toasters

toasters@lists.teaparty.net

13515 discussions

Income Tax Lawyers. Special Package submitting Annual Returns (Karachi).
by Classified＠Karachi.com 30 Aug '05

30 Aug '05

Classified@Karachi --- Free Internet Classified - Get member today Income Tax Lawyers. Special Package submitting Annual Returns (Only for Karachi) We are Income Tax Lawyers for new Income Tax Payees. We Provide Free NTN We Charge Rs.1500 for filing of Annual Return. For Furthur Information Contact as following: Company Name: Abdul Ali & Co. Phone: 2760634 & 2751110 Timing: 11 AM to 6 PM. Contact us for placing Ads (For property, vacancies, automobiles or other promotionals). This email is covering database of 800,000 Pakistani email addresses, get the Ads sponsered at very cheap rates. call at 0321-2102628 / 0321-2102629 or email at sreza_pk(a)yahoo.com

1 0

RE: Memory error
by Warkentin, Grant 28 Aug '05

28 Aug '05

without doing research on the error... Looks like you had a parity error on one memory module. Looks like this error was corrected by the ECC stuff. May have to replace dimm j27. NOTICE - This communication is intended ONLY for the use of the person or entity named above and may contain information that is confidential or legally privileged. If you are not the intended recipient named above or a person responsible for delivering messages or communications to the intended recipient, YOU ARE HEREBY NOTIFIED that any use, distribution, or copying of this communication or any of the information contained in it is strictly prohibited. If you have received this communication in error, please notify us immediately by telephone and then destroy or delete this communication, or return it to us by mail if requested by us. The City of Calgary thanks you for your attention and cooperation. -----Original Message----- From: owner-toasters(a)mathworks.com [mailto:owner-toasters@mathworks.com] On Behalf Of Alan Sparks Sent: 2005 Aug 26 10:42 PM To: Toasters List Subject: Memory error Can someone help me interpret this error message from a 760 filer head? Beyond "it's a memory error," that is... Is this difficult/expensive to fix? Thanks in advance. -Alan [netapp2: raid_xor_server:CRITICAL]: 1 CORR PROC ERR 86 eia:17295c00 fs:f400 eis:c5000000 isr:100000000 CPU ECC error on DIMM J27 at address=0x17295c0f, bit=31. -- Alan Sparks, UNIX/Linux Systems Integration and Administration <asparks(a)doublesparks.net>

1 0

FTP Authentication/Authorisation in OnTap 7.0.1
by Simon Daykin 28 Aug '05

28 Aug '05

Hi all, Got a strange issue... We need to have some local username and passwords to allow things (services etc) to FTP to our filers to get/put files. No great shakes I thought, however I have a little problem. Unless the volume and qtree security style is set to UNIX, I get permission denied. E.g. I have a user in our /etc/passwd file, with a homedir configured as /vol/ftptest/. If volume ftptest is set to UNIX security, then I can log in via FTP with the username/password in /etc/passwd and list/put/get files etc without a problem. The second I set the security on the volume to "mixed", it all stops, and every FTP command including "ls" returns "insufficient privileges". Put it back to unix, and hey presdo. Whys this an issue? Well a) some of the things that we are going to need to FTP to/from are in mixed volumes, and b) I will need a couple of directories that will be accessable via FTP and a CIFS share. If it helps, we are not licensed for NFS, only CIFS. Any ideas? Thanks, Simon BTW, have a case open with NetApp, but I am still working on it with them... ****************************************************************************************************** This e-mail and any attachment is intended solely for the addressee, is strictly confidential and may also be legally privileged. If you have received it in error, you are on notice of its status. If you are not the addressee please do not read, print, re-transmit, store or act in reliance on it or any attachments. Instead, please email it back to the sender and then immediately permanently delete it. Please email postmaster(a)portman.co.uk if you need assistance. To find out more about us please visit: www.portman.co.uk Portman Building Society reserves the right to monitor and inspect e-mails sent to and by its employees at any time for lawful business practices. Portman Building Society, Head Office: Portman House, Richmond Hill, Bournemouth BH2 6EP. Portman Building Society is authorised and regulated by the Financial Services Authority (Register Number 158696). (www.fsa.gov.uk/register). The Mortgage Works is a trading name of The Mortgage Works (UK) plc, registered in England number 2222856. Registered address, Portman House, Richmond Hill, Bournemouth BH2 6EP. The Mortgage Works is authorised and regulated by the Financial Services Authority (Register Number 189623). Portman Channel Islands Ltd is registered in Guernsey number 25871. Registered address, Suite 5 North, Town Mills, La Rue Du Pre, St Peter Port, Guernsey, Channel Islands GY1 3TR. The Mortgage Works and Portman Channel Islands Ltd are part of the Portman Building Society Group. ******************************************************************************************************

