toasters

toasters@lists.teaparty.net

3 participants
13514 discussions

Duplicate nonboot vol0
by Michael Homa 11 May '07

11 May '07

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

2 1

RE: Duplicate nonboot vol0
by MCLACHLAN, Alan 10 May '07

10 May '07

Just thinking - you shouldn't have to boot to maintenance mode to do this, just need to make sure after the rename that the root flag is on the one you want to keep before you offline and destroy the other. But since both volumes are offline in your example you must already be in maintenance mode... 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 MCLACHLAN, Alan Sent: Friday, May 11, 2007 9:39 AM To: Michael Homa Cc: toasters(a)mathworks.com Subject: RE: Duplicate nonboot vol0 Try booting to maintenance mode and do a vol rename - you should find only one of the "vol0" volumes is renamed. Then identify which volume is the real one and destroy the other. If the one that was renamed was the real vol0 you can rename it back to vol0 if you wish (root volume doesn't have to be called "vol0"). 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 Michael Homa Sent: Friday, May 11, 2007 8:59 AM 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

RE: Duplicate nonboot vol0
by MCLACHLAN, Alan 10 May '07

10 May '07

Try booting to maintenance mode and do a vol rename - you should find only one of the "vol0" volumes is renamed. Then identify which volume is the real one and destroy the other. If the one that was renamed was the real vol0 you can rename it back to vol0 if you wish (root volume doesn't have to be called "vol0"). 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 Michael Homa Sent: Friday, May 11, 2007 8:59 AM 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

RE: GbE card for F840
by MCLACHLAN, Alan 10 May '07

10 May '07

The X1027 is a stock standard Intel Pro1000T without an Intel decal on it, sold as OEM product by Intel to NetApp and other vendors. Some vendors change firmware on the cards, but I've seen no indication that NetApp does. I have successfully used the MUCH cheaper regular boxed Intel Pro1000T in a range of test / dev filer models (F7xx and F8xx series). It should be no problem in an F840, and will show up as an X1027. Similarly the others are other Intel NIC's - been a while but I'm pretty sure the old X1025 fibre card was a regular Intel PRO1000 (1000BaseSX) card. ***NOTE: You shouldn't do this on a system with an active NetApp maintenance contract of course... :-) 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: +61 7 3237 9695 Mob: +61 429 655644 -----Original Message----- From: owner-toasters(a)mathworks.com [mailto:owner-toasters@mathworks.com] On Behalf Of Tom Samplonius Sent: Friday, May 11, 2007 7:33 AM To: Dave Rubright Cc: Scott Lowe; toasters(a)mathworks.com Subject: Re: GbE card for F840 Is there any different in performance between the different GigE cards? I noticed that the dual port copper and the quad port copper GigE cards are nearly the same price on the used/refurb market. It seems a bit odd. ----- "Dave Rubright" <dave(a)4basetech.com> wrote: > You didn't specify which ONTAP version you plan to use so I'll list > the NetApp supported cards for ONTAP GD release 7.0.6. > > NetApp PN Description > > X1027* GBE with copper > X1027B-R5 GBE with copper > X1037-R5 Dual GBE with copper > > * indicates by RMA only but if you find a card, still works. > > How you obtain the cards is up to you. > > > Dave Rubright Jr > 4Base Technology, Inc > > > > > > From: owner-toasters(a)mathworks.com [mailto: > owner-toasters(a)mathworks.com ] On Behalf Of Scott Lowe > Sent: Thursday, May 10, 2007 10:49 AM > To: toasters(a)mathworks.com > Subject: GbE card for F840 > > > > > Good afternoon all, > > I have an old F840 that has been donated for use in a test/development > lab at my office. I need an inexpensive Gigabit Ethernet adapter for > this system. Does anyone have any suggestions on what cards are > compatible with ONTAP and could be used in this system? > > Best regards, > Scott Lowe > Senior Engineer > ePlus Technology, Inc. > slowe(a)eplus.com

