toasters

toasters@lists.teaparty.net

3 participants
13514 discussions

running out of inodes problem
by Magnus Swenson 22 May '07

22 May '07

Hello Toasters, Just wanted to do a quick check, what the standard practise is when running out of inodes on a volume. I have several flex volumes in one aggregate. One of the volumes only at 80% full ran out of inodes. df -i will show number of inodes used and inodes free. This is a 100G volume with 3458831 inodes. According to now.netapp.com, there are two solutions, increase inodes with the 'maxfiles' command, or add more disk space to the volume. Has anybody had experience with this and which way did you go?

7 9

lun type: windows_gpt
by Buerger, Andreas 22 May '07

22 May '07

Hi, I just created a lun via lun setup on our 6070 running 7.2.2. I mentioned a lun type called windows_gpt, does anybody know what this type is used for? Is it a new feature in 7.2 ? Regards ----------------------------------------- Andreas Buerger Wincor Nixdorf Int. GmbH WN CIO4 Computing & Storage Heinz-Nixdorf-Ring 1 33106 Paderborn Phone: +49 5251 693 4215 Fax: +49 5251 693 4200 Mail: andreas.buerger(a)wincor-nixdorf.com -----------------------------------------

3 2

ndmpcopy for Linux
by Augie Schwer 22 May '07

22 May '07

Has anyone built ndmpcopy for Linux recently? The Solaris version doesn't seem to build anymore and the ndmp.org web site does not look very active anymore. -- Augie Schwer - Augie(a)Schwer.us - http://schwer.us Key fingerprint = 9815 AE19 AFD1 1FE7 5DEE 2AC3 CB99 2784 27B0 C072

2 1

Re: Clustered heads with SATA disk shelves?
by Wilkinson, Brent 21 May '07

21 May '07

Not sure but I believe you do not want to mix fc and sata loops. Could be wrong though. -----Original Message----- From: owner-toasters(a)mathworks.com <owner-toasters(a)mathworks.com> To: Tom Samplonius <tom(a)samplonius.org> CC: toasters <toasters(a)mathworks.com> Sent: Fri May 18 19:44:32 2007 Subject: Re: Clustered heads with SATA disk shelves? clustered sata shelves work just fine. I have several terabytes attached to a 3050 cluster with out any problems. AT-FCX is required for that to work. I'd also recommend being on the latest firmware on the AT-FCX. -Blake On 5/18/07, Tom Samplonius <tom(a)samplonius.org> wrote: > > One item that I've researching that is a bit unclear, is that, can I can connect a SATA disk shelf (DS14mk2 AT) to a clustered set of FAS960 heads? > > I think there is no problem. I assume that you must use the AT-FCx modules, as they are dual-looped. I suspect that the the AT-FCx is mandatory for clustering (as opposed to the AT-FC) , but NOW seems a bit vague, at least according to what I was able to find. > > Also, I've heard rumors that connecting SATA shelves to a cluster is not really reliable. I was a bit taken a back, as NetApp as the SATA shelves have been out for a while. Is this really the case? > > > Tom >

3 2

Symantec AV not releasing pBlks
by Horton, Jamie 18 May '07

18 May '07

Anyone ever had the below issue?: I'm running 2 Win2k3 servers as my Symantec Scan Engine Servers (running Symantec Anti-Virus for Network Attached Storage 4.3). Both act as primary vscan scanners (for my R200 and FAS960 filers). Every once in awhile one or both of my filers stop servicing CIFS requests, because they run out of pBlks (control blocks). After several outages this week, I have learned that in order for everything to run clean, I have to do the following in sequence: 1. vscan off (on both filers) 2. Stop scan engine service on both win2k3 servers 3. vscan on (on both filers) 4. Start scan engine service on both win2k3 servers If I have everything on, and I stop and start vscan only on the filers (without recycling services on the win2k3 servers), I immediately start losing pBlks until they are all exhausted, then nobody can access any shares. NetApp suggested I upgrade to 7.2.2 since this version deals with pBlks better. I upgraded last night, and since I didn't recycle scan engine services on the win2k3 servers, I ran out of pBlks early this morning. Once I executed the sequence above, all was well. NOTE: we are continuing to add more users to our environment (user home drives are on the FAS960), which obviously add more to the scanning load, but that doesn't account for it happening on my R200 (software shares and application shares). Any information would be greatly appreciated. Thanks, -Jamie

1 0

RE: Off Topic - brocade monitoring
by Alejandro Orellano 15 May '07

15 May '07

Hi Blake, You should use TX and RX FC Words. Note that these values HAS TO be multiplied by four to recieve number of bytes! OIDs: TX FC Words: 1.3.6.1.4.1.1588.2.1.1.1.6.2.1.11.(port+1) RX FC Words: 1.3.6.1.4.1.1588.2.1.1.1.6.2.1.12.(port+1) SNMP starts port count at 1, not at 0. So, for switch port 0 you should use 1.3.6.1.4.1.1588.2.1.1.1.6.2.1.11.1 and 1.3.6.1.4.1.1588.2.1.1.1.6.2.1.12.0 Finally, note that (RxWord + TxWord * 4) give the same results as PortPerfShow. More info on http://www.brocadeconnect.com (you need a user/pass). Regards, ./alex -----Mensaje original----- De: owner-toasters(a)mathworks.com [mailto:owner-toasters@mathworks.com] En nombre de Blake Golliher Enviado el: martes, 15 de mayo de 2007 2:24 Para: toasters(a)mathworks.com Asunto: Off Topic - brocade monitoring Anyone here know how to get MB/ Sec / Port metric out of a brocade 4100 using SNMP? I'll upgrade the firmware / OS if I have to, but I can't find anywhere in the MIB. Can I take the frames counter, and multiply it by 2116 (2112 byte frame + 4 byte header)? That'd only work if the frames were always fulll, which seems wrong. It's driving me crazy, and I was just hoping someone knew on this list. If there's a more brocade centric list, please let me know. Thanks, -Blake

1 0

Off Topic - brocade monitoring
by Blake Golliher 15 May '07

15 May '07

Anyone here know how to get MB/ Sec / Port metric out of a brocade 4100 using SNMP? I'll upgrade the firmware / OS if I have to, but I can't find anywhere in the MIB. Can I take the frames counter, and multiply it by 2116 (2112 byte frame + 4 byte header)? That'd only work if the frames were always fulll, which seems wrong. It's driving me crazy, and I was just hoping someone knew on this list. If there's a more brocade centric list, please let me know. Thanks, -Blake

1 0

offline ldap impacting cifs
by jay d 14 May '07

14 May '07

I have 2 clustered filers. One filer shares several vols via nfs. The security on these vols is set to unix. Some of them require access from windows in which case a cifs share has been created and ldap is used to map windows accounts to unix uids/gids. On the other filer, all vols are ntfs, there's no nfs (cifs only), and ldap is configured and enabled. We experienced an outage on all cifs connections on both filers when the one ldap server we were using went down. "net view" (from a windows client) would hang and explorer couldn't find the network path. I would expect the mapping to fail and windows users to be mapped to the default pcuser on the unix vols accessed via cifs. I would also expect the cifs only filer to have no issues continuing to serve cifs. Is my expectation off? I can resolve the issue by adding additional ldap hosts but I want to uncover why cifs only connections are dependent on ldap when my ad domain controllers are online. Thanks, jd

1 0

Problems with mixed mode
by Michael Fahy 14 May '07

14 May '07

We have an FAS960 running NFS and CIFS. There are entries in the cifs_homedir.cfg file so that Windows users can map drives to their Unix home directories. Windows users can successfully map drives to their unix home directories but unless their files and directories are configured with write permission for "everyone", (i.e. 666 permissions for files) the Windows users cannot write to their own files and directories. The filer is not successfully matching the Windows username with the corresponding Unix username (even though the names are the same). We are using OpenLDAP for authentication on the Unix side. We have been told that "Files and directories created from unix using nfs only get their permissions read properly by other unix systems, and the same with cifs by Windows systems" but I do not believe this. I'm sure we are just not configuring the filer correctly. Any suggestions?

4 3

RE: Duplicate nonboot vol0
by MCLACHLAN, Alan 11 May '07

11 May '07

I have had this occur a couple of times over the years. Note in Michael's case the two vol0's were on the same physical disks, so it wasn't a result of drive adds. If you search on NOW I think from memery there's a bug article in about a race condition where this can occur. I'm too busy to bother looking it up right now ;) Regards, Alan McLachlan Technical Analyst Information Management Services Department of Education, Training and the Arts (DETA) Floor 11 Education House, 30 Mary Street, Brisbane Fax: 07 3237 9695 Mob: 0429 655644 -----Original Message----- From: owner-toasters(a)mathworks.com [mailto:owner-toasters@mathworks.com] On Behalf Of Dave Rubright Sent: Friday, May 11, 2007 10:41 AM To: Michael Homa; toasters(a)mathworks.com Subject: RE: Duplicate nonboot vol0 I'm curious as to how you ended up with 2 volumes called vol0. Meaning, you can't create a volume named vol0 if it already exists even if it's offline. My only guess would be that you added some drives that were part of another 2 disk volume called vol0 which ONTAP should have renamed to vol0(1) when inserted. Not sure what happened there but... So an option if you did add drives, you should know which drives you added and remove them. If you don't know which drives were added then a prior autosupport should tell you which drives were dedicated to the original vol0 and remove the ones not on the volume list. From here you should be able to rename original vol0 to another name (orig_vol) and bring online. Pop in the drives you removed and offline vol0, destroy it. Then you can rename "orig_vol" volume back to vol0. Dave Rubright Jr 4Base Technology, Inc > -----Original Message----- > From: owner-toasters(a)mathworks.com > [mailto:owner-toasters@mathworks.com] On Behalf Of Michael Homa > Sent: Thursday, May 10, 2007 3:59 PM > To: toasters(a)mathworks.com > Subject: Duplicate nonboot vol0 > > We have a backup F740, running 6.4.5, that serves as an > insurance to our production, primary, netapp system. And, > yes, before someone suggests it, we are in the process of > upgrading it to a 270 with a more recent version of ONTAP. > > Somehow a second vol0 (obviously traditional since the ONTAP > < 7) was created and I'm trying to figure out how to destroy it: > > Volume State Status Options > vol0 offline normal raidsize=14 > > Plex /vol0/plex0: online, normal, active > RAID group /vol0/plex0/rg0: normal > RAID group /vol0/plex0/rg1: normal > > vol0 offline normal raidsize=14 > > Plex /vol0/plex0: online, normal, active > RAID group /vol0/plex0/rg0: normal > RAID group /vol0/plex0/rg1: normal > > A disk in the duplicate vol0 is bad and that's how I > discovered the problem: > > Volume vol0 (restricted, normal) (block checksums) > Plex /vol0/plex0 (online, normal, active) > RAID group /vol0/plex0/rg0 (degraded) > > RAID Disk Device HA SHELF BAY CHAN Used (MB/blks) > Phys (MB/blks) > --------- ------ --------------- ---- -------------- > -------------- > parity 7.48 7 3 0 FC:A 68000/139264000 > 69536/142410400 > data FAILED N/A 68000/139264000 > > I'm a bit unsure how to proceed. If I pull the disk, will the > system not grab one of the spares and rebuild on it? What I'd > like to happen is have the system rename the bad vol0 as > vol0(1) and then I can use the vol destroy command to get rid > of it. How do I do that? If I use the vol rename command, > there's the issue of identifying the "bad" vol0 and not the > one I want to retain. > > There was a ticket in the netapp knowledge base with a > procedure but that situation was for a duplicate boot vol0s > > I'm sure this is relatively simple yet I haven't come up with > a solution. > > Michael Homa > Operating Systems Support and Database Group Academic > Computing and Communication Center University of Illinois at Chicago > email: mhoma(a)uic.edu > >

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