toasters

toasters@lists.teaparty.net

13520 discussions

RE: ndmp doesn't working after 644 - Re: [Netapp Log # 679356] error 3
by di Mauro, Domenico 18 Mar '04

18 Mar '04

Good morning Stephane, are you saying that when you type; "options ndmpd.authtype plaintext" on the filer console, the users finally get access to the files with the long path name? Domenico. -----Original Message----- From: Stephane Bentebba [mailto:stephane.bentebba@fps.fr] Sent: March 17, 2004 5:41 PM To: di Mauro, Domenico; list-nvusers(a)knowhow.vertis.nl Cc: toasters(a)mathworks.com Subject: ndmp doesn't working after 644 - Re: [Netapp Log # 679356] error 3 btw i want to feedback what could be classed as a bug : beetween the upgrade 631 and 644 : the ndmpd daemon of the Filer used to use only plaintext password to authenticate the ndmp user (from 2nd party buisness : atempo, netvault, veritas...) in 644 the filer can accept plaintext and encrypted (MD5) and by default accept in encrypted mode so after the upgrade, what was running well donesn't work no more you have to type by telnet options ndmpd.authtype plaintext to reenable the plaintext (it is challenge otherwise) ... if using netvault stop and restart the service after this change on the filer

1 0

RE: RAID4 Catch-22
by Strange, Steve 17 Mar '04

17 Mar '04

Chris, This technical article on the NetApp website has a good technical overview: http://www.netapp.com/tech_library/3298.html Cheers, Steve -----Original Message----- From: Chris Thompson [mailto:cet1@cus.cam.ac.uk] Sent: Wednesday, March 17, 2004 9:41 AM To: Strange, Steve Cc: toasters(a)mathworks.com Subject: Re: RAID4 Catch-22 Steve Strange writes: [...] > Data ONTAP 6.5 features RAID-DP, or RAID double parity, which makes this > problem disappear. The RAID group would then have double redundancy, > and could handle a media failure during the reconstruct of a single disk > without data loss or downtime. Can anyone elaborate on how this works, in detail? Chris Thompson Email: cet1(a)cam.ac.uk

2 2

Netapp Equipment
by peter gauthier 17 Mar '04

17 Mar '04

Hi To All Just to let you all have a chance, I have the responsibility to remove quantities of older Netapp equipment, such as;F230's, F330, F630's F540, C1100's and also SCSI shelves differential and single ended with 9gb drives and FC7's, I even have the storage 1 shelves single ended and differential with that the 4gb drives. F330 spares kit, as well I have power supplies for the storage 2 and FC7 shelves, NVRAM cards, networks cards, scsi cards. This inventory is at give away prices and some I will just give away and that's probably what I will do, donate to our Ottawa University's and Colleges. I also have none Netapp equipment. This is a large list over 350 items. These cover Sparc 5's,10's,20's, Ultra 10's, SUN clones Axil311's 320's, along with these we have scsi single connect, fast narrow and differential disks, video cards 13w3 and svga's. Cycle SUN clone MLB's, tape drives, cdrom drives, power supplies. SCSI bus and PCI adapters Anyway if you are interested give me a call or email would be great. Txs Peter Gauthier 613-721-3300 x6223

1 0

RE: RAID4 Catch-22
by Strange, Steve 17 Mar '04

17 Mar '04

Geoff, You'll need to boot with floppy boot option 29/7, which tells RAID to ignore media read errors. The reconstruct will then complete, but you'll want to run WAFL_check after that, since ignoring media errors means some blocks of data could be lost (user data or metadata). The RAID subsystem in ONTAP was rewritten in version 6.2, and reconstruct (among many other things) is much improved. We keep track of reconstruct progress between reboots, and in even more recent versions, we won't panic when we hit a media error during reconstruct. WAFL iron will allow you do do a sanity check on the volume following this, without having to bring the filer down for WAFL_check. Data ONTAP 6.5 features RAID-DP, or RAID double parity, which makes this problem disappear. The RAID group would then have double redundancy, and could handle a media failure during the reconstruct of a single disk without data loss or downtime. Any RAID-5 or RAID-4 system won't be able to handle this without at least some data loss. Hope this helps. Steve -----Original Message----- From: Geoff Hardin [mailto:geoff.hardin@dalsemi.com] Sent: Tuesday, March 16, 2004 6:23 AM To: toasters Subject: RAID4 Catch-22 We are stuck in a RAID 4 Catch-22 and we really can't see any way out of it. Here's the situation: I have a clustered pair of F760 filers running ONTAP 6.1R1P1. Early Monday morning, disk 6.20 (72 GB drive in a DS14 shelf) failed. Immediately, the filer began to rebuild on spare disk 6.29 and (because of the large size of the volume, approximately 800 GB), the reconstruction was still running at about 7 pm. It was at 7 pm that disk 6.25 experienced an unrecoverable read error on sector 128273044; however, since there is no parity disk available, the filer was unable to recover this data and the filer panicked and rebooted. Fast forward twelve hours and again we're about 90% done with reconstruction and disk 6.25 has an unrecovered read error on sector 128273044; the filer panics, reboots, and the countdown begins again. Does anyone know of any way out of this dilemma, short of restoring from tape? Many thanks in advance. Geoff Hardin UNIX System Administrator Dallas Semiconductor geoff.hardin(a)dalsemi.com

