toasters

toasters@lists.teaparty.net

13515 discussions

NTFS Permissions Collection and Reporting Tool
by Crawford, Mark (CBC) 02 Nov '05

02 Nov '05

Hello, Is anyone aware of a product that will collect and report on NTFS permissions? Our company uses a product known as Aelita by Quest Software. When we implemented our NetApp filers, Aelita could no longer collect and report on the NTFS permissions of the CIFS shares. We had developed an in-house solution as temporary stop-gap. But that has outlived its potential. Any suggestions would be greatly appreciated. Confidentiality Notice: This e-mail is intended only for the personal and confidential use of the individual to whom it is addressed and may contain information that is privileged, confidential and protected by law. If you are not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any use or disclosure of this information is strictly prohibited. If you have received this message in error, please notify the sender immediately by reply e-mail and delete the original message. Your compliance is appreciated.

1 0

VIRUS (Win32/MyDoom.O!Worm): IN UNA E-MAIL DA LEI INVIATA
by Content-filter at chamaleon.trampi.mpi.it 02 Nov '05

02 Nov '05

VIRUS ALERT Il sistema di scansione ha rilevato un problema in una email presumibilmente inviate da Lei -> (<toasters(a)mathworks.com>), per il seguente destinatario: -> rmmm41100v(a)istruzione.it La consegna del messaggio non e' potuta avvenire Di seguito i riferimenti della e-Mail inviata: ------------------------- BEGIN HEADERS ----------------------------- Return-Path: <toasters(a)mathworks.com> Received: from mathworks.com (host160-102.pool81119.interbusiness.it [81.119.102.160]) by mx1.istruzione.it (Mail Service) with ESMTP id 5135D11DFB8 for <rmmm41100v(a)istruzione.it>; Wed, 2 Nov 2005 13:02:17 +0100 (CET) From: toasters(a)mathworks.com To: rmmm41100v(a)istruzione.it Subject: Rmmm41100v(a)istruzione.it Date: Wed, 2 Nov 2005 13:05:41 +0100 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0011_75520165.4078150D" X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2600.0000 X-MIMEOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2600.0000 Message-Id: <20051102120217.5135D11DFB8(a)mx1.istruzione.it> -------------------------- END HEADERS ------------------------------

1 0

Can CIFS set ctime to arbitrary value?
by Steve Losen 01 Nov '05

01 Nov '05

We have a FAS3050 CF pair for home directory access via both NFS and CIFS. We use unix style file security throughout. We are running DOT 7.0.1R1. We have discovered a directory with files apparently created via CIFS where the ctimes are almost two months in the future (Dec 30, 2005). I am pretty sure that there is no way to muck with ctime via NFS. You can only set atime and mtime to arbitrary values and I think that the filer sets ctime based on its own clock. Does CIFS work differently? Can you set ctime to something arbitrary with CIFS? Is there an option to prevent this? We have some home grown backup software that access the filers via NFS that uses mtime and ctime to decide what files need to be backed up. If CIFS can set ctime arbitrarily, then our incremental dumps may be skipping files that should really be backed up. Steve Losen scl(a)virginia.edu phone: 434-924-0640 University of Virginia ITC Unix Support

1 0

Re: Jareds time to think about it
by Filipa Semon 31 Oct '05

31 Oct '05

G s Ph ss Spe r ood day, Don't mis armaExpre cial Offe LeVIVAAmCIXa vitraAGRA Now $LIUM Now $bienALIS Now $nax 3.311.20 3.69 plus other - Additional info >> Fast >> Best >> Home >> Total >> Easy ShiPriDelConOrd ppingcesiveryfidentialityering