1 0

upgrading from 270c to 3040
by Jeff DiNisco 09 May '07

09 May '07

I'm considering upgrading from a 270c to a 3040 (all aggrs, no traditional vols). I'm wondering about the proper procedure to swap the heads. Here's what I'm thinking the steps will be, but I'd like someone to confirm or let me know if there's a better way to go about it... on 270c... change root vol size to accommodate 3040 (both) upgrade ontap to 7.2.2 (both) modify /etc/rc for different interface names (both) record ownership info, which filer owns which disks (both) disable cluster shutdown both heads replace EFH mods w/ ESH2 mods on 3040... attach shelves to both 3040 heads boot 1 head into maintenance mode remove ownership on all disks take ownership of only the disks that were previously owned by 1st filer as recorded in above step run "storage release disks" run "mailbox destroy local" shutdown head boot other head into maintenance mode take ownership of only the disks that were previously owned by 2nd filer as recorded in above step shutdown head boot 1 head, confirm things look good boot other head, confirm things look good install 7.2.2 for 3040 architecture apply new licenses enable/test failover I think that might work, not sure. As I see it, the biggest risk is missing a disk or 2 when assigning ownership. My guess is the filer would attempt to recover the aggregate by rebuilding on a spare. Is there an autorebuild option I can turn off that would allow me to recognize that a have missing disks, boot back into maint mode, and fix manually? Just trying to uncover my biggest areas of risk in the procedure and mitigate them if possible. Thanks. JeffD

3 2

RE: Removing shelves from FAS940
by Learmonth, Peter 08 May '07

08 May '07

Hi Paul Just halt and unplug the shelves. If there are other shelves (mk2 with LRC?) on the loop, make sure they are terminated. When it reboots, as long as all disks from any vols/aggrs on those shelves are gone, the assimilation process will be happy. If even one disk is still present it will complain of broken vols/aggrs, but otherwise function just fine. It sounds like you don't have any exports, shares, LUNs on those shelves, so all you have to do is migrate the root vol. You can use ndmpcopy for that. I typically name the new root vol "root" and leave it that way. ndmpd on ndmpcopy /etc /vol/root/etc (going from memory, but I think you need to specify the destination directory. Play with it...) Don't forget vol options root root Enjoy Peter Share and Enjoy! Peter ... Sent from one of those phone+email doohicky things... I reserve the right to be wrong. -----Original Message----- From: Paul Letta [mailto:letta@jlab.org] Sent: Tuesday, May 08, 2007 07:07 AM Pacific Standard Time To: toasters(a)mathworks.com Subject: Removing shelves from FAS940 Hello, I have a FAS940 (7.1.1.1) that has multiple shelves. I want to remove 4 of the older shelves to take them out of service. These 4 shelves contain /vol/vol0, which is the root vol. My plan is: 1) move the root vol to another volume 2) reboot filer off of the new root volume. 3) Halt filer 4) Remove the 4 old shelves (all remaining shelves are DS14Mk2's) 5) boot filer Do I need to do anything before I halt the filer (like vol offline, vol destroy) ? What will the filer do when it boots up the second time and is now missing the 4 shelves ? The /etc directory is really the only data that is in use on these old shelves now, so a destroy is ok, but the cautious side of me would rather save old /vol/vol0 on these shelves -- just in case. I have searched for this answer, and even opened a support case, but I've only found "probably" type answers. Thanks ! Paul

1 0

Removing shelves from FAS940
by Paul Letta 08 May '07

08 May '07

Hello, I have a FAS940 (7.1.1.1) that has multiple shelves. I want to remove 4 of the older shelves to take them out of service. These 4 shelves contain /vol/vol0, which is the root vol. My plan is: 1) move the root vol to another volume 2) reboot filer off of the new root volume. 3) Halt filer 4) Remove the 4 old shelves (all remaining shelves are DS14Mk2's) 5) boot filer Do I need to do anything before I halt the filer (like vol offline, vol destroy) ? What will the filer do when it boots up the second time and is now missing the 4 shelves ? The /etc directory is really the only data that is in use on these old shelves now, so a destroy is ok, but the cautious side of me would rather save old /vol/vol0 on these shelves -- just in case. I have searched for this answer, and even opened a support case, but I've only found "probably" type answers. Thanks ! Paul

2 1

The simulator and vmware esx
by James Beal 07 May '07

07 May '07

I sent this from my un-subscribed work address so if we get two copies apologies. I have been banging my head against the traditional problem with the simulator and not being able to see the network. Its interesting to discover that esx has an option (Security) under each network "vswitch". The security tab has a policy exceptions area. There is an option for Promiscuous mode, the simulator doesn't talk to the network by default, you need to allow promiscuous mode access to the virtual switch. Once you know the option is there in esx its obvious how it should be set I just didn't know it existed. I haven't seen this recorded as a solution to the problem yet and thought people may be interested. james