2 1

ndmp doesn't working after 644 - Re: [Netapp Log # 679356] error 3
by Stephane Bentebba 17 Mar '04

17 Mar '04

btw i want to feedback what could be classed as a bug : beetween the upgrade 631 and 644 : the ndmpd daemon of the Filer used to use only plaintext password to authenticate the ndmp user (from 2nd party buisness : atempo, netvault, veritas...) in 644 the filer can accept plaintext and encrypted (MD5) and by default accept in encrypted mode so after the upgrade, what was running well donesn't work no more you have to type by telnet options ndmpd.authtype plaintext to reenable the plaintext (it is challenge otherwise) ... if using netvault stop and restart the service after this change on the filer

1 0

RAID4 Catch-22
by Geoff Hardin 16 Mar '04

16 Mar '04

We are stuck in a RAID 4 Catch-22 and we really can't see any way out of it. Here's the situation: I have a clustered pair of F760 filers running ONTAP 6.1R1P1. Early Monday morning, disk 6.20 (72 GB drive in a DS14 shelf) failed. Immediately, the filer began to rebuild on spare disk 6.29 and (because of the large size of the volume, approximately 800 GB), the reconstruction was still running at about 7 pm. It was at 7 pm that disk 6.25 experienced an unrecoverable read error on sector 128273044; however, since there is no parity disk available, the filer was unable to recover this data and the filer panicked and rebooted. Fast forward twelve hours and again we're about 90% done with reconstruction and disk 6.25 has an unrecovered read error on sector 128273044; the filer panics, reboots, and the countdown begins again. Does anyone know of any way out of this dilemma, short of restoring from tape? Many thanks in advance. Geoff Hardin UNIX System Administrator Dallas Semiconductor geoff.hardin(a)dalsemi.com

1 0

Surplussing drives
by Lance A. Brown 15 Mar '04

15 Mar '04

Greetings, We are in the process of surplussing a couple old Netapps. The head units are going back to NetApp as part of a rebate program, we are keeping some drives/shelves, and surplussing the rest. My boss wants the to-be-surplussed drives wiped before they go out the door. I checked the docs and on NOW but didn't find a good way to do this. The to-be-surplussed drives are all in one filer, and all in vol0. Does anyone know a good way to wipe these drives short of a full re-install of OnTAP? --[Lance] -- Lance A. Brown SysAdmin Task LMIT ITSS Contract for National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences 919.361.5444x420

3 2

Low performance on 760c with clients running mail (postfix)
by Magnar Stav Johanssen 12 Mar '04

12 Mar '04

Hi I'm currently running OnTAP 6.4.3 on my 760c. I've got 3 servers (Solaris 9) running postfix with high volum of mail. These 3 machines alone uses all free CPU on one of the nodes in the NetApp-cluster. What kind of measures will reduse the CPU-usage on both the client and the NetApp? Regards, Magnar

3 4

Non-Domain User Account
by Steve Evans 11 Mar '04

11 Mar '04

I have a user who's laptop won't be part of the Active Directory domain. He can access windows file servers shares by typing in his domain credentials when he trys to access the particular share. But with the NetApp filer (ONTAP 6.3.1R1) he just gets an access denied error message and is never asked for alternate credentials. I've talked to support a couple times but I wasn't thrilled with their answers. Steve Evans SDSU Foundation

1 0

Awful ufsrestore performance reading from DLT7000 on F810
by Chris Thompson 11 Mar '04

11 Mar '04

I am running ONTAP 6.4.3P2 on an F810. It has a SCSI-attached DLT7000 drive used primarily for its own backups, but we also use the filer's rmt(8) implementation to dump a few Solaris ufs partitions that way. We've been doing a round of checking that we can we restore from our backups. Everything went fine until I tried to restore these Solaris partitions. The problem isn't content, but the appallingly slow transfer rate. This isn't ufsrestore's fault per se, as I've used a program that just does 63KB reads via the rmt interface and disposes of the data [*] and I can still get at best 400 KB/sec out if it. That's at least a factor of 10 less than it should be: dumping the Solaris partitions achieves something like 4000 KB/sec [not quite up to 7000 KB/sec that the ONTAP dumps run at --- there's a 100 MHz network link involved --- but acceptable]. It's not a problem with tape reading as such: ONTAP restores run at essentially the same speed as ONTAP dumps. We certainly didn't have this problem the last time we tried this, about a year ago. What's changed since then? . we were using an F740 that has been replaced by the F810 [the DLT7000 tape drive is the same one] . we were running ONTAP 6.2.2 then, 6.4.3P2 now . we were running Solaris 8 then, Solaris 9 now (well patched, in both cases) - but as mentioned above, it's not ufsrestore per se Anyone got any ideas on this one? or similar experiences? Chris Thompson Email: cet1(a)cam.ac.uk [*] "Disposes of the data" after it's been sucked through a pipe on the Solaris host. I suppose I could write a program to call rcmd(3) directly rather than relying on rsh(1) to do it for me, but I really doubt that this can be where the bottleneck lies.

1 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