toasters

toasters@lists.teaparty.net

13514 discussions

Upgrading ONTAP
by Steve Evans 22 Apr '03

22 Apr '03

I'm going to upgrade to 6.3.1 R1. This is my first upgrade so I have a few questions. As I see it there are three steps. 1. Upgrade System Firmware 2. Upgrade ONTAP 3. Upgrade Disk Firmware Is that the order I should do it in and should I do it all at the same time or spread them out say one per week? Steve Evans SDSU Foundation (619) 594-0653

1 0

Question on ndmpcopy and restore_symboltable
by kyle 22 Apr '03

22 Apr '03

I run multiple ndmpcopies daily, and want to know if after each successful copy should the restore_symboltable be removed or should I always leave it around? There is no space issue, I just want to know what the correct way to handle this is. Thanks.

3 2

ndmpdlog no more obscure
by Stephane Bentebba 22 Apr '03

22 Apr '03

Hi all, here is a sed script to make ndmpdlog.yyymmdd log easier to read. it generate an html output with background color to quick identify errors recorded in the log. have a try _______________________________________________________________________ #! /bin/sed -f # DESCRIPTION # - This script convert a plain ndmpdlog.YYYYMMDD comming from a Netapp Filer (or compatible) to a nice html report. # - It write the result on stdout. # - For Un*x system or compatible. # SYNOPSIS # ndmpdlog2html.sed ndmpdlog.20030422 > anyfilename4output # OPTIONS # - you can focus the report only on error messages by uncomenting a line # - you can change enlight colors by modifying #hhhhhh fields # - you can uncomment the last line to enable very long reports # TODO # - embed this sed script in shell to incorpore as a title, the name of the log and the date in a more readable way # - add a java applet link that would mail the log to the Netapp support # - make coffee # HISTORY # - 22/04/2003 (europe date convention) version 1.0 # AUTHOR # - stephane bentebba # COPYRIGHT # - no copyright # - not supported # - feel free to enhance and distribute # SEE ALSO # - http://www.ndmp.org/download/ for the NDMP specifications # - http://www.netapp.com for Netapp products # #### set up the HTML header 1i\ <HTML><HEAD><TITLE>Enlighted NDMP logs</TITLE></HEAD>\ <BODY><body bgcolor="#FFFFFF">\ <br><br> # #### filter warnings : 'Error NDMP_*' /$.*[Ee]rror.*NDMP_NO_ERR.*$/{ s//<table border=0 cellpadding=0 cellspacing=0 width=600 bgcolor=#ddb422><tr><td><font color=black size=2>\1<br><\/td><\/tr><\/table>/ # #### comment out this line to ignore warning lines # d;n p;d } # #### filter Errors : 'Error code: NDMP_*' lines (in fact all remaining lines containing '[Ee]rror' /$.*[Ee]rror.*$/{ s//<table border=0 cellpadding=0 cellspacing=0 width=700 bgcolor=#ff0000><tr><td><font color=black size=2>\1<br><\/td><\/tr><\/table>/ p;d } # #### filter 'NDMP message' and 'Message NDMP_*' lines (avoiding '[Mm]essage replysequence | header' lines) /$.*[Mm]essage replysequence.*$/!{ /$.*[Mm]essage Header.*$/!{ /$.*[Mm]essage.*$/{ s//<table border=0 cellpadding=0 cellspacing=0 width=500 bgcolor=#32cd32><tr><td><font color=black size=2>\1<br><\/td><\/tr><\/table>/ # #### comment out this line to ignore message lines # d;n p;d } } } # #### uncomment the single 'd' line to focus on Message, Warning and Error messages only /$.*$/{ s//<table border=0 cellpadding=0 cellspacing=0 width=400 bgcolor=#008080><tr><td><font color=black size=1>\1<br><\/td><\/tr><\/table>/ # d } # #### to avoid output files being bigger than 16M (!) 100000q # EXAMPLE # You can try it with that sample of an authentic ndmpdlog : # # Apr 22 02:43:48 [ndmpd:72]: Method 264 # Apr 22 02:43:48 [ndmpd:72]: ReplySequence 5 # Apr 22 02:43:48 [ndmpd:72]: Error NDMP_NO_ERR # Apr 22 02:43:48 [ndmpd:72]: Error code: NDMP_NO_ERR # Apr 22 02:43:48 [ndmpd:72]: Vendor: Network Appliance # Apr 22 02:43:48 [ndmpd:72]: Product: Network Appliance NDMP server # Apr 22 02:43:50 [ndmpd:72]: Revision: 3.0 # Apr 22 02:43:50 [ndmpd:72]: NDMP message type: NDMP_TAPE_OPEN # Apr 22 02:43:50 [ndmpd:72]: NDMP message replysequence: 6 # Apr 22 02:43:50 [ndmpd:72]: Message Header: # Apr 22 02:43:50 [ndmpd:72]: Sequence 0 # Apr 22 02:43:50 [ndmpd:72]: Timestamp 0 # Apr 22 02:43:50 [ndmpd:72]: Msgtype 1 # Apr 22 02:43:50 [ndmpd:72]: Method 768 # Apr 22 02:43:50 [ndmpd:72]: ReplySequence 6 # Apr 22 02:43:50 [ndmpd:72]: Error NDMP_NO_ERR # Apr 22 02:43:50 [ndmpd:72]: Error code: NDMP_IO_ERR # Apr 22 02:43:50 [ndmpd:72]: Device name: nrst0a # Apr 22 02:43:50 [ndmpd:72]: Mode: 0 # Apr 22 02:43:50 [ndmpd:72]: IOException: Input/output error # Apr 22 02:43:50 [ndmpd:72]: NDMP message type: NDMP_TAPE_OPEN # Apr 22 02:43:50 [ndmpd:72]: NDMP message replysequence: 7 # Apr 22 02:43:50 [ndmpd:72]: Message Header: # Apr 22 02:43:50 [ndmpd:72]: Sequence 0 # Apr 22 02:43:50 [ndmpd:72]: Timestamp 0 _______________________________________________________________________ -- jetez un oeil ici http://www.sensiva.com/ -- -- have a look here http://www.sensiva.com/ --

