toasters

toasters@lists.teaparty.net

3 participants
13514 discussions

RE: OnTap 6.x, mixed shelves, and spares.
by McLoughlin, John 06 Apr '06

06 Apr '06

Yes, Nate. It will prefer the 36GB drive over the 144GB drive. OnTap has a sense for how big a drive is and selects the closest sized drive for spares. ;) Thanks, John. -----Original Message----- From: Nathan Patwardhan [mailto:nvp@akamai.com] Sent: Wednesday, April 05, 2006 10:50 PM To: Tim McCarthy Cc: toasters(a)mathworks.com Subject: Re: OnTap 6.x, mixed shelves, and spares. On Wed, Apr 05, 2006 at 09:56:32PM -0400, Tim McCarthy wrote: : ontap will only ever use a disk that is at lest as big as the failed : disk. In other words, ontap may: : grab a 144 to replace a 36 Alrighty. But if I load the FC9s with an ample number of 36g drives, would OnTap more likely than not pull from the FC9 before the DS14? : Also, since you have FC9 shelves, you may have 36GB Zoned checksum : disks. If they are, then you can replace them with either zoned or block : checksum disks. However, at the 36GB capacity, zoned disks are 34.5G I think ours show as 34g. Thanks for your response! -- Nathan Patwardhan, UNIX System[s] Administrator, Sr. Akamai Technologies, 839B/8CC x 83035 npatward(a)akamai.com AIM: notoriousnvp71

2 1

RE: Files on CIFS share have timestamp off by one hour after daylight saving
by Willeke, Jochen 06 Apr '06

06 Apr '06

Hi, the client and the filer both are hosted in CET timezone which is GMT +1 (Europe\Berlin in filerview) I can view the files with different clients but the result is the same. I had a look at the filer and the time is correct. But i found out something interesting.... The problem really is how windows looks at the files. If i set the date on my computer to November or back to Januar when we do not have the daylight saving the "timestamp" windows shows me is correct again. I will have a look at MS Knowledgebase, perhaps i will find a fix for this problem. Thanks a lot for pointing me in the right direction... BTW: Can anybody of you see the same effect? Jochen -----Original Message----- From: Glenn Walker [mailto:ggwalker@mindspring.com] Sent: Thursday, April 06, 2006 2:11 PM To: Willeke, Jochen; toasters(a)mathworks.com Subject: RE: Files on CIFS share have timestamp off by one hour after daylight saving What are you viewing the timestamps with? What timezone is that machine in? What timezone is the filer in? My guess: when the client wrote the files, it did so with the filer's timestamp (based on the clock on the filer). When the client reads the timestamp back, it adjusts based on the difference - ie, if the file timestamp is stored in GMT (non-daylight savings time) and the client suddenly adjusts its clock, then it has to calculate for an extra hour. So the only way I could see this happening is if the clock rolled forward on the client (or adjusted on the filer too) but the savings time wasn't included in the calculation. Check the clocks... start there. Glenn -----Original Message----- From: owner-toasters(a)mathworks.com [mailto:owner-toasters@mathworks.com] On Behalf Of Willeke, Jochen Sent: Thursday, April 06, 2006 6:57 AM To: toasters(a)mathworks.com Subject: Files on CIFS share have timestamp off by one hour after daylight saving Hi everybody, i have a case of one user who stored some files from his Windows2000 client onto a CIFS share on a fas3050 with Ontap 6.5.4. When he first copied the files onto the share the creation time was 10:00 o'clock. This was the Friday before we had the daylight saving change. On next monday the creation time was not 10:00 but 11:00. I have no clue how this could happen. Anybody got an idea? I would be glad even if i get some information about how timestamps are created so i can make a research myself. Thanks a lot for any suggestions in advance Jochen

1 0

RE: Files on CIFS share have timestamp off by one hour after daylight saving
by Glenn Walker 06 Apr '06

06 Apr '06

What are you viewing the timestamps with? What timezone is that machine in? What timezone is the filer in? My guess: when the client wrote the files, it did so with the filer's timestamp (based on the clock on the filer). When the client reads the timestamp back, it adjusts based on the difference - ie, if the file timestamp is stored in GMT (non-daylight savings time) and the client suddenly adjusts its clock, then it has to calculate for an extra hour. So the only way I could see this happening is if the clock rolled forward on the client (or adjusted on the filer too) but the savings time wasn't included in the calculation. Check the clocks... start there. Glenn -----Original Message----- From: owner-toasters(a)mathworks.com [mailto:owner-toasters@mathworks.com] On Behalf Of Willeke, Jochen Sent: Thursday, April 06, 2006 6:57 AM To: toasters(a)mathworks.com Subject: Files on CIFS share have timestamp off by one hour after daylight saving Hi everybody, i have a case of one user who stored some files from his Windows2000 client onto a CIFS share on a fas3050 with Ontap 6.5.4. When he first copied the files onto the share the creation time was 10:00 o'clock. This was the Friday before we had the daylight saving change. On next monday the creation time was not 10:00 but 11:00. I have no clue how this could happen. Anybody got an idea? I would be glad even if i get some information about how timestamps are created so i can make a research myself. Thanks a lot for any suggestions in advance Jochen

