com; voiperster@gmailcom; Roach, Steven Subject: RE: Licensing Question Hi Andy, As General Council, would you please ensure that none of our software licenses are transferable, and if any have been transferred illegally that the people responsible are dealt with in a appropriate manner. Thanks Dan From: ScottUCE(a)aol.com [mailto:ScottUCE@aol.com] Sent: Monday, April 21, 2008 7:02 PM To: Warmenhoven, Dan; Roach, Steven; voiperster(a)gmail.com; toasters(a)mathworks.com Subject: Re: Licensing Question Union Computer has been selling discounted and used NetApp systems and add-ons, including filers with transferable software licenses, for over ten years. Of the nearly 300 companies to whom we have sold NetApp hardware during this time, dozens have been purchasing used filers for which Network Appliance, Inc. is obligated to transfer the software licenses -- free of charge. Nonetheless, it is true that most NetApp filersʼ licenses cannot be transferred to new users; as such, many of these units will sit in our warehouse until they can be sold for parts, maintenance sparing, testing and backup. Scott Scott Fischmann Union Computer Exchange, Inc. 7600 West 27th Street Building B1 Minneapolis, Minnesota 55426 scott(a)unioncomputer.com 952.935.7282 - Office 952.240.6835 - Mobile (urgent calls only) "Helping our customers make each dollar go further - since 1991!" In a message dated 4/21/2008 7:51:00 PM Central Daylight Time, DanWarmenhoven(a)netapp.com writes: None of NetApp's software licenses are transferable, and they never have been in my 14 years as CEO. Dan Dan Warmenhoven Chairman & CEO NetApp, Inc. 1-408-822-6600 Direct dan(a)netapp.com www.netapp.com From: ScottUCE(a)aol.com [mailto:ScottUCE@aol.com] Sent: Monday, April 21, 2008 4:29 PM To: Roach, Steven; voiperster(a)gmail.com Cc: toasters(a)mathworks.com Subject: Re: Licensing Question Peter: Some used NetApp filers DO have transferable ONTAP licenses. We have been providing them for many years and would be happy to answer any questions you might have. Scott Scott Fischmann Union Computer Exchange, Inc. 7600 West 27th Street Building B1 Minneapolis, Minnesota 55426 scott(a)unioncomputer.com 952.935.7282 - Office 952.240.6835 - Mobile (urgent calls only) "Helping our customers make each dollar go further - since 1991!" In a message dated 4/21/2008 9:27:37 AM Central Daylight Time, Steven.Roach(a)netapp.com writes: Peter, If all you wanted was access via FCP that is the only license you would need, a software subscription also would be needed so you can download the Data OnTap. A hardware subscription would not be a bad idea. Not sure how much the cost is, I would certainly have a conversation with your local NetApp Sales guy or a Channel Sales rep. On 4/20/08 10:33 PM, "Peter Rosenthal" <voiperster(a)gmail.com> wrote: Thanks Steven, Is the FCP license all that is required or is there some sort of base license. Any ballpark figure on the license cost? Thanks. 2008/4/21 Roach, Steven <Steven.Roach(a)netapp.com>: Hey Peter, Resetting a password is very easy, During the boot hit Control + C to enter in to Special Menu and one of the options there will allow to you to reset the password. Licenses are a whole other story. Licenses do not transfer with Used equipment. If you buy a used FAS270 will have to buy an "FCP" license to access it over Fibre Channel. From: Peter Rosenthal [mailto:voiperster@gmail.com] Sent: Sun 4/20/2008 6:36 PM To: toasters(a)mathworks.com Subject: Licensing Question Hello, We are considering getting some used netapps equipment. I am mostly concerned with the pitfalls of licensing and would be grateful for any pointers. Specifically we are currently looking at a FAS270. We want to connect it via fibre channel to a FC switch and then two FC HBAs on different hosts. I do not want to end up with a door stop product and therefore I would like to know if: Will I have any problems resetting any existing passwords that might exist on the filer? Is the license required to access the filer via fibre channel optional or will any licensed filer support it? Thanks. NetApp Steve Roach Mobile (215)237-1660 Support (888)463-8277 Need a new ride? Check out the largest site for U.S. used car listings at AOL Autos. Need a new ride? Check out the largest site for U.S. used car listings at AOL Autos. Be a better friend, newshound, and know-it-all with Yahoo! Mobile. Try it now. ____________________________________________________________________________________ Be a better friend, newshound, and know-it-all with Yahoo! Mobile. Try it now. http://mobile.yahoo.com/;_ylt=Ahu06i62sR8HDtDypao8Wcj9tAcJ

1 0

Re: Licensing Question
by Scott Baker 24 Apr '08

24 Apr '08

In order to raise the price of NTAP stock. As soon as the hardware is traded-in it's useless, unless you put a new license on it and pay up the wazoo for that new license. Why do you think their margins are so high. Read the annual reports. ----- Original Message ---- From: "Darragh, Stephen J (CSC) (US SSA)" <stephen.j.darragh(a)baesystems.com> To: toasters(a)mathworks.com Sent: Tuesday, April 22, 2008 8:54:49 AM Subject: RE: Licensing Question Message Hello, Why wouldn't you allow the software to move with the hardware even if its not the original owner? I am sure you have valid reasons and it would be nice if you could convey those to all these people who use your product. Thank you Stephen Darragh -----Original Message----- From: owner-toasters(a)mathworks.com [mailto:owner-toasters@mathworks.com] On Behalf Of Warmenhoven, Dan Sent: Monday, April 21, 2008 10:14 PM To: Kryder, Andy Cc: ScottUCE(a)aol.com; toasters(a)mathworks.com; voiperster(a)gmail.com; Roach, Steven Subject: RE: Licensing Question Hi Andy, As General Council, would you please ensure that none of our software licenses are transferable, and if any have been transferred illegally that the people responsible are dealt with in a appropriate manner. Thanks Dan From: ScottUCE(a)aol.com [mailto:ScottUCE@aol.com] Sent: Monday, April 21, 2008 7:02 PM To: Warmenhoven, Dan; Roach, Steven; voiperster(a)gmail.com; toasters(a)mathworks.com Subject: Re: Licensing Question Union Computer has been selling discounted and used NetApp systems and add-ons, including filers with transferable software licenses, for over ten years. Of the nearly 300 companies to whom we have sold NetApp hardware during this time, dozens have been purchasing used filers for which Network Appliance, Inc. is obligated to transfer the software licenses -- free of charge. Nonetheless, it is true that most NetApp filers’ licenses cannot be transferred to new users; as such, many of these units will sit in our warehouse until they can be sold for parts, maintenance sparing, testing and backup. Scott Scott Fischmann Union Computer Exchange, Inc. 7600 West 27th Street Building B1 Minneapolis, Minnesota 55426 scott(a)unioncomputer.com 952.935.7282 - Office 952.240.6835 - Mobile (urgent calls only) "Helping our customers make each dollar go further - since 1991!" In a message dated 4/21/2008 7:51:00 PM Central Daylight Time, Dan.Warmenhoven(a)netapp.com writes: None of NetApp's software licenses are transferable, and they never have been in my 14 years as CEO. Dan Dan Warmenhoven Chairman & CEO NetApp, Inc. 1-408-822-6600 Direct dan(a)netapp.com www.netapp.com From: ScottUCE(a)aol.com [mailto:ScottUCE@aol.com] Sent: Monday, April 21, 2008 4:29 PM To: Roach, Steven; voiperster(a)gmail.com Cc: toasters(a)mathworks.com Subject: Re: Licensing Question Peter: Some used NetApp filers DO have transferable ONTAP licenses. We have been providing them for many years and would be happy to answer any questions you might have. Scott Scott Fischmann Union Computer Exchange, Inc. 7600 West 27th Street Building B1 Minneapolis, Minnesota 55426 scott(a)unioncomputer.com 952.935.7282 - Office 952.240.6835 - Mobile (urgent calls only) "Helping our customers make each dollar go further - since 1991!" In a message dated 4/21/2008 9:27:37 AM Central Daylight Time, Steven.Roach(a)netapp.com writes: Peter, If all you wanted was access via FCP that is the only license you would need, a software subscription also would be needed so you can download the Data OnTap. A hardware subscription would not be a bad idea. Not sure how much the cost is, I would certainly have a conversation with your local NetApp Sales guy or a Channel Sales rep. On 4/20/08 10:33 PM, "Peter Rosenthal" <voiperster(a)gmail.com> wrote: Thanks Steven, Is the FCP license all that is required or is there some sort of base license. Any ballpark figure on the license cost? Thanks. 2008/4/21 Roach, Steven <Steven.Roach(a)netapp.com>: Hey Peter, Resetting a password is very easy, During the boot hit Control + C to enter in to Special Menu and one of the options there will allow to you to reset the password. Licenses are a whole other story. Licenses do not transfer with Used equipment. If you buy a used FAS270 will have to buy an "FCP" license to access it over Fibre Channel. From: Peter Rosenthal [mailto:voiperster@gmail.com] Sent: Sun 4/20/2008 6:36 PM To: toasters(a)mathworks.com Subject: Licensing Question Hello, We are considering getting some used netapps equipment. I am mostly concerned with the pitfalls of licensing and would be grateful for any pointers. Specifically we are currently looking at a FAS270. We want to connect it via fibre channel to a FC switch and then two FC HBAs on different hosts. I do not want to end up with a door stop product and therefore I would like to know if: Will I have any problems resetting any existing passwords that might exist on the filer? Is the license required to access the filer via fibre channel optional or will any licensed filer support it? Thanks. NetApp Steve Roach Mobile (215)237-1660 Support (888)463-8277 Need a new ride? Check out the largest site for U.S. used car listings at AOL Autos. Need a new ride? Check out the largest site for U.S. used car listings at AOL Autos. ____________________________________________________________________________________ Be a better friend, newshound, and know-it-all with Yahoo! Mobile. Try it now. http://mobile.yahoo.com/;_ylt=Ahu06i62sR8HDtDypao8Wcj9tAcJ