1 0

RE: Question on ndmpcopy and restore_symboltable
by Melvin, Grant 21 Apr '03

21 Apr '03

Hi, As Lance points out if you intend to do incremental restores then you need to leave the restore_symboltable file in place. However, if the transfer is complete then you can remove it. Cheers, Grant -----Original Message----- From: Lance R Bailey To: kyle Cc: toasters(a)mathworks.com Sent: 4/19/03 9:32 PM Subject: Re: Question on ndmpcopy and restore_symboltable the restore_symboltable is used by successive ndmpcopy commands -- Lance I'm a vegetarian. Not because I love animals. It's because I hate plants. Saturday Night Live On Sat, Apr 19, 2003 at 08:57:18PM -0400, kyle wrote: > I run multiple ndmpcopies daily, and want to know if after each successful > copy should the restore_symboltable be removed or should I always leave it > around? There is no space issue, I just want to know what the correct way > to handle this is. > > Thanks.

1 0

Identify This Filer, Firmware
by Ryan Ward 20 Apr '03

20 Apr '03

I am trying to identify this product; I bought it off Ebay and of course know little about it. Guessing it's a Netapp based on the ST136403FC drives. NA10 and NA11 firmware currently on them. It's a 7 drive system and it looks like it's in a Eurologic Chassis EL Part Code: XL501R-F-03N-A2 Drive enclosures have Part Code DISK-36GB-10-NF5 again looks like a Netapp part code. Other than that nothing else to revealing Next question ;) Does anyone have the latest flash and utility to upgrade the firmware on these drives? Your help would be much appreciated Thanks Kindly -Ryan

2 2

Shrkinking volume on filer
by frank marxs 18 Apr '03

18 Apr '03

I heard someone tell me that if I had a volume with lots of extra space I could pull a drive from that volume and use it to grow an other volume which was full.... I know we can grow a volume by adding a drive on a filer, but I haven't heard of the possibility of shrinking a volume by pulling a drive. Did I miss something or is this a new feature? BTW: Anyone seen a drop in performance after growing a volume which was almost full? Cheers Frank "Two things are infinite: the universe and human stupidity; and I'm not sure about the universe." - Albert Einstein _________________________________________________________________ Add photos to your messages with MSN 8. Get 2 months FREE*. http://join.msn.com/?page=features/featuredemail