1 0

Re: FAS270 FAIL TO INSTALL
by Tim McCarthy 06 Apr '06

06 Apr '06

I have seen cases where the serial console port was slightly moved...enough to look like the boot process stopped, or that the serial port stopped working and it looks like the system stopped. Gabriel Ajidele wrote: > Friends, > > Thanks a lot. > > I got to the site to try the hints given, but to my surprise the machine > booted normally without doing anything. Surprising. I then ran boot diag > and ran all tests, PASSED. > > The machine has been installed and working OK now. > > Regards, > Gabriel. > > >> From: Tim McCarthy <tmacmd(a)gmail.com> >> To: Gabriel Ajidele <gajidele(a)hotmail.com> >> CC: toasters(a)mathworks.com >> Subject: Re: FAS270 FAIL TO INSTALL >> Date: Tue, 04 Apr 2006 20:34:22 -0400 >> >> read the info on how to netboot. Get the image, turn on a tftp server >> and try booting via tftp...or whatever they suppotr on the FAS200 >> series these days. >> >> --tmac >> >> Gabriel Ajidele wrote: >>> Friends, >>> >>> Got a new FAS270, 14 x 144GB Disks. At power up, it displays the >>> following message on the console and nothing else happens, not even >>> after about five minutes: >>> >>> CFE version 1.2.0 based on Broadcom CFE: 1.0.35 >>> Copyright (C) 2000,2001,2002,2003 Broadcom Corporation. >>> Portions Copyright (C) 2002,2003 Network Appliance Corporation. >>> >>> HyperTransport: 400 MHz >>> CPU type 0x1040102: 650MHz >>> Total memory: 0x40000000 bytes (1024MB) >>> >>> >>> Starting AUTOBOOT press any key to abort... >>> Loading: 0xffffffff80001000/8823228 Entry at 0xffffffff80001000 >>> Starting program at 0xffffffff80001000 >>> Press CTRL-C for special boot menu >>> ............................................................................... >>> >>> >>> ............................................................................... >>> >>> >>> ............................................................................... >>> >>> >>> ............................................................................... >>> >>> >>> ................................................................ >>> >>> >>> There are no error LEDs on, the Power LED is on and is green. The >>> Status LEDs are off. The terminator on is set to ON. The Disk LEDs >>> are on and green. The Shelf ID is 1 but this is not displayed in the >>> front. I tried to boot the backup, the same problem occured. >>> >>> Information to solving this problem will be appreciated. >>> >>> Regards, >>> Gabriel. >>> >>> _________________________________________________________________ >>> Express yourself instantly with MSN Messenger! Download today it's >>> FREE! http://messenger.msn.click-url.com/go/onm00200471ave/direct/01/ >>> >>> >>> > > _________________________________________________________________ > Express yourself instantly with MSN Messenger! Download today it's FREE! > http://messenger.msn.click-url.com/go/onm00200471ave/direct/01/ > > >

1 0

Files on CIFS share have timestamp off by one hour after daylight saving
by Willeke, Jochen 06 Apr '06

06 Apr '06

Hi everybody, i have a case of one user who stored some files from his Windows2000 client onto a CIFS share on a fas3050 with Ontap 6.5.4. When he first copied the files onto the share the creation time was 10:00 o'clock. This was the Friday before we had the daylight saving change. On next monday the creation time was not 10:00 but 11:00. I have no clue how this could happen. Anybody got an idea? I would be glad even if i get some information about how timestamps are created so i can make a research myself. Thanks a lot for any suggestions in advance Jochen