2 1

mount.cifs; NetApp; owner/mode appearance
by David Lee 24 Apr '08

24 Apr '08

If this is an FAQ, feel free to point me in the right direction... Short-form: o UNIX-derived filesystem (qtree) on filer; o Linux client using "mount.cifs" to access qtree via CIFS; o File ownerships look wrong; mode always shows as 777. Detail: We run a central fileserver on behalf of many users. A particular new qtree is a fresh copy of a filesystem (on which many users each have their own, self-owned subdirectory). It was previously hosted on UNIX, and is still intended to be used solely in a UNIX context. But we (service providers) don't own the Linux machines which will be connecting to this, therefore we are not exporting it as NFS (host-based security) as this would compromise security. (User-A on their Linux box could 'su' to root and then 'su' again to User-B and see User-B files... this would be bad.) So we are trying to set things up so that the users can use CIFS (which is user-based security). So we have set the qtree mixed mode and made it a CIFS share on the filer. So far, so good. Overall: UNIX users on UNIX clients to UNIX-filesystems on filer, but having to use CIFS rather than NFS as the protocol. When a user on their Linux client does: /sbin/mount.cifs //filer/qtree /local/mountpoint what they see is that all file ownerships are apparently their own (even though this level shows the directory of self-owned subdirectories) and that all permissions appear as 777 (rwxrwxrwx). The actual workings seem to be OK, but the appearance is less than desirable. Presumably this is because the SMB/CIFS protocol cannot carry the UNIX permissions and ownerships. 1. Is the above reasoning towards understanding the problem more or less correct? 2. Is there any way around it? I understand that more recent definitions of CIFS have UNIX extensions. Is this implemented in ONTAP? Our versions: filer: "NetApp Release 7.2.2" mount.cifs: 1.10 Apologies if the question is poorly expressed! -- : David Lee I.T. Service : : Senior Systems Programmer Computer Centre : : UNIX Team Leader Durham University : : South Road : : http://www.dur.ac.uk/t.d.lee/ Durham DH1 3LE : : Phone: +44 191 334 2752 U.K. :

9 10

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