1 0

RE: NetApp 3050 vs Dell 6650
by Carter K. George 29 Oct '05

29 Oct '05

I am sure the FAS 3050 is a fine solution and yes, FlexVols are cool, but NFS on Linux is nowhere near as bad as you make it out to be. On current distributions (SuSE SLES9 - which has the better Linux NFS - and RHEL) both UDP and TCP are supported and work just fine. There was some trouble with older 2.4 Linux kernels with TCP, but that's long since fixed. rsize and wsize up to 32768 is also supported on both UDP and TCP, at least on SuSE Linux. And Jumbo frames work just fine on Linux NFS, as some of our benchmarks show (we have now gotten over 2,000 Megabytes (not Megabits) per second over NFS from a single Linux file system, read and write, using iozone). That's using a cluster file system to mount and export the same file system from multiple Linux nodes concurrently. With jumbo frames and two standard GigE ports, you get about 225 MB/sec per node. Need more bandwidth to/from a given file or file system? Just add more nodes. It is true that the NFSv4 server is not entirely mainstream on Linux yet. The NFSv4 client and server are both being developed at the University of Michigan, Center for Information Technology Integration, with funding from Network Appliance, PolyServe, and IBM. You can track the progress here: http://www.citi.umich.edu/projects/nfsv4/ While v4 might not be a standard part of the enterprise distributions yet, this code runs, it passes interoperability tests with other NFSv4 implementations at the NFSv4 Bakeathons, and you can download it and run it for free on any Linux server with a suitable kernel. It may well be behind the NetApp implementation, but it is not in its infancy and in fact, NetApps has been very generous with both people and money in supporting the development and testing of NFS v4 on Linux. ckg -----Original Message----- From: owner-toasters(a)mathworks.com [mailto:owner-toasters@mathworks.com] On Behalf Of Tim Sent: Friday, October 28, 2005 4:08 PM To: Blake Golliher Cc: ChazzCRH; toasters(a)mathworks.com Subject: Re: NetApp 3050 vs Dell 6650 From a performance and stability standpoint, as I recall, the RHEL3 NFS server only supports NFS over UDP reliably and only with a max rsize/wsize of 8192. A Filer does UDP and TCP(the preferred method) and supports rsize & wsize of 32768, and in some cases 65536 over TCP. Couple that with JUMBO frames if your entrire infrastructure is GigE and I would suspect it would outperform hands down. Heck probably without JUMBO frames it would still be better. The NFS v4 server on RHEL 3/4 is still in its' infancy (experimental?) compared to NetApp. The RHEL3/4 NFS client rocks though. It does support NFS v3/4 given your version of RHEL supports it. Not to mention the awesome flexibilty of Flexible Volumes which are a breeze to administer.... --tmac Blake Golliher wrote: > SIO from NetApp is a great tool for this. So is iometer if you wanted > something from a non vendor source, but netapp also releases the > source to SIO, so it's pretty trustworthy a tool to me. But I do like > iozone's excel graph output (you hearing that NetApp?). > > SIO has an output of iops, and MB's per second. You can do threading, > and differnt block sizes to better simulate the workload your current > setup handles. > > The first thing you have to do, and I always for get this, is create a > file that's the size of, or larger, of the workload you are going to > run sio against. In solaris you can just use mkfile, but for linux, I > just do a quick dd. > > dd if=/dev/zero of=/mnt/netapp/root/test_sio_file bs=1024k count=100 > > which creates a 100MB file. > > Here's an example output, so you see what I'm talking about... > > [golliher(a)admin.lab sio] sudo ./sio_ntap_freebsd 50 100 4k 20m 4 2 > /mnt/netapp/root/test_sio_file > Version: 3.00 > > SIO_NTAP: > Inputs > Read %: 50 > Random %: 100 > Block Size: 4096 > File Size: 20971520 > Secs: 4 > Threads: 2 > File(s): /mnt/netapp/root/test_sio_file > Outputs > IOPS: 162 > KB/s: 647 > IOs: 2763 > Terminating threads ...[golliher(a)admin.lab sio] > > You can see more examples of how to run it from the man page, and I > recommend doing that. As you can see, my run had half reads, half > writes of random 4K I/O's to a file I specifed. The test ran for 4 > seconds with 2 threads and on only 20MB of the target file. > > Hope that helps.... > -Blake > > ps, the readme is out of date for SIO, the Makefile has full support > for freebsd os. Probably a little tweaking, and it'll run on > MacOSX... > > On 10/28/05, ChazzCRH (sent by Nabble.com) <lists(a)nabble.com> wrote: > >> We are considering replacing our current NFS server which is a Dell 6650 >>with Quad Xeon MP 2.7 procs, 12GB RAM, 4GB NICS running RHEL3 with a 3050 >>cluster. >> >>We are running 7.2K SATA drives from Winchester Systems connected via an >>U320 SCSI to the Dell today and we would be running NetApp's 250GB SATA >>drives on the 3050 cluster. >> >>NetApp posts IOPS as a performance metric but I am unable to find anything >>like that related to my Dell configuration so trying to figure out the >>performance gain and justifying the money we would be saving is becoming >>very tough. I can look at reads and writes per sec using IOSTAT on my Dell >>but I am not 100% sure its apples to apples compared to IOPS. >> >>Can anyone shed some light on this for me? >> >>Thanks ! >> >>-C >> >> >>________________________________ >> Sent from the Network Appliance - Toasters forum at Nabble.com. > > >