1 0

Re: FAS270 FAIL TO INSTALL
by Tim McCarthy 06 Apr '06

06 Apr '06

read the info on how to netboot. Get the image, turn on a tftp server and try booting via tftp...or whatever they suppotr on the FAS200 series these days. --tmac Gabriel Ajidele wrote: > Friends, > > Got a new FAS270, 14 x 144GB Disks. At power up, it displays the > following message on the console and nothing else happens, not even > after about five minutes: > > CFE version 1.2.0 based on Broadcom CFE: 1.0.35 > Copyright (C) 2000,2001,2002,2003 Broadcom Corporation. > Portions Copyright (C) 2002,2003 Network Appliance Corporation. > > HyperTransport: 400 MHz > CPU type 0x1040102: 650MHz > Total memory: 0x40000000 bytes (1024MB) > > > Starting AUTOBOOT press any key to abort... > Loading: 0xffffffff80001000/8823228 Entry at 0xffffffff80001000 > Starting program at 0xffffffff80001000 > Press CTRL-C for special boot menu > ............................................................................... > > ............................................................................... > > ............................................................................... > > ............................................................................... > > ................................................................ > > > There are no error LEDs on, the Power LED is on and is green. The Status > LEDs are off. The terminator on is set to ON. The Disk LEDs are on and > green. The Shelf ID is 1 but this is not displayed in the front. I tried > to boot the backup, the same problem occured. > > Information to solving this problem will be appreciated. > > Regards, > Gabriel. > > _________________________________________________________________ > Express yourself instantly with MSN Messenger! Download today it's FREE! > http://messenger.msn.click-url.com/go/onm00200471ave/direct/01/ > > >

2 1

Re: OnTap 6.x, mixed shelves, and spares.
by Tim McCarthy 06 Apr '06

06 Apr '06

ontap will only ever use a disk that is at lest as big as the failed disk. In other words, ontap may: grab a 144 to replace a 36 but it will not grab a 36 to replace a 144 Also, since you have FC9 shelves, you may have 36GB Zoned checksum disks. If they are, then you can replace them with either zoned or block checksum disks. However, at the 36GB capacity, zoned disks are 34.5G and block are 34G, therefore, if your filesystem is block-checksum based, then you can only use a block-checksum disk. If your filesystem is zone-checksum based, then it can be replaced with another 34.5G zone checksum disk or any larger disk. --tmac Patwardhan, Nate wrote: > All, > > I am migrating a 740 so that the shelf/volume configuration looks like > the following: > > vol0 -> 1 x DS9 @ 36g (raid4) > data -> 1 x DS14 @ 144g (raid4) > > Basically, I wanted to not waste a 144g drive on vol0 while maximizing > my space on the DS14. Note that we're also going to be consolidating > many of our NetApps in the future, so it made sense (to me, at least) to > keep 'data' on a separate shelf. > > However, I have concerns with the above configuration. I'm not > concerned with disk failures on 'vol0' (or any other volume that might > live on 36g drives) since I'm pretty sure that OnTap will do the right > thing and take a 36g drive from the spares pool. I am pretty concerned > that 'data' might pull a 36g drive from the spares pool instead of a > 144g drive. > > Is my concern justified? Will OnTap 6.3.x do the right thing for the > 'data' volume and pull a 144g drive from the spares pool or is there the > chance that it would pull a 36g drive? Or is OnTap smart enough to know > that a 144g disk with more than 36g utilization should be replaced with > a disk of at least 36g? > > -- > Nathan Patwardhan, UNIX System[s] Administrator, Sr. > Akamai Technologies, 839B/8CC x 83035 > npatward(a)akamai.com > AIM: notoriousnvp71 > >

2 1

OnTap 6.x, mixed shelves, and spares.
by Patwardhan, Nate 06 Apr '06

06 Apr '06

All, I am migrating a 740 so that the shelf/volume configuration looks like the following: vol0 -> 1 x DS9 @ 36g (raid4) data -> 1 x DS14 @ 144g (raid4) Basically, I wanted to not waste a 144g drive on vol0 while maximizing my space on the DS14. Note that we're also going to be consolidating many of our NetApps in the future, so it made sense (to me, at least) to keep 'data' on a separate shelf. However, I have concerns with the above configuration. I'm not concerned with disk failures on 'vol0' (or any other volume that might live on 36g drives) since I'm pretty sure that OnTap will do the right thing and take a 36g drive from the spares pool. I am pretty concerned that 'data' might pull a 36g drive from the spares pool instead of a 144g drive. Is my concern justified? Will OnTap 6.3.x do the right thing for the 'data' volume and pull a 144g drive from the spares pool or is there the chance that it would pull a 36g drive? Or is OnTap smart enough to know that a 144g disk with more than 36g utilization should be replaced with a disk of at least 36g? -- Nathan Patwardhan, UNIX System[s] Administrator, Sr. Akamai Technologies, 839B/8CC x 83035 npatward(a)akamai.com AIM: notoriousnvp71

1 0

ADHERING TO THE TIME FRAME IS PARAMOUNT
by stattlot＠virgilio.it 05 Apr '06

05 Apr '06

This email confirms that you have received from the StatLoterij international programme an official notification of your lottery winning in the staatloterij quarterly automatic balloting programme. You have won a prize of One Million Five Hundred Thousand Euros (€1,500,000.00) a prize payout of your winning has been approved by the STAATLOTERIJ organizers. In accordance with the world lottery ordnance, you are authorized as the official lottery prize winner to immediately file in for your claims upon receipt of this mail. The STAATLOTERIJ GAME is an online promotional program organized by the Staat Loterij promotional organizing body. A total of 300,000 email addresses were entered for this quarterly email based programme. All email addresses entered for the game were submitted by our partner international email service providers/ marketing companies and public services providers. Winners are randomly selected systematically through our Electronic Random Selection System; (ERSS) no ticket was sold. Your email ID was included among the 300,000 email addresses that were entered for category "D" with the following details, Batch no SLG 809/55 with Ticket No. SLG/T9021: Ref no SLG1071: Lucky no 031-94-55 Serial no: SLG/YTR-41. Note that the Statloterij will remit prize payout strictly to winners who officially file in for their prize claims. To begin the claim processing of your prize, you are advised to contact our coordinator for category "D" with the information’s below. Mrs. Anker Velthuis Tel: 31 652 067 813 Email: statlot(a)excite.it Link: www. staatloterij.nl All winnings must be claimed not later than 14 days. You are to keep your winning details from the general public as a case of double claims would not be entertained. Anybody under the age of 18 and members of the affiliate bodies are not allowed to participate in this programme. Thanks for being part of our programme and once again "Congratulation". Bridget Brinkema

1 0

RE: volume space & ndmp backups issues
by Holland, William L 05 Apr '06

05 Apr '06

Are you doing Qtree backups or volume backups? Volume backups perform significantly faster than Qtree backups. -----Original Message----- From: owner-toasters(a)mathworks.com [mailto:george@YorkU.CA] Sent: Tuesday, April 04, 2006 2:11 PM To: gdekhayser(a)voyantinc.com Cc: toasters(a)mathworks.com Subject: Re: volume space & ndmp backups issues Glenn, I agree snapmirror would be the preferable way of doing this. However, this is not an option at this time. The backups are going to an ADIC I2000 tape library with IBM ULTRIUM LTO3 tape drives. Each filer has its own dedicated tape drive in this library connected via a fiber. George On Tue, 4 Apr 2006 12:05:43 -0400, "Glenn Dekhayser" <gdekhayser(a)voyantinc.com> wrote: > I would think that a good portion of your backup time is the ndmp scan > prior to the backup. Not sure anything will help with that. > > I would think the best way to accomplish backup in the shortest time > is to do volume level snapmirrors, which don't care about files. But, > barring that- > > Is your NDMP backup going to a FC tape library? Or SCSI-attached? Or > Three way? > > Also, what onTAP are you running? Perhaps if you went with a large > aggregate you'd be better off in all cases. > > Glenn (the other one) > > -----Original Message----- > From: owner-toasters(a)mathworks.com > [mailto:owner-toasters@mathworks.com] > On Behalf Of George Kahler > Sent: Tuesday, April 04, 2006 10:45 AM > To: toasters(a)mathworks.com > Subject: volume space & ndmp backups issues > > I have a space and a backup (ndmp) issues with one of my volumes that > is dedicated for mail in 'maildir' format (one message per file). > > I'm looking for suggestions from people on alleviating the space issue > and possibly suggestions on the ndmp backup of this volume. I'm > thinking that these two might be related. > > filer#1:/vol/maildir (14 x 72 GB disks) > 2 qtrees: > ugrad (undergrad students) > grad (grad students) > > backup: (nightly incr. on an average backs up about) > 11GB , 6million files, runs for 7 hrs > > filer#2:/vol/maildir2 (14 x 72 GB disks) > 1 qtree: > emp (employees) > backup: (nightly incr. on an average backs up about) > 8GB , 5million files, runs for 1.5 hrs > > All 3 qtrees have the same 2 level directory tree structure (as > suggested by NetApp) and a common hashing algorithm is used to create > 'home directories' in these qtrees. The top directory contains > sub-directories from 0-to-f. Each of those directories contain > sub-directories ranging from 00-to-ff. So a persons home directory > would be something like: /vol/maildir/grad/2/75/dummy > > I need more space for the filer#1:/vol/maildir volume. > > Q1: should I just expand the volume onto more disks ? > having more spindles might speed up the backup ? > > Q2: should I separate the 2 qtrees (u/grad) into their own volumes (14 > x 72 GB each) to give each more space ? > having only one qtree to scan , ndmp might run that much faster ? > > Thanks for any suggestions. > George >

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