toasters

toasters@lists.teaparty.net

13531 discussions

RE: upgrade 256MB CF
by You, Qinghong 10 Aug '04

10 Aug '04

Marcus, It probably has something to do with your mb firmware. Try updating it to the latest version. 'sysconfig -v' will tell you the version. thanks Qinghong -----Original Message----- From: Bui, Marcus [mailto:Marcus.Bui@aiminvestments.com] Sent: Wednesday, August 11, 2004 5:11 AM To: 'toasters(a)mathworks.com' Subject: upgrade 256MB CF Hi Toasters, I have a cluster F880 upgrading the 32MB to 256MB CF. I upgraded one Filer to the 256MB without any problem. The other, I having major problems. Twice already, Netapp sent me a new 256MB CF, thinking it must be bad from the manufacturer. The third time, the CF reader, PCMCIA extender and CF was replace, but still the Filer can't see it. I reinserted the old 32MB still using the new reader and PCMCIA and it worked fine. I also tried "bootfs format 0a.0:3: SERVICE" and get error "Device not configured". ONTAP info: Filer> version -b 1:/x86/kernel/primary.krn: OS 6.5.1R1 1:/x86/diag/diag.krn: Diagnostic_4.3 1:/x86/firmware/xfiler/firmware.img: Firmware 4.3_i2 1:/x86/firmware/rodan/firmware.img: Firmware 4.3_i1 Any suggestions? Thanks, Marcus Bui AIM Investments IT Services phone: 713-986-9061 fax: 713-821-9524 email: marcus.bui(a)aiminvestments.com pager: 8773450839(a)archwireless.net ________________________________ Confidentiality Note: The information contained in this message, and any attachments, may contain confidential and/or privileged material. It is intended solely for the person or entity to which it is addressed. Any review, retransmission, dissemination, or taking of any action in reliance upon this information by persons or entities other than the intended recipient is prohibited. If you received this in error, please contact the sender and delete the material from any computer.

1 0

toasters@mathworks.com Press release
by info 10 Aug '04

10 Aug '04

toasters(a)mathworks.com Canadian Subsidy Directory 4865 Hwy 138,R.R 1 Saint-Andrews West Ontario, KOC 2A0 PRESS RELEASE CANADIAN SUBSIDY DIRECTORY 2004 EDITION Legal Deposit-National Library of Canada: ISBN 2-922870-05-7 The newly revised Canadian Subsidy Directory 2004 edition is now available. A guide containing information to more than 2000 direct and indirect subsidies, grants, and loans offered by various levels of Government; Foundation; Association; and other similar Organizations. Over 20 000 copies sold. The Canadian Subsidy Directory is a most comprehensive and a much needed tool to create or enrich any business. A true valuable resource required to improve your cost efficiency with crucial information held by professionals. Agriculture; Transport; Communication; Education; Import-Export; Labor; Research & Development; Arts, Theater, Music & Entertainment; Hospitality & Culinary Services; Notably the Technology Sector and no less Joint Venture to name just a few. The Canadian Subsidy Directory is retailed at $69.95. To obtain a copy please call Canadian Publications toll free at: 1 - 8 6 6 - 3 2 2 - 3 3 7 6

1 0

FTP on new Filer
by Steve Evans 10 Aug '04

10 Aug '04

I'm trying to setup FTP on a new Filer and I'm running into some issues. My version of ONTAP is 6.5.1R1, it's a CIFS only environment. My options ftpd.auth_style is NTLM My options cifs.home_dir_namestyle is mapped If I have cifs.home_dir_namestyle set to ntname everything works fine. All we use home directories for is FTP'ing though, which is only done by some service accounts. So I'd like to use mapped namestyle and set home directories on individual accounts. So in my passwd file I have a line sevans::10:10:Testing FTP:/vol/vol0/test: My usermap.cfg file has DOMAIN\sevans == sevans Now shouldn't that work? When I try to ftp in I'm told 530 /: Login incorrect - User has no home directory. Login failed. Steve Evans SDSU Foundation

2 1

Storage hosting rental.
by Maren S. Leizaola 09 Aug '04

09 Aug '04

Hi, I would like to know if there is restrictions on NetApps licensing which stops one from renting storage space/access to other companies. Regards, Maren. -------------------------------------------------------------- HKdotCOM Ltd Tel: 852 2865-4865 ext 888 Fax: 852 2865-4100