2 1

perfstat for macosx
by Blake Golliher 29 Oct '05

29 Oct '05

Would anyone be intersted in my patch for macosx to run on Darwin? I'm still adding to it, but the patch works, and runs as is. It's fairly straight forward to see what I did, but it might save you the typing. I'll include it with this email. -Blake

1 0

RE: NetApp 3050 vs Dell 6650
by George, Andrew 29 Oct '05

29 Oct '05

I'm not great with NFS but have you tried seeing if anything posted on www.spec.org, they do a lot of nfs benchmarking. -----Original Message----- From: owner-toasters(a)mathworks.com [mailto:owner-toasters@mathworks.com] On Behalf Of Blake Golliher Sent: Saturday, 29 October 2005 7:27 AM To: ChazzCRH Cc: toasters(a)mathworks.com Subject: Re: NetApp 3050 vs Dell 6650 SIO from NetApp is a great tool for this. So is iometer if you wanted something from a non vendor source, but netapp also releases the source to SIO, so it's pretty trustworthy a tool to me. But I do like iozone's excel graph output (you hearing that NetApp?). SIO has an output of iops, and MB's per second. You can do threading, and differnt block sizes to better simulate the workload your current setup handles. The first thing you have to do, and I always for get this, is create a file that's the size of, or larger, of the workload you are going to run sio against. In solaris you can just use mkfile, but for linux, I just do a quick dd. dd if=/dev/zero of=/mnt/netapp/root/test_sio_file bs=1024k count=100 which creates a 100MB file. Here's an example output, so you see what I'm talking about... [golliher(a)admin.lab sio] sudo ./sio_ntap_freebsd 50 100 4k 20m 4 2 /mnt/netapp/root/test_sio_file Version: 3.00 SIO_NTAP: Inputs Read %: 50 Random %: 100 Block Size: 4096 File Size: 20971520 Secs: 4 Threads: 2 File(s): /mnt/netapp/root/test_sio_file Outputs IOPS: 162 KB/s: 647 IOs: 2763 Terminating threads ...[golliher(a)admin.lab sio] You can see more examples of how to run it from the man page, and I recommend doing that. As you can see, my run had half reads, half writes of random 4K I/O's to a file I specifed. The test ran for 4 seconds with 2 threads and on only 20MB of the target file. Hope that helps.... -Blake ps, the readme is out of date for SIO, the Makefile has full support for freebsd os. Probably a little tweaking, and it'll run on MacOSX... On 10/28/05, ChazzCRH (sent by Nabble.com) <lists(a)nabble.com> wrote: > We are considering replacing our current NFS server which is a Dell > 6650 with Quad Xeon MP 2.7 procs, 12GB RAM, 4GB NICS running RHEL3 > with a 3050 cluster. > > We are running 7.2K SATA drives from Winchester Systems connected via > an U320 SCSI to the Dell today and we would be running NetApp's 250GB > SATA drives on the 3050 cluster. > > NetApp posts IOPS as a performance metric but I am unable to find > anything like that related to my Dell configuration so trying to > figure out the performance gain and justifying the money we would be > saving is becoming very tough. I can look at reads and writes per sec > using IOSTAT on my Dell but I am not 100% sure its apples to apples compared to IOPS. > > Can anyone shed some light on this for me? > > Thanks ! > > -C > > > ________________________________ > Sent from the Network Appliance - Toasters forum at Nabble.com.