2 1

Re: Who to buy additional drives from?
by ScottUCE＠aol.com 17 Apr '03

17 Apr '03

Here are the facts: 1. Adding or attaching uncertified "gray market" NetApp hardware WILL NOT VOID your NetApp warranty or service agreement. In the same vein, attaching other devices to your NetApp (switches, SCSI devices, etc.) will not void your warranties. 2. NetApp DOES NOT REQUIRE "gray market" hardware to be certified, unless the buyer wishes to add the hardware to their NetApp service agreement. If NetApp disputes the above, would an officer of the company please post a detailed response to the Toasters group so that this "debate" can be settled once and for all? Scott Scott Fischmann Union Computer Exchange, Inc. 6233 Idylwood Lane Minneapolis, MN 55436 email: scott(a)unioncomputer.com phone: 952 935 7282 | fax: 952 935 5056 "Helping our customers make each dollar go further -- since 1991!" www.unioncomputer.com > Subj:RE: Who to buy additional drives from? > Date:4/17/2003 2:33:27 PM Central Daylight Time > From:<A HREF="mailto:iso9@jwiz.org">iso9(a)jwiz.org</A> > To:<A HREF="mailto:ScottUCE@aol.com">ScottUCE(a)aol.com</A>, <A HREF="mailto:d.kindred@telesciences.com">d.kindred(a)telesciences.com</A>, <A HREF="mailto:toasters@mathworks.com">toasters(a)mathworks.com</A> > Sent from the Internet > > > > While this is true, one should also be aware that NetApp requires "gray > market" hardware to be recertified. If it is not recertified ($1000 > minimum, $1500 for "non-business-hours") you will void your warrantee. The > recertification basically involved attaching the shelf, then creating a > volume, and running hammer. > > At least, that's what they made us do. YMMV. > > Jordan > > >> -----Original Message----- >> From: owner-toasters(a)mathworks.com [mailto:owner-toasters@mathworks.com]On >> Behalf Of ScottUCE(a)aol.com >> Sent: Thursday, April 17, 2003 12:00 PM >> To: d.kindred(a)telesciences.com; toasters(a)mathworks.com >> Subject: Re: Who to buy additional drives from? >> >> >> ......We are maintaining NetApp support, so we would need an >> "approved" vendor, etc....... >> >> ************************************************************************ >> >> Hi, David: >> >> You do not need to buy NetApp hardware from an "approved" vendor, even if >> your filer is on NetApp hardware support. >> >> Should you choose to buy third-party-supplied NetApp hardware, you have >> the choice of: >> >> 1) adding your third-party-supplied NetApp hardware to your NetApp >> support contract, >> 2) utilizing, instead, any hardware warranty provided by your >> third-party supplier, or >> 3) going "bare." >> >> Regards, >> >> Scott >> >> Scott Fischmann >> Union Computer Exchange, Inc. >> 6233 Idylwood Lane >> Minneapolis, MN 55436 >> email: scott(a)unioncomputer.com >> phone: 952 935 7282 | fax: 952 935 5056 >> >> "Helping our customers make each dollar go further -- since 1991!" >> www.unioncomputer.com >> >> >> >>> Subj:Who to buy additional drives from? >>> Date:4/16/2003 4:36:55 PM Central Daylight Time >>> From:<A HREF="mailto:d.kindred@telesciences.com">d.kindred(a)telesciences.com</A> >>> To:<A HREF="mailto:toasters@mathworks.com">toasters(a)mathworks.com</A> >>> Sent from the Internet >>> >>> >>> >>> I need to add some drives to the DS14 on our F810, but had a couple of >>> questions. >>> >>> Since the Filer has performed so well, I haven't had much need to deal >>> with it, which is good, but it also means I'm not as familiar with it as >>> I'd like. It seems I only have time to learn about the things that >>> break :( >>> >>> I have been able to find answers to the technical questions on NOW, so I >>> don't have to act stupid about those. >>> >>> I do have one non-technical questions left though: >>> >>> When the time comes to buy the drives should I go back to the VAR we >>> bought the system from, or direct to NetApp, or should I consider some >>> other source? We are maintaining NetApp support, so we would need an >>> "approved" vendor, etc. >>> >>> Thanks. >>> >>> >>> -- >>> David L. Kindred <mailto:d.kindred@telesciences.com> >>> Unix Systems & Network Administrator >>> Telesciences, Inc. <http://www.telesciences.com> >>> Support: <http://support.telesciences.com> >>> 2000 Midlantic Drive, Suite 410, Mt. Laurel, NJ 08054 >>> Tel: +1.856.866.1000 ext. 4184 >>> Fax: +1.856.866.0185 >>> --- >>> >> >> >> >> >

