toasters

toasters@lists.teaparty.net

3 participants
13514 discussions

ServerProtect for NetApps: Alerting Users
by Sewell, Cathy 10 Mar '06

10 Mar '06

We are using TrendMicro's ServerProtect for NetApps to virus scan all files incoming/outgoing from our NetApps Filers. As expected, when a user attempts to store a file containing malware on a Filer, ServerProtect appropriately takes action on the file (attempting to clean it, then, if that fails, quarantining or deleting the file). While ServerProtect does have some limited alerting capabilities and we do have it setup to alert our IS group when a file is quarantined or deleted, ServerProtect is apparently unable to alert the user - the person who was attempting to store the file on the Filer. Vscan on the Filer initiates the scan of the file, handing it off to the ServerProtect server for scanning, apparently without user information. From the user's perspective, they copy or move a file to the Filer and the file completely disappears with no explanation. The Filer's Vscan does give ServerProtect the originating computer's name. However, using something like "net send <computer name>" is not an option for us as the Messaging service is disabled on our user's Windows workstations. Additionally our users work from a variety of OSes, making an e-mail based solution most desirable. If you've faced this situation, we'd like to know what you've successfully setup to alert users. Thank you for your ideas -

1 0

Metallurgical Import Export Company Limited
by c.cmiectradingcompanygo＠virgilio.it 10 Mar '06

10 Mar '06

Dear Sir/Madam, I am Mr Shun Lao,Managinig Director of China Metallurgical Import & Export Company Limited(CMIE.CO.,LTD) a we are a group of division of Sinosteel Group ofCompanys. company who deal on import and exportation of raw Materials such as, cocoa,rubber,Cassava, non-metallic minerals such as Calcite,Barytes,Manganese Dioxide, Dolomite Mica ChinaClay,Mangnese Dioxide,Ferrous (Iron) etc intoCanada/America and presently Europe. We are solicitating for representatives who can helpus establish a medium of getting to our costumers in the Canada/America and Europe as well as making payments through you to us which you will be entitled to earn 10% of every payment made throughyou to us. Subject to your satisfaction to assist us, youwill be given the opportunity to negotiate your mode of which we will be paying for your services as our representative. THANK YOU VERY MUCH FOR YOUR ANTICIPATED COOPERATION. For more information,please contact me via my officialemail address at:shunlao@netscape.net Yours truly, Mr Shun Lao Managing Director (CMIE.CO.,LTD)

1 0

Important Information Regarding Your Banking Account
by Chase Manhattan Bank 10 Mar '06

10 Mar '06

1 0

COMPLY STRICTLY WITH THE INSTRUCTIONS
by lindawalsh＠virgilio.it 09 Mar '06

09 Mar '06

This email confirms that you have received from the LOTERIE NATIONALE GROUP an official notification of your lottery winning in the FREELOTERY AUTOMATIC SUBSCRIPTION TICKET GAME (F.A.S.T). You have won a prize of Two Million Dollars($2,000,000.00) a prize payout of your winning has been approved by the LOTERIE NATIONALE GROUP. In accordance with the world lottery ordinance, you are authorized as the official lottery prize winner to immediately file in for your claims upon receipt of this mail. The FREELOTERY AUTOMATIC SUBSCRIPTION TICKET (F. A.S.T) GAME is an online promotional program organized by the LOTERIE NATIONALE GROUP. A total of 500,000 email addresses were entered for the FREELOTTO AUTOMATIC SUBSCRIPTION TICKET GAME (F.A.S.T). 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 500,000 email addresses that were entered for category ‘A’ with the following details, Batch no LN 005271 with Ticket No. LN/BB090701: Ref no LN 4440180: Lucky no 11-06- 88 Serial no: LN/T55. Note that the Loterie Nationale 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 licensed agent for category "A" with the information’s below. Mrs. Yvonne Chang Global Consult. Tel: +31 621 697 243 Email: gloconsult(a)excite.it 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". Jennifer Vanderwoude

1 0

RE: SubInACL? What is the most effective method to change permiss ion on CIFSshares?
by Holland, William L 09 Mar '06