1 0

Re: NetApp 3050 vs Dell 6650
by Tim 28 Oct '05

28 Oct '05

From a performance and stability standpoint, as I recall, the RHEL3 NFS server only supports NFS over UDP reliably and only with a max rsize/wsize of 8192. A Filer does UDP and TCP(the preferred method) and supports rsize & wsize of 32768, and in some cases 65536 over TCP. Couple that with JUMBO frames if your entrire infrastructure is GigE and I would suspect it would outperform hands down. Heck probably without JUMBO frames it would still be better. The NFS v4 server on RHEL 3/4 is still in its' infancy (experimental?) compared to NetApp. The RHEL3/4 NFS client rocks though. It does support NFS v3/4 given your version of RHEL supports it. Not to mention the awesome flexibilty of Flexible Volumes which are a breeze to administer.... --tmac Blake Golliher wrote: > SIO from NetApp is a great tool for this. So is iometer if you wanted > something from a non vendor source, but netapp also releases the > source to SIO, so it's pretty trustworthy a tool to me. But I do like > iozone's excel graph output (you hearing that NetApp?). > > SIO has an output of iops, and MB's per second. You can do threading, > and differnt block sizes to better simulate the workload your current > setup handles. > > The first thing you have to do, and I always for get this, is create a > file that's the size of, or larger, of the workload you are going to > run sio against. In solaris you can just use mkfile, but for linux, I > just do a quick dd. > > dd if=/dev/zero of=/mnt/netapp/root/test_sio_file bs=1024k count=100 > > which creates a 100MB file. > > Here's an example output, so you see what I'm talking about... > > [golliher(a)admin.lab sio] sudo ./sio_ntap_freebsd 50 100 4k 20m 4 2 > /mnt/netapp/root/test_sio_file > Version: 3.00 > > SIO_NTAP: > Inputs > Read %: 50 > Random %: 100 > Block Size: 4096 > File Size: 20971520 > Secs: 4 > Threads: 2 > File(s): /mnt/netapp/root/test_sio_file > Outputs > IOPS: 162 > KB/s: 647 > IOs: 2763 > Terminating threads ...[golliher(a)admin.lab sio] > > You can see more examples of how to run it from the man page, and I > recommend doing that. As you can see, my run had half reads, half > writes of random 4K I/O's to a file I specifed. The test ran for 4 > seconds with 2 threads and on only 20MB of the target file. > > Hope that helps.... > -Blake > > ps, the readme is out of date for SIO, the Makefile has full support > for freebsd os. Probably a little tweaking, and it'll run on > MacOSX... > > On 10/28/05, ChazzCRH (sent by Nabble.com) <lists(a)nabble.com> wrote: > >> We are considering replacing our current NFS server which is a Dell 6650 >>with Quad Xeon MP 2.7 procs, 12GB RAM, 4GB NICS running RHEL3 with a 3050 >>cluster. >> >>We are running 7.2K SATA drives from Winchester Systems connected via an >>U320 SCSI to the Dell today and we would be running NetApp's 250GB SATA >>drives on the 3050 cluster. >> >>NetApp posts IOPS as a performance metric but I am unable to find anything >>like that related to my Dell configuration so trying to figure out the >>performance gain and justifying the money we would be saving is becoming >>very tough. I can look at reads and writes per sec using IOSTAT on my Dell >>but I am not 100% sure its apples to apples compared to IOPS. >> >>Can anyone shed some light on this for me? >> >>Thanks ! >> >>-C >> >> >>________________________________ >> Sent from the Network Appliance - Toasters forum at Nabble.com. > > >