1 0

Re: Who to buy additional drives from?
by ScottUCE＠aol.com 17 Apr '03

17 Apr '03

......We are maintaining NetApp support, so we would need an "approved" vendor, etc....... ************************************************************************ Hi, David: You do not need to buy NetApp hardware from an "approved" vendor, even if your filer is on NetApp hardware support. Should you choose to buy third-party-supplied NetApp hardware, you have the choice of: 1) adding your third-party-supplied NetApp hardware to your NetApp support contract, 2) utilizing, instead, any hardware warranty provided by your third-party supplier, or 3) going "bare." Regards, Scott Scott Fischmann Union Computer Exchange, Inc. 6233 Idylwood Lane Minneapolis, MN 55436 email: scott(a)unioncomputer.com phone: 952 935 7282 | fax: 952 935 5056 "Helping our customers make each dollar go further -- since 1991!" www.unioncomputer.com > Subj:Who to buy additional drives from? > Date:4/16/2003 4:36:55 PM Central Daylight Time > From:<A HREF="mailto:d.kindred@telesciences.com">d.kindred(a)telesciences.com</A> > To:<A HREF="mailto:toasters@mathworks.com">toasters(a)mathworks.com</A> > Sent from the Internet > > > > I need to add some drives to the DS14 on our F810, but had a couple of > questions. > > Since the Filer has performed so well, I haven't had much need to deal > with it, which is good, but it also means I'm not as familiar with it as > I'd like. It seems I only have time to learn about the things that > break :( > > I have been able to find answers to the technical questions on NOW, so I > don't have to act stupid about those. > > I do have one non-technical questions left though: > > When the time comes to buy the drives should I go back to the VAR we > bought the system from, or direct to NetApp, or should I consider some > other source? We are maintaining NetApp support, so we would need an > "approved" vendor, etc. > > Thanks. > > > -- > David L. Kindred <mailto:d.kindred@telesciences.com> > Unix Systems & Network Administrator > Telesciences, Inc. <http://www.telesciences.com> > Support: <http://support.telesciences.com> > 2000 Midlantic Drive, Suite 410, Mt. Laurel, NJ 08054 > Tel: +1.856.866.1000 ext. 4184 > Fax: +1.856.866.0185 > --- >

2 1

RE: Slow NFS filer performance on WAN connection vs Solaris NFS W AN connection
by Mike McBride 17 Apr '03