1 0

re.co
by PAUL FRANCO 07 Aug '04

07 Aug '04

I am Mr. Paul franco, manager of Banca de san paolo Private Banking Sector, Torino Agenzia 7,Torino, ITALY. What I wish to relate to you will smack of unethical practice but I want you to understand something. On June 6, 1999, Mr. Richard Smith came to our Bank to engage in business discussions with our private banking Division. He informed us that he had a financial portfolio of 5.7 million USD, which he wished to have us turn over (invest) on his behalf. Based on the investment, we spun the money around which with accrued profit and interest Stood at over 6.5 million United States Dollars.In mid 2001, he asked that the money be Liquidated because he needed to make an urgent investment requiring cash Payments in Antwerp. He directed that I liquidate the funds and Have it deposited with a firm in Brussels. I informed him that Banca de san paolo would Have to make special arrangements to have this done and in order not to Circumvent due process; the bank would have to make a 9.5 % deduction from The funds to cater for banking and statutory charges. He complained about The charges but later came around when I explained to him the complexities Of the task he was asking of us. Cash movement across boarders has Become especially strict since the incidents of 9/11.I contacted my affiliate in Brussels and had the funds available in main land Europe. I undertook all the processes and made sure I followed his precise Instructions to the letter and had the Funds deposited at the UK based security Consultancy firm.Mr. Richard. Smith told me he wanted the money there in anticipation of his arrival from Norway later that week. This was the last communication we had, this transpired around 25th February 2001.In June later year, we got a call from Uk based firm informing us about The inactivity of that particular portfolio. This was an astounding position as far as I was concerned; given the fact that I managed the private banking sector I was the only one Who knew about the deposit at Uk based firm and I could not understand Why Mr. Richard. Had not come forward to claim his deposit. I made futile efforts To locate Mr. Richard no success, Four weeks later, information Started to trickle in, apparently Mr. Richard Smith was dead. A person who suited his description was declared dead of a heart attack in Cannes, South of France. We were soon able to identify the body and cause of death Was confirmed. The bank immediately launched an investigation into possible Surviving next of kin to alert about the situation and also to come forward To claim his estate. I Mr. Richard Smith died in testate. This bank Has spent great amounts of money trying to track this man?s family; they have Investigated for months and have found no family. The investigation has come to an end. My proposal; I am prepared to place you in a position to instruct Uk Based firm to release the deposit to you as the closest surviving relation. Upon receipt of the deposit, I am prepared to share the money with You in half. That is: I will simply nominate you as the next of kin and have them Release the deposit to you. We share the proceeds 50/50. I would have gone ahead to ask the funds be released to me, but that Would have drawn a straight line to me and my involvement in claiming the deposit. I assure you that I could have the deposit released to You within a few days. I will simply inform the bank of the final closing of The file relating to Mr. Richard. I will then officially communicate with Uk based firm and instruct them to release the deposit to you. With These two things: all is done. The alternative would be for us to have uk based firm direct the funds to another bank with you as account Holder. This way there will be no need for you to think of receiving the Money from Uk We can fine-tune this based on our Interactions. I am aware of the consequences of this proposal. I ask that if you find no interest in this project that you should discard this mail. I ask that you do not be vindictive and destructive. If my offer is of no appeal to you, delete this message and forget I ever contacted you.

1 0

RE: cold head swap or temporary cluster finangle?
by jeff.mery＠ni.com 06 Aug '04

06 Aug '04

This would require downtime on the existing system unless it already has cluster hardware installed. It may even require downtime if the hardware is already there, but I'm not sure. Can anyone provide any insight here? If the hardware isn't there, you'd have to down your existing filer, install the cluster interconnect card, cable it to the new head, bring the original up, license clustering, setup the other system for clustering, .... I'm sure you get the idea =). I would probably choose the 10 minute head swap. Jeff Mery, MCP National Instruments ------------------------------------------------------------------- "Allow me to extol the virtues of the Net Fairy, and of all the fantastic dorks that make the nice packets go from here to there. Amen." TB - Penny Arcade ------------------------------------------------------------------- -----Original Message----- From: owner-toasters(a)mathworks.com [mailto:owner-toasters@mathworks.com] On Behalf Of tavis(a)hq.newdream.net Sent: Friday, August 06, 2004 1:21 PM To: toasters(a)mathworks.com Subject: cold head swap or temporary cluster finangle? I have an F760 I need to swap out with a new F760. A cold swap would only cause 10 minutes of downtime, but it would be cool setup a temporary cluster and do a takeover with no downtime. How feasible is this? Would setting up the cluster situtaion mandate a reboot of the filer in question anyway? -tavis New Dream Network