1 0

NetApp 3050 vs Dell 6650
by ChazzCRH (sent by Nabble.com) 28 Oct '05

28 Oct '05

We are considering replacing our current NFS server which is a Dell 6650 with Quad Xeon MP 2.7 procs, 12GB RAM, 4GB NICS running RHEL3 with a 3050 cluster. We are running 7.2K SATA drives from Winchester Systems connected via an U320 SCSI to the Dell today and we would be running NetApp's 250GB SATA drives on the 3050 cluster. NetApp posts IOPS as a performance metric but I am unable to find anything like that related to my Dell configuration so trying to figure out the performance gain and justifying the money we would be saving is becoming very tough. I can look at reads and writes per sec using IOSTAT on my Dell but I am not 100% sure its apples to apples compared to IOPS. Can anyone shed some light on this for me? Thanks ! -C -- Sent from the Network Appliance - Toasters forum at Nabble.com: http://www.nabble.com/NetApp-3050-vs-Dell-6650-t463122.html#a1264416

2 1

RE: NDMP Copy for windows..
by Pou Lee 27 Oct '05

27 Oct '05

From archived email messages I have ascertained that the F760 was running DOT 6.0.1R3 that at that time (3/2004) was only shown as "earlier releases" on NOW, not in the active supported version list. NDMPcopy did not work via either push or pull between the F760 running DOT 6.0.1R3 and the FAS250 running 6.5 since no client existed in DOT 6.0.1R3 or version compatibility issue. Options at that time were: 1. Upgrade first to 6.2 then to 6.5 2. Use NT/W2K (AS) Java NDMP copy client running on NT 4 workstation (there was a Net App PS internal tech guide on this process) 3. Use "volcopy", copying whole volume; requires complete downtime (10 - 20 hours pending on number of network interfaces and their speeds; could add Fiber GigE for connection to Copper GigE on FAS 250 if a swtich supporting both Fiber and copper is available) 4. Use third party remote data replication software like "Secure Copy", "Robo Copy" for Windows data and "rsync" for UNIX data; requires long time (20 -30 hours) and two different processes for the two types of data Option 1 was deemed problematic since two upgrades are involved so more could go wrong potentially Option 2 was chosen and executed with no problem. Option 3 & 4 were not recommended due to long outage. -----Original Message----- From: Tim [mailto:tmacmd@gmail.com] Sent: Thursday, October 27, 2005 3:40 AM To: Pou Lee Cc: Jeff Mohler; Toasters List Subject: Re: NDMP Copy for windows.. If the java NDMPcopy worked on 6.2 (which it should have since ndmp has been around in ONTAP for a long time) then the ndmpcopy program would have also worked from the FAS250: fas250> ndmpcopy -sa root760:pass f760:/vol/src fas250:/vol/dest Of course, you could also rsh/ssh the command to keep the console/command-line free. Why not upgrade the F760 to the latest 6.5 code for the migration? mmm....? Pou Lee wrote: > Jeff, > > You might want to check with your Net App Sales account manager to see > if they can get you a copy of NDMP Java client from Net App Professional > Service. We have used the NDMP Java W2K client for migration from a > F760 running DOT 6.2 to a FAS250 running DOT 6.5 since DOT 6.2 does > not support NDMP (if I recall correctly) so we had to be creative. > > If you need to migrate data from Windows servers to Net App filers, you > might also want to consider OSSV (Open Systems Snap Vault). We have used > OSSV successfully in multiple instances migrating data from W2K AS > servers to R200's with assistance from Net App Professional Services > after engaging Sales account manager. > > Pou > > -----Original Message----- > From: owner-toasters(a)mathworks.com [mailto:owner-toasters@mathworks.com] > On Behalf Of Jeff Mohler > Sent: Wednesday, October 26, 2005 2:27 PM > To: Toasters List > Subject: NDMP Copy for windows.. > > I don't see a client on ndmp.org, but has there ever been an ndmpcopy > for > windows put out anywhere? > > >

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