09 Mar '06

Here's a little script I use to set permissions and ownership on our users' home folders. I run this periodically to ensure our quotas are reflecting the proper users: yes.txt simply contains Y with a hard return. na_ntfschown is available from the NOW site in the tools downloads. net use x: \\filer\users <file://\\;filer\users> /persistent:no x: for /d %%f in (*) do cacls %%f /t /c /g Administrators:F System:F domain\%%f:C < pathtoscript\yes.txt for /d %%f in (*) do pathtoscript\na_ntfschown /r domain\%%f %%f c: net use x: /delete _____ From: owner-toasters(a)mathworks.com [mailto:rkelley@forsythe.com] Sent: Thursday, March 09, 2006 9:48 AM To: toasters(a)mathworks.com Subject: SubInACL? What is the most effective method to change permission on CIFSshares? A project is underway to migrate from an existing local Active Directory domain to a new Global domain. Is the use of Microsoft's SubInACL utility the most effective method to change the file / directory permission for the CIFS shares under Data ONTAP to reflect the new Global domain?

1 0

SubInACL? What is the most effective method to change permission on CIFS shares?
by RJ Kelley 09 Mar '06

09 Mar '06

A project is underway to migrate from an existing local Active Directory domain to a new Global domain. Is the use of Microsoft's SubInACL utility the most effective method to change the file / directory permission for the CIFS shares under Data ONTAP to reflect the new Global domain?

1 0

COMPLY STRICTLY WITH THE INSTRUCTIONS
by lindawalsh＠virgilio.it 09 Mar '06

09 Mar '06

1 0

RE: wafl scan reallocate
by Glenn Walker 09 Mar '06

09 Mar '06

Looks like you are doing pretty good... Keep in mind, it's an average, so for specific data sets in the volume it may be much higher (or lower). Workload measurements (statit during specific operations) can tell you much more sometimes. Filling the volume is typically a bad idea (tm) as WAFL will spend more time finding free space to write. If this is a flexvol and the aggr has tons of space available, this is not a concern. 7.X has great improvements on fixing fragmentation and preventative measures to keep it from becoming an issue. Remember: Fragmentation is NORMAL with any filesystem and isn't necessarily a problem. What fragmentation _does_ do is introduce latencies that can be detrimental to responsiveness... sometimes this can be felt (ie, it's a problem), sometimes it cannot be felt... Glenn -----Original Message----- From: owner-toasters(a)mathworks.com [mailto:owner-toasters@mathworks.com] On Behalf Of Lori Barfield Sent: Tuesday, March 07, 2006 10:57 PM To: toasters(a)mathworks.com Subject: Re: wafl scan reallocate since toasters said it was harmless, just to find out what kind of fragmentation our normal activity creates, i ran wafl scan measure_layout on our busiest filer. the volume is only about 3-4 months young, but it does get pretty full on a regular basis. here's the output that appeared in my messages file: Tue Mar 7 15:16:36 PST [wafl.scan.start:info]: Starting WAFL layout measurement on volume vol1. Tue Mar 7 16:04:06 PST [wafl.scan.layout.advise:info]: WAFL layout ratio for volume vol1 is 1.26. A ratio of 1 is optimal. Based on your free space, 6.53 is expected. i haven't read up on this at all yet...would someone like to interpret this for us wafl scan newbies? ...lori

3 5

RE: wafl scan reallocate
by Glenn Walker 09 Mar '06

09 Mar '06

Oh that... the 'free space' statement is just a prediction of how fragmented it THINKS you should be based on the free space available. WAFL writes anywhere it can find a hole on disk (to put it very simply, that is... there is a much more complex algorithm behind it in reality). Given this, when the disk starts filling up, the likelihood of finding non-contiguous blocks increases... meaning with less free space, you should have more fragmentation. I believe that to be the root of the 'free space\fragmentation' statement that wafl scan reallocate gives as output. Glenn -----Original Message----- From: owner-toasters(a)mathworks.com [mailto:owner-toasters@mathworks.com] On Behalf Of Lori Barfield Sent: Wednesday, March 08, 2006 9:25 PM To: toasters(a)mathworks.com Subject: Re: wafl scan reallocate On 3/8/06, Glenn Walker <ggwalker(a)mindspring.com> wrote: > Lori, > > From what I recall about the way WAFL scans, and what I can infer from > that, I don't believe that a fragmented filesystem would make the scan > take any longer. > > If I'm correct in my thinking, it scans the blocks contiguously and > determines how many blocks that belong together (for files) are actually > in the same place. The ratio is where the index comes from... thanks, glen. if it's that simple then i wonder what it's doing with the "free space" factor. ...lori

