toasters

toasters@lists.teaparty.net

2 participants
13529 discussions

Re: antivirus software
by John Duino 13 Mar '03

13 Mar '03

David Papas <david.papas(a)newisys.com> said: > Just curious which antivirus software, if any, folks are using on their > filers out there. We're considering either Symantec or Trend's for an > F820 and was wondering what people's experience with scanning filers has > been like. > > > Thanks all, > David Papas > I've been using and installing RAV antivirus (ravantivirus.com or from raeinternet.com) in various installations with great success. -- *-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-* | John Duino | | AeroHead Designs | | UNIX, Network & WWW Consulting | | (310) 993-9188 | | jduino(a)AeroHead.com | | http://www.AeroHead.com | *-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*

1 0

RE: antivirus software
by Gifford, Josh 13 Mar '03

13 Mar '03

Hi David, I was on the beta team for the Trend product and I have been very happy with it. The overhead on the filer is minimal and you can use existing NT servers to scan the filer. If you already use Trend ServerProtect, then it will run under the information server that you already have and you can manage it through the console that you are used to using. Currently Trend is working on another version with a lot of new features, but I'm not sure when I'll see the beta on that. If you have any specific questions, please let me know. Josh J. Gifford MCP Network Systems Administrator Siemens PTD 7000 Siemens Rd Wendell, NC 27591 Office 919.365.2806 Fax 919.365.1080 josh.gifford(a)siemens.com -----Original Message----- From: David Papas [mailto:david.papas@newisys.com] Sent: Thursday, March 13, 2003 12:24 PM To: toasters(a)mathworks.com Subject: antivirus software Just curious which antivirus software, if any, folks are using on their filers out there. We're considering either Symantec or Trend's for an F820 and was wondering what people's experience with scanning filers has been like. Thanks all, David Papas

1 0

antivirus software
by David Papas 13 Mar '03

13 Mar '03

Just curious which antivirus software, if any, folks are using on their filers out there. We're considering either Symantec or Trend's for an F820 and was wondering what people's experience with scanning filers has been like. Thanks all, David Papas

2 1

RE: CIFS getattr load
by Sam Schorr 13 Mar '03

13 Mar '03

Todd, Do you have the no_atime_update=on option set on your filer volume(s)? If not, this can generate much activity as the filer updates the access time for each file hit. Automated testing would really whack them. --sam -----Original Message----- From: Todd C. Merrill [mailto:tmerrill@mathworks.com] Sent: Tuesday, March 11, 2003 2:27 PM To: toasters(a)mathworks.com Subject: CIFS getattr load Instead of standing at a crossroads or a fork in the road, I'm standing in an open field, and need somebody to point me in a direction... My filers are showing loads and loads of CIFS getattr operations, on the order of 80% of the CIFS traffic, which is 80-90% of the total NFS and CIFS traffic. Finding out why this is so, or alleviating it or reducing it so the load on the filers goes down, is my goal. The filers are used in a software development environment, in an automated testing environment (generally no interactive usage by people). The CIFS/getattr load is most imbalanced not when a software build is happening but while testing suites are run. On the order of only 10 Windows clients (generally Win2k) can nearly cripple an F840. So, at this point, any WAG's are welcome. Do directories with large numbers of files stress the getattr operations? Has anyone run across any applications that are very "chatty" with filers? Has anyone run into any bugs (with ONTAP or with Windows) that might show such a symptom? Perhaps the application mix we are running is just this way, but something in my gut tells me something is amiss. I have a sniffer available, but before I get to that detail, I was hoping to mine the wisdom of this list, to approach this vague problem armed with some good ideas. Until next time... The MathWorks, Inc. 508-647-7000 x7792 3 Apple Hill Drive, Natick, MA 01760-2098 508-647-7001 FAX tmerrill(a)mathworks.com http://www.mathworks.com ---

2 1

RE: ClearCase 5.x on NetApp, mixed NFS/CIFS setup issues
by Clawson, Simon 13 Mar '03

13 Mar '03

we found that the key things to check are - groups - You must have the same primary NT group as UNIX group - the same group name. clearcase_aldb - This user must exist in both realms. root=<hostname> - This must be set on the nfs share for all unix systems that will have root access to the vobs and views. access=<hostname> - This must be set on the nfs share for all unix systems that will have access to the shares. There is a great white paper on this at http://www.netapp.com/tech_library/311.html?fmt=print Simon -----Original Message----- From: Marion Hakanson [mailto:hakanson@cse.ogi.edu] Sent: 11 March 2003 21:26 To: John Stoffel Cc: toasters(a)mathworks.com Subject: Re: ClearCase 5.x on NetApp, mixed NFS/CIFS setup issues > . . . > mixed security settings. The problem is that running as root on one > of the ClearCase servers, we cannot remove a file that was created by > a user running on a PC with CC client software. > > Our infrastructure is pretty simple, with just one NIS domain and one > NT domain to work with. But because our corporate IT group won't give > us a short group name in the Win2K domain, we're forced to use the > unix username of 'mss-vobadm' with an NT username of > NA05\sa106068ccalbd. We've got a usermap.cfg as shown below. > > Does anyone have any hints on how we can fix this up, or track down > the proper setup for this environment? > > NA05\sa106068ccalbd => mss-vobadm > NA05\sa106068ccalbd <= root Unencumbered by experience with ClearCase (:-), I'll say that I would try the following in usermap.cfg (assuming that NA05\* refers to local users on the filer, or to your single NT domain): NA05\sa106068ccalbd == mss-vobadm NA05\Administrator == root > And we've tried to use the following cifs options: > . . . > cifs.nfs_root_ignore_acl on > . . . With the above, NFS root users (which are now equivalent to Windows admin users) should be able to override any Windows permissions. It _may_ be necessary to "chown root" the problem files/directories before you'll be able to remove them, depending on what Windows ACL's are in effect. Of course, for root to have this type of access, your NFS partition must be exported with "root=" access to the NFS clients which will be trying to remove this stuff. This type of arrangement works for us here, though without the issue of ClearCase involved. It may be overkill for your situation, but it's a decent place to start. And as I've said before, in case you haven't already done so: There's an excellent article on NOW, with a title something like "Security Troubleshooting Guide", which describes all these issues in great detail. Definitely read through this before converting. Oh yes: I think that if a Windows client has a file open, you won't be able to delete it from the Unix side. You also can't delete a directory which has a Windows share pointing at it. Regards, -- Marion Hakanson <hakanson(a)cse.ogi.edu> CSE Computing Facilities