2 1

RE: Disappearing Files
by Hill, Aaron 06 Aug '04

06 Aug '04

I have not seen this. We have thousands of clients on multiple filers. In our experience, "missing" files are either because it was deleted or someone moved it. Tracking down these files when the users aren't sure where they were originally can be a fun. We use the Intermine Filecensus program, basically a catalogue database of all the files and attributes located on central storage. These missing files, can you see them in the snapshots? Aaron _____ From: Jack Lyons [mailto:jack.lyons@martinagency.com] Sent: Friday, 6 August 2004 1:30 AM To: 'toasters(a)mathworks.com ' Subject: Disappearing Files We are using the Dave Client (CIFS client for the Mac) to connect our Macs to a F960 running Data ONTAP 6.5 Every now and then we get reports of files disappearing and most of the time it is due to the user error, but that doesn't explain all of the complaints. Has anyone ever seen or heard of files disappearing and then reappearing. Thanks Jack This email and its contents may be confidential. If it is and you are not the intended recipient, please do not disclose or use the information within this email or its attachments. If you have received this email in error, please delete it immediately. Thank you. ************** IMPORTANT MESSAGE ************** This e-mail message is intended only for the addressee(s) and contains information which may be confidential. If you are not the intended recipient please advise the sender by return email, do not use or disclose the contents, and delete the message and any attachments from your system. Unless specifically indicated, this email does not constitute formal advice or commitment by the sender or the Commonwealth Bank of Australia (ABN 48 123 123 124) or its subsidiaries. We can be contacted through our web site: commbank.com.au **************************************************