4 3

Re: Solaris Oracle NFS mount options
by Adloori, Shanthi 07 May '07

07 May '07

Hi Carl, The TR-3322 that you mentioned in your email is a great start and has basic fundamentals of NFS protocol but it is rather an outdated one. For the current and latest mount options recommendations, please refer to the following URLs - these options are well tested and have been validated with Oracle. NetApp Database Portal FAQ available from the NOW site: http://now.netapp.com/NOW/knowledge/docs/bpg/db/oracle_faq.shtml NOW site (recommended mount options): http://now.netapp.com/Knowledgebase/solutionarea.asp?id=kb7518 Oracle Metalink: metalink doc for mount options: -- note 359515.1 https://metalink.oracle.com/metalink/plsql/ml2_documents.showDocument?p_ database_id=NOT&p_id=359515.1 Regarding protocol performance comparison - please check out: TR-3496: ORACLE 10g PERFORMANCE - PROTOCOL COMPARISON ON SUN SOLARIS http://www.netapp.com/library/tr/3496.pdf Regarding more information on forcedirectio or llock on Solaris - please refer to: http://now.netapp.com/Knowledgebase/solutionarea.asp?id=kb6570 According to our experts: You should use DirectIO for the REDO Logs as it reduces CPU overhead on the host. There is no benefit by using llock and caching REDO Log IO. Bypassing the FS cache for REDO traffic is a good thing, especially for high SPARC CPU count systems and any AMD based systems even as of Solaris 10 U2. It has to do with CPU DTLB tear downs, etc. Using llock in addition to forcedirectio does not gain anything on Solaris, thus it's EITHER-OR. We are also in the process of merging the content of TR-3322 with TR-3496 and we will remove TR-3322 from the web to avoid any further confusion. Please let us know if you have any questions. Thanks, Shanthi Adloori Sr. Manager, Oracle Alliance Engineering 408.822.7828 | Network Appliance | shanthi(a)netapp.com ------------------------------------------------------------------------ -------- From: Sto Rage(c) [mailto:netbacker@gmail.com] Sent: Wednesday, May 02, 2007 11:31 AM To: Carl Howell Cc: toasters(a)mathworks.com Subject: Re: Solaris Oracle NFS mount options Yeah, the Netapp documents are not consistent. This is what we have for our oracle mounts: nfs 2 yes rw,bg,vers=3,proto=tcp,hard,intr,rsize=32768,wsize=32768,forcedirectio,l lock <<--- For all data files, redo logs and arch log volumes. and no forceddirectio for the Oracle binaries volume nfs 2 yes rw,bg,vers=3,proto=tcp,hard,intr,rsize=32768,wsize=32768,llock Is this correct? It seems to be working OK for us now, we are yet to go into production though, its only a few developers working on the database. BTW, we are on Solaris 10. -G On 5/2/07, Carl Howell <chowell(a)uwf.edu> wrote: In TR-3322 it says that the mount point for the redo logs should have the forcedirectio option on and the mount point for the data files should have it off. KB7518, which appears to be more recent, doesn't say anything about mount options for redo log volumes, but I assume you should have either forcedirectio or llock on both the mount points for your redo logs and data files. Is this correct? Thanks, - Carl

4 3

Moving vfiler inside filer
by JacekN 06 May '07

06 May '07

IHAC who has NetApp filer with mixed disks: FC and SATA. He initially configured many vfilers (aka MultiStore) on SATA drives (using FlexVols) but now decided to move vfilers from SATA to FC aggregates. The problem is to minimize downtime (each vfiler has several huge data volumes). vfiler migrate could be a good (although not perfect) solution but it has to be performed between distinct filers (volume names must match). I am considering the following scenario: - create new vfiler - create corresponding volumes - make baseline SnapMirror transfer (I tried ndmpcopy but it does not fit to the solution) - unmount clients - close shares/exports on the moved volume - make incremental SnapMirror transfer - recreate shares - remount clients - repeat above steps for next volumes I do not like this solution because: - it requires SnapMirror license (VolCopy requires extreme long downtime, ndmpcopy is file level incremental and does not synchronize removed files/dirs), - it requires significant amount of work on client side (new server, new export name). Any better ideas will be appreciated! Best regards, Jacek Nogala --- avast! Antivirus: Outbound message clean. Virus Database (VPS): 000738-3, 2007-05-05 Tested on: 2007-05-06 20:38:57 avast! - copyright (c) 1988-2007 ALWIL Software. http://www.avast.com

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