17 Apr '03

I would like to add a few more details to the problem i'm having with the poor NFS performance on the Filers using NFS over the WAN(See towards the bottom). The remote Solaris system is 2.8 The NetApp filer(740) is 6.2.2 The Filer has a quad board to Etherchannel ports on a Cisco switch 100mb is the backbone on LAN My first suspicion was maybe the filers were slow on the LAN also but since i was running 100mb I didn't notice the problem. However, this is not the case. I forgot to add i did do extensive testing on the LAN at corporate and I was getting between 6-8.5MBytes/sec from Filer to Solaris system and from Solaris(local disk) to another Solaris(local disk) system. There really was not much difference between the performance on the Filer or the Solaris box. Also, when I used the UDP transport for the remote NFS the performance was terrible. I was seeing a lot of retransmissions. TCP definitely works better on the WAN. Also, the RTT's were the same from the Remote Solaris system to the corporate Filer or from the Remote Solaris system to the corporate Solaris system. I also want to thank several people for their comments on this subject. Unfortunately, i still have been unable to identify the source of the problem. Jeff Mohler Neil Stichbury Alan McLachlan Jeff Wolfe Hunter Wylie Mike McBride Silicon Wave, Inc. (858) 404-5210 mcbride(a)siliconwave.com http://www.siliconwave.com <http://www.siliconwave.com/> -----Original Message----- From: Hunter Wylie [mailto:hwylie@stpaultel.com] Sent: Wednesday, April 16, 2003 10:39 PM To: Mike McBride Subject: Re: Slow NFS filer performance on WAN connection vs Solaris NFS WAN connection Mike, Here's a simple test to try isolate the problem. From a third system ("C") at the same central site run the test talking the Sun ("A") and the 740 ("B"). Run the test on the local LAN and see what you get. If the filer speeds are the same and the Filer is loafing you have a networking problem in the LAN. Try manually setting all network interfaces to Full. Never use auto detection mode. What speed interface is each system, A & B? If the Filer runs at about 6-8.5mbytes per second, assuming a 100mbit LAN interface on the file you still have network problems somewhere between the filer and the VPN box The problems you describe are normally found in the network when the filer is loafing. Check the stats on the LAN interfaces on the filer too, lost frames, retries, etc.. Might be a bad Filer LAN interface. Hunter ----- Original Message ----- From: Mike <mailto:mcbride@siliconwave.com> McBride To: 'toasters(a)mathworks.com' <mailto:'toasters(a)mathworks.com'> Cc: Mike McBride <mailto:mcbride@siliconwave.com> Sent: Wednesday, April 16, 2003 4:32 PM Subject: Slow NFS filer performance on WAN connection vs Solaris NFS WAN connection We have several engineers working from home using Solaris boxes and utilizing VPN's to the office. Typical application use is Cadence. What i have noticed is the NFS performance on the Filers are almost 50% slower than the performance of the Solaris machines. I have run several tests including cp, ftp and utilizing ping roundtrip times, traceroute, snoop and tcpdump to monitor activities between home SUN systems and file systems at work. I have also tested NFS using different transport protocols(tcp/udp) modifying rsize/wsize buffers and using NFS2 and NFS3 versions of NFS. The filers and the Solaris systems at cooperate are on the same subnet - there is no differences in the routing. FYI - the VPN's at home are all Linksys VPN cable/dsl routers configured for Site to Site VPN connections to corporate office. The problem is definitely with NFS and it is isolated to the Filers. I am confused why the performance of the NetApp NFS would be so poor compared with NFS on the Solaris systems. Now, I know NFS on a WAN is slow and VPN encryption is going to degrade the performance severely, but I am wondering why NetApp NFS performance is much worse than Solaris NFS performance. Basically, when accessing files on a Solaris system(local disk) at the corporate office from home i'm getting about 915KBits/sec. When accessing the same files on a NetApp(F740) at the corporate office from home i'm getting about 510KBits/sec. The transfer mechanism is NFS. When using FTP i get the same 915KBits/sec on the Solaris(local disk) and Filer. The load on the Filer at the time of testing is minimal. Anyone have any insight on this subject? Any feedback would be appreciated since I put quite a bit of time in this to try and understand the problem here. Thanks, Mike McBride Silicon Wave, Inc. (858) 404-5210 mcbride(a)siliconwave.com http://www.siliconwave.com <http://www.siliconwave.com>

1 0

Can you speed up the time it takes to browse large CIFS shares?
by Hight, Steve - Perot 17 Apr '03

17 Apr '03

Anyone know of any client specific or filer tunable parameters that will speed the time it takes to browse large directories in windows explorer? We have several CIFS shares with 2k or more files/directories in the root of a share. The performance seems to be the same from an NT4, Win2k Pro, XP or Citrix client. This is not really a NetApp issue, the same performance problems exist when trying to browse a share of this size located on an NT server. Any ideas? Thanks, Steve

3 2

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