1 0

RE: Exchange question
by Alan Biren 06 Aug '04

06 Aug '04

Skip, You might also want to increase the MTU size on both the Servers and the Filer Ethernet Ports. If implementing via a switch, the switch will need to be set to access the new MTU size as well. We are running both SQL and Exchange via iSCSI in this fashion and the MTU is set to 9000. Good Luck, Alan Biren Senior Systems Engineer/Storage Architect AMC Corporation ________________________________ From: owner-toasters(a)mathworks.com on behalf of jeff.mery(a)ni.com Sent: Thu 8/5/2004 6:55 PM To: reinoud.reynders(a)uz.kuleuven.ac.be; SKIP.HOFMANN(a)ttisg.com; Charlie.Bryant(a)netapp.com Cc: toasters(a)mathworks.com; RAYMUND.SANTOS(a)ttisg.com Subject: RE: Exchange question Don't forget about host file entries. Name resolution won't be available on the private interfaces, so both the Exchange box and FAS will resolve each other over the public interface. This will return IPs from your public network so they'll continue to talk over that interface. You can get around this using host files to force both the FAS and Exchange box to use the private interface. %SystemRoot%\drivers\etc\hosts for NT /etc/hosts on the filer The format is <ip> <some_white_space> <hostname> for both files. I would play it safe and add entries for both then NetBIOS name and FQDN. (i.e. system.foo.com and system) Jeff Mery, MCP National Instruments ------------------------------------------------------------------- "Allow me to extol the virtues of the Net Fairy, and of all the fantastic dorks that make the nice packets go from here to there. Amen." TB - Penny Arcade ------------------------------------------------------------------- ________________________________ From: owner-toasters(a)mathworks.com [mailto:owner-toasters@mathworks.com] On Behalf Of Reinoud Reynders Sent: Thursday, August 05, 2004 3:12 PM To: SKIP HOFMANN; Bryant, Charlie Cc: toasters(a)mathworks.com; RAYMUND SANTOS Subject: RE: Exchange question Hi Skip, We use for our SQL-servers and Exchange servers indeed a private connection between de servers and the filers. This give a really better response time, because there is no competition between disk IO (to the logs and DB) and the client access. So yes, do it. It was not clear for me, what protocol you use between the filer and your exchange server. When this is CIFS, than you can improve the performance an stability by using ISCSI. We use ISCSI for these applications, and that works great. Best Regards, Reinoud Reynders University Hospital Leuven Belgium ________________________________ Van: SKIP HOFMANN [mailto:SKIP.HOFMANN@ttisg.com] Verzonden: donderdag 5 augustus 2004 18:58 Aan: 'Bryant, Charlie' CC: ''toasters(a)mathworks.com' '; RAYMUND SANTOS Onderwerp: Exchange question Hi Charlie Thanks again for coming in yesterday and helping us out we really appreciated it. As explained yesterday I'm going to email you my questions/concerns about the exchange questions I had. Currently we have are exchange 5.5 DB and logs on our FAS250, the logs and DB are on separate Vol. When we did a performance test yesterday on the FAS250 it did not appear to be working hard, at times we did see a spike, but for the most part the system was running below a high stress margin. The exchange DB is on the same Vol that houses a CIFS share and this share is the Home directory for a lot of users. We are planning on moving this data to a separate Vol so that our exchange DB doesn't have to compete for access time and possibly get bogged down by this CIFS share. The size of this CIFS share is 37 gigs. The exchange server and the FAS 250 are running at GIG E. What I was thinking of doing to speed access time from exchange to the FAS250 and hopefully from doing this our outlook clients will stop getting pop ups requesting data is this. Connect the 2nd nic on the FAS with a cross over cable to the 2nd gigE card on our exchange server. Currently our servers are on a 10.20.x.x segment so the 1st nic on the FAS and the 1st nic on exchange are configured with this ip scheme. I'm going to configure nic 2 on the filer and nic 2 on exchange with a 192.168.x.x I'm doing this to try and force when the two servers need to talk to each other they do it over the nic 2. The only reason the FAS needs to talk to exchange and vice versa is because we have the DB and the logs on the FAS250. If I can have a separate connection for this communication instead of the communication having to go over the same nic card (nic1) then I'm thinking that this should speed up access time, and Outlook clients should notice faster speeds. Please let me know what you think, and thanks again Skip ***************************************************************************************************** If you have received this email in error please notify the the system manager or the sender immediately and do not disclosed the to anyone or make copies. ** eSafe scanned this email for viruses, vandals or malicious content ** ** To find out eSafe(TM) and other Aladdin Security Products, contact AMC Corporation at (212) 620-0700 *****************************************************************************************************