1 0

RE: So long and thanks for all the bytes
by Sphar, Mike 27 Aug '05

27 Aug '05

My guess would be "Get approved by penny-pinching management". I know I've had many times where I've had to fight for keeping/upgrading a netapp over objections such as "Well, I could just buy a bunch of cheap disks and a server at Fry's to do the same thing!" Things like those stupid SNAP Servers don't help either. We had to move a bunch of stuff to one of those a while back over my objections. Fast forward a couple months and the SNAP Server loses a disk, which somehow causes it to actually crash and corrupt most of the data (which wasn't all being backed up yet because we were still fighting with a weird permission problem trying to get NFS backups to work.) Bear in mind the ancient F230 that we moved data *from* has never experienced any data loss like that, and is in fact still running. Now when people talk about putting something on the SNAP server I just say "Yeah, good luck with that" and I keep putting my stuff on my good friend Mr F940. -- Michael W. Sphar - IS&T - Lead Systems Administrator SMBU Engineering Support Services, BMC Software -----Original Message----- From: owner-toasters(a)mathworks.com [mailto:owner-toasters@mathworks.com] On Behalf Of Jeff Mohler Sent: Friday, August 26, 2005 9:29 AM To: Simon Waters; toasters(a)mathworks.com Subject: Re: So long and thanks for all the bytes So what can W2k3 do that an F720 cannot? On 8/26/05 4:20 AM, "Simon Waters" <simonw(a)zynet.net> wrote: > Thanks for the help over the years. > > Expect rather tired F720 with lots of 18 and 36 Gb to appear on Ebay shortly > ;) > > And no I don't like Windows 2003 storage stuff :( But it does all fit in an > eighth of the rack space, and 6 disk drives. > > Simon > >

4 3

Memory error
by Alan Sparks 27 Aug '05

27 Aug '05

Can someone help me interpret this error message from a 760 filer head? Beyond "it's a memory error," that is... Is this difficult/expensive to fix? Thanks in advance. -Alan [netapp2: raid_xor_server:CRITICAL]: 1 CORR PROC ERR 86 eia:17295c00 fs:f400 eis:c5000000 isr:100000000 CPU ECC error on DIMM J27 at address=0x17295c0f, bit=31. -- Alan Sparks, UNIX/Linux Systems Integration and Administration <asparks(a)doublesparks.net>

1 0

RE: So long and thanks for all the bytes
by Palmer, Jason 26 Aug '05

26 Aug '05

Your Q. >>>>> So what can W2k3 do that an F720 cannot? <<<<< Run appliacations and crash spectacually is what that is good at. It can also store data... Ok we admit that ! My Q. >>>>> So what can an F720 do that an W2K3 cannot? <<<<< Serve data, and serve data well. It is an appliance, designed for that purpose. ONTAP even offloads other functions such as Virus Scanning etc... So that the Appliance can get on and do its job well. So, I guess W2K3 can do most things, fairly OK but not as well as an appliance specialising in those tasks. Your Comment >>>>> And no I don't like Windows 2003 storage stuff :( But it does all fit in an eighth of the rack space, and 6 disk drives. <<<<< Trade up to a FAS270(c)up to 4Tb in one 3u shelf, with all the filer intelligence and not a START button in sight :o) -----Original Message----- From: owner-toasters(a)mathworks.com [mailto:owner-toasters@mathworks.com] On Behalf Of Sphar, Mike Sent: 26 August 2005 16:05 To: toasters(a)mathworks.com Subject: RE: So long and thanks for all the bytes My guess would be "Get approved by penny-pinching management". I know I've had many times where I've had to fight for keeping/upgrading a netapp over objections such as "Well, I could just buy a bunch of cheap disks and a server at Fry's to do the same thing!" Things like those stupid SNAP Servers don't help either. We had to move a bunch of stuff to one of those a while back over my objections. Fast forward a couple months and the SNAP Server loses a disk, which somehow causes it to actually crash and corrupt most of the data (which wasn't all being backed up yet because we were still fighting with a weird permission problem trying to get NFS backups to work.) Bear in mind the ancient F230 that we moved data *from* has never experienced any data loss like that, and is in fact still running. Now when people talk about putting something on the SNAP server I just say "Yeah, good luck with that" and I keep putting my stuff on my good friend Mr F940. -- Michael W. Sphar - IS&T - Lead Systems Administrator SMBU Engineering Support Services, BMC Software -----Original Message----- From: owner-toasters(a)mathworks.com [mailto:owner-toasters@mathworks.com] On Behalf Of Jeff Mohler Sent: Friday, August 26, 2005 9:29 AM To: Simon Waters; toasters(a)mathworks.com Subject: Re: So long and thanks for all the bytes So what can W2k3 do that an F720 cannot? On 8/26/05 4:20 AM, "Simon Waters" <simonw(a)zynet.net> wrote: > Thanks for the help over the years. > > Expect rather tired F720 with lots of 18 and 36 Gb to appear on Ebay shortly > ;) > > And no I don't like Windows 2003 storage stuff :( But it does all fit in an > eighth of the rack space, and 6 disk drives. > > Simon > > -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- The information contained herein is confidential and is intended solely for the addressee. Access by any other party is unauthorised without the express written permission of the sender. If you are not the intended recipient, please contact the sender either via the company switchboard on +44 (0)20 7623 8000, or via e-mail return. If you have received this e-mail in error or wish to read our e-mail disclaimer statement and monitoring policy, please refer to http://www.drkw.com/disc/email/ or contact the sender. 3167 --------------------------------------------------------------------------------

1 0

So long and thanks for all the bytes
by Simon Waters 26 Aug '05

26 Aug '05

Thanks for the help over the years. Expect rather tired F720 with lots of 18 and 36 Gb to appear on Ebay shortly ;) And no I don't like Windows 2003 storage stuff :( But it does all fit in an eighth of the rack space, and 6 disk drives. Simon

2 1

mbstat
by Mats.Oberg＠tietoenator.com 26 Aug '05

26 Aug '05

Hi, I've been running the perfstat.sh script from the now site, and in the middle of the script, something called "mbstat" gets run. Looking at the output from this it seems that our filer is running out of buffers for the primary network interface (e11b in this case). Is my interpretation correct or is this just normal values? ================================================================= =-=-=-=-=-= PERF fs001 PRESTATS =-=-=-=-=-= mbstat System pool small bufs: free 2379 (out of 2400), borrowed 0 mallocs 0, drains 0 (success 0), waits 0, drops 0 / System pool small bufs: free 2379 (out of 2400), borrowed 0 mallocs 0, drains 0 (success 0), waits 0, drops 0 System pool large bufs: free 7803 (out of 24033), borrowed 16195 mallocs 863400249, drains 0 (success 0), waits 0, drops 0 Private pool e0: free 228 (out of 1764) mallocs 0, drains 0 (success 0), waits 0, drops 0 Private pool e11a: free 228 (out of 1764) mallocs 0, drains 0 (success 0), waits 0, drops 0 Private pool e11b: free 0 (out of 1764) <====== looks like we are out of free buffers.... mallocs 0, drains 0 (success 0), waits 0, drops 15107 28526 total mbufs 21087 MT_DATA 7439 MT_FREE Descriptor mbuf: total 28476, mallocs 1317717, drops 0 Old style mbuf: total 50, mallocs 15074, drops 0 nfs: request 0 ip reassembly: 0 frags, 0 pkts ================================================================== Could this be why we see strange hangs when accessing an nfsmounted directory for the first time in a while? And if that is indeed the case, is there anything I can do to improve the performance? / Mats

1 0

Mail System Error - Returned Mail
by new＠amazon.com 25 Aug '05

25 Aug '05

ALERT! This e-mail, in its original form, contained one or more attached files that were infected with a virus, worm, or other type of security threat. This e-mail was sent from a Road Runner IP address. As part of our continuing initiative to stop the spread of malicious viruses, Road Runner scans all outbound e-mail attachments. If a virus, worm, or other security threat is found, Road Runner cleans or deletes the infected attachments as necessary, but continues to send the original message content to the recipient. Further information on this initiative can be found at http://help.rr.com/faqs/e_mgsp.html. Please be advised that Road Runner does not contact the original sender of the e-mail as part of the scanning process. Road Runner recommends that if the sender is known to you, you contact them directly and advise them of their issue. If you do not know the sender, we advise you to forward this message in its entirety (including full headers) to the Road Runner Abuse Department, at abuse(a)rr.com.

1 0

Delivery reports about your e-mail
by cf-community＠houseoffusion.com 25 Aug '05

25 Aug '05

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