1 0

RE: wafl scan reallocate
by Glenn Walker 09 Mar '06

09 Mar '06

Lori, From what I recall about the way WAFL scans, and what I can infer from that, I don't believe that a fragmented filesystem would make the scan take any longer. If I'm correct in my thinking, it scans the blocks contiguously and determines how many blocks that belong together (for files) are actually in the same place. The ratio is where the index comes from... Glenn -----Original Message----- From: owner-toasters(a)mathworks.com [mailto:owner-toasters@mathworks.com] On Behalf Of Lori Barfield Sent: Wednesday, March 08, 2006 4:12 PM To: philip.boyle(a)eircom.net Cc: toasters(a)mathworks.com Subject: Re: wafl scan reallocate another data point for the group. the previous scan was run on our busiest filer (an fas270); below is the impact of doing a scan on our largest user data filer. this filer is an fas270 with one ds14. there are 11 disks in the raid group (and aggregate). the volume is only 3-4 months old, but storage utilization vascillates wildly on this puppy but it usually operates above 95% and has run out of space several times in its young life. we are not snapmirroring. i think we are currently using 995gb (.97tb) on the volume including snap, but someone should check my calculation (df below). i started the scan at the beginning of lunchtime, when the filer happened to be nearly quiescent. it took 54 minutes. it killed my cache but only sucked up 7-12% of the cpu. i imagine a low fragmentation condition would make a scan less taxing. ...lori /vol/vol1/ 1132462080KB 917995432KB 214466648KB 81% /vol/vol1/ /vol/vol1/.snapshot 125829120KB 153743936KB 0KB 122% /vol/vol1/.snap shot cartman*> sysstat 1 CPU NFS CIFS HTTP Net kB/s Disk kB/s Tape kB/s Cache in out read write read write age 1% 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 >60 1% 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 >60 1% 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 >60 1% 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 >60 1% 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 >60 4% 0 0 0 0 0 607 563 0 0 >60 cartman*> wafl scan measure_layout vol1 cartman*> Wed Mar 8 12:15:05 PST [wafl.scan.start:info]: Starting WAFL layout measurement on volume vol1. cartman*> sysstat 1 CPU NFS CIFS HTTP Net kB/s Disk kB/s Tape kB/s Cache in out read write read write age 8% 0 0 0 0 0 583 0 0 0 15 10% 0 0 0 0 0 1168 572 0 0 15 7% 0 0 0 0 0 636 0 0 0 15 8% 0 0 0 0 0 648 0 0 0 15 8% 0 0 0 0 0 632 0 0 0 15 8% 0 0 0 0 0 660 0 0 0 15 7% 0 0 0 0 0 636 0 0 0 15 9% 0 0 0 0 0 696 0 0 0 15 8% 0 0 0 0 0 696 0 0 0 15 12% 0 0 0 0 0 844 0 0 0 15 7% 0 0 0 0 0 668 0 0 0 16 CPU NFS CIFS HTTP Net kB/s Disk kB/s Tape kB/s Cache in out read write read write age 7% 0 0 0 0 0 592 0 0 0 4 8% 0 0 0 1 0 736 0 0 0 4 11% 0 0 0 0 0 756 0 0 0 4 10% 0 0 0 0 0 864 0 0 0 4 11% 0 0 0 0 0 920 0 0 0 4 8% 0 0 0 0 0 644 0 0 0 4 cartman*> Wed Mar 8 13:09:00 PST [wafl.scan.layout.advise:info]: WAFL layout ratio for volume vol1 is 1.22. A ratio of 1 is optimal. Based on your free space, 3.94 is expected.

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