1 0

RE: Exchange question
by jeff.mery＠ni.com 05 Aug '04

05 Aug '04

Don't forget about host file entries. Name resolution won't be available on the private interfaces, so both the Exchange box and FAS will resolve each other over the public interface. This will return IPs from your public network so they'll continue to talk over that interface. You can get around this using host files to force both the FAS and Exchange box to use the private interface. %SystemRoot%\drivers\etc\hosts for NT /etc/hosts on the filer The format is <ip> <some_white_space> <hostname> for both files. I would play it safe and add entries for both then NetBIOS name and FQDN. (i.e. system.foo.com and system) Jeff Mery, MCP National Instruments ------------------------------------------------------------------- "Allow me to extol the virtues of the Net Fairy, and of all the fantastic dorks that make the nice packets go from here to there. Amen." TB - Penny Arcade ------------------------------------------------------------------- _____ From: owner-toasters(a)mathworks.com [mailto:owner-toasters@mathworks.com] On Behalf Of Reinoud Reynders Sent: Thursday, August 05, 2004 3:12 PM To: SKIP HOFMANN; Bryant, Charlie Cc: toasters(a)mathworks.com; RAYMUND SANTOS Subject: RE: Exchange question Hi Skip, We use for our SQL-servers and Exchange servers indeed a private connection between de servers and the filers. This give a really better response time, because there is no competition between disk IO (to the logs and DB) and the client access. So yes, do it. It was not clear for me, what protocol you use between the filer and your exchange server. When this is CIFS, than you can improve the performance an stability by using ISCSI. We use ISCSI for these applications, and that works great. Best Regards, Reinoud Reynders University Hospital Leuven Belgium _____ Van: SKIP HOFMANN [mailto:SKIP.HOFMANN@ttisg.com] Verzonden: donderdag 5 augustus 2004 18:58 Aan: 'Bryant, Charlie' CC: ''toasters(a)mathworks.com' '; RAYMUND SANTOS Onderwerp: Exchange question Hi Charlie Thanks again for coming in yesterday and helping us out we really appreciated it. As explained yesterday I'm going to email you my questions/concerns about the exchange questions I had. Currently we have are exchange 5.5 DB and logs on our FAS250, the logs and DB are on separate Vol. When we did a performance test yesterday on the FAS250 it did not appear to be working hard, at times we did see a spike, but for the most part the system was running below a high stress margin. The exchange DB is on the same Vol that houses a CIFS share and this share is the Home directory for a lot of users. We are planning on moving this data to a separate Vol so that our exchange DB doesn't have to compete for access time and possibly get bogged down by this CIFS share. The size of this CIFS share is 37 gigs. The exchange server and the FAS 250 are running at GIG E. What I was thinking of doing to speed access time from exchange to the FAS250 and hopefully from doing this our outlook clients will stop getting pop ups requesting data is this. Connect the 2nd nic on the FAS with a cross over cable to the 2nd gigE card on our exchange server. Currently our servers are on a 10.20.x.x segment so the 1st nic on the FAS and the 1st nic on exchange are configured with this ip scheme. I'm going to configure nic 2 on the filer and nic 2 on exchange with a 192.168.x.x I'm doing this to try and force when the two servers need to talk to each other they do it over the nic 2. The only reason the FAS needs to talk to exchange and vice versa is because we have the DB and the logs on the FAS250. If I can have a separate connection for this communication instead of the communication having to go over the same nic card (nic1) then I'm thinking that this should speed up access time, and Outlook clients should notice faster speeds. Please let me know what you think, and thanks again Skip

1 0

RE: Exchange question
by Reinoud Reynders 05 Aug '04

05 Aug '04

Hi Skip, We use for our SQL-servers and Exchange servers indeed a private connection between de servers and the filers. This give a really better response time, because there is no competition between disk IO (to the logs and DB) and the client access. So yes, do it. It was not clear for me, what protocol you use between the filer and your exchange server. When this is CIFS, than you can improve the performance an stability by using ISCSI. We use ISCSI for these applications, and that works great. Best Regards, Reinoud Reynders University Hospital Leuven Belgium _____ Van: SKIP HOFMANN [mailto:SKIP.HOFMANN@ttisg.com] Verzonden: donderdag 5 augustus 2004 18:58 Aan: 'Bryant, Charlie' CC: ''toasters(a)mathworks.com' '; RAYMUND SANTOS Onderwerp: Exchange question Hi Charlie Thanks again for coming in yesterday and helping us out we really appreciated it. As explained yesterday I'm going to email you my questions/concerns about the exchange questions I had. Currently we have are exchange 5.5 DB and logs on our FAS250, the logs and DB are on separate Vol. When we did a performance test yesterday on the FAS250 it did not appear to be working hard, at times we did see a spike, but for the most part the system was running below a high stress margin. The exchange DB is on the same Vol that houses a CIFS share and this share is the Home directory for a lot of users. We are planning on moving this data to a separate Vol so that our exchange DB doesn't have to compete for access time and possibly get bogged down by this CIFS share. The size of this CIFS share is 37 gigs. The exchange server and the FAS 250 are running at GIG E. What I was thinking of doing to speed access time from exchange to the FAS250 and hopefully from doing this our outlook clients will stop getting pop ups requesting data is this. Connect the 2nd nic on the FAS with a cross over cable to the 2nd gigE card on our exchange server. Currently our servers are on a 10.20.x.x segment so the 1st nic on the FAS and the 1st nic on exchange are configured with this ip scheme. I'm going to configure nic 2 on the filer and nic 2 on exchange with a 192.168.x.x I'm doing this to try and force when the two servers need to talk to each other they do it over the nic 2. The only reason the FAS needs to talk to exchange and vice versa is because we have the DB and the logs on the FAS250. If I can have a separate connection for this communication instead of the communication having to go over the same nic card (nic1) then I'm thinking that this should speed up access time, and Outlook clients should notice faster speeds. Please let me know what you think, and thanks again Skip

1 0

Jump to page:

2026

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