2 1

Re: NetApps used equipment policies - Service Resourcing Int'l - a reseller
by David Esper 13 Mar '03

13 Mar '03

Dear Toasters, My company Service Resourcing International, Inc is a reseller of Network Appliance hardware. I work hard to provide a positive experience for our customers, and I am happy to work with you, your local dealers and/or Network Appliance directly. Please give me a call if you have any Network Appliance Buy/Sell needs. I also have available F760's with CIFS, NFS Licenses. Guaranteed! Best Regards, David Bransky Service Resourcing International, Inc 4958 Corliss Road Lyndhurst, OH 44124 Tel:(216)382-1400 Fax(216)382-2129 Direct:(216)398-0990 http://www.computer-used.com dbransky(a)ameritech.net WE BUY/SELL: AUSPEX, EMC, HP, NetFRAME, NETWORK APPLIANCE, SGI, STORAGETEK _________________________________________________________________ Tired of spam? Get advanced junk mail protection with MSN 8. http://join.msn.com/?page=features/junkmail

1 0

Re: Storage management
by Alek O. Komarnitsky (N-CSC) 13 Mar '03

13 Mar '03

> From owner-toasters(a)mathworks.com Wed Mar 12 15:35 MST 2003 > From: "Bui, Marcus" <Marcus.Bui(a)aiminvestments.com> > > Hello Toasters, > > I'm looking for a solution to manage the disk space usage on the storage > environment (Windows NT/2000, Netapp Filer, SAN - Sun, Hitachi). Need to > track who is the 'disk hog', duplicate files, keep historical data, etc.. > I'm sure there's more to it. Anyways, have not dealt with any storage > management solution so any suggestion will help. If you are interested in a non-GUI Perl Code solution that will slice-n-dice your storage data in just about any way possible, you might take a look at yadu (Yet Another du) which can be found at: http:/www.komar.org/ -> Misc. Tech Stuff -> yadu alek P.S. If you want to "stretch" your data, you might also take a look at the "Longest Car on the Internet" which is also there ... or simply type "longest car" into Google and go from there! ;-)

1 0

Storage management
by Bui, Marcus 12 Mar '03

12 Mar '03

Hello Toasters, I'm looking for a solution to manage the disk space usage on the storage environment (Windows NT/2000, Netapp Filer, SAN - Sun, Hitachi). Need to track who is the 'disk hog', duplicate files, keep historical data, etc.. I'm sure there's more to it. Anyways, have not dealt with any storage management solution so any suggestion will help. thanks, Marcus Bui

1 0

FAS960/Solaris/Veritas/Oracle
by Brent.Killion＠pinnaclewest.com 12 Mar '03

12 Mar '03

Toasters- Is there anyone out there using FAS960/Solaris/Veritas Foundation Suite/Oracle yet? We are getting ready to begin testing/implementation and I'm looking for some lessons learned specifically on using Snapshots with Oracle backups and LUNs. Thanks, Brent Killion

1 0

RE: Weired Linux error
by Tom Felbinger 12 Mar '03

12 Mar '03

Thanks!!! -----Original Message----- From: Kade, Mike [mailto:Mike.Kade@netapp.com] Sent: Wednesday, March 12, 2003 11:06 AM To: tom.felbinger(a)synopsys.com Subject: RE: Weired Linux error Oops... Here it is. http://www.fys.uio.no/~trondmy/src/ Mike ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- ------- Serving Data By Design - Network Appliance, Inc Michael Kade Technology Evangelist (480) 510-8002 mkade(a)netapp.com -----Original Message----- From: Tom Felbinger [mailto:tom.felbinger@synopsys.com] Sent: Wednesday, March 12, 2003 8:48 AM To: Kade, Mike Subject: RE: Weired Linux error Mike, Thanks, but I'm not finding the link you mentioned. Just to be clear, all my nfs mounts are thru the automounter, both autofs and amd. autofs uses udp by default, but amd used tcp by default. I modified the /etc/amd.net file to use udp instead. If memory serves me correctly, I did interactively mount the filer using tcp and still encountered the data corruption. I've very interested in resolving this and look forward to the link. Thanks to all for their input. Tom -----Original Message----- From: Kade, Mike [mailto:Mike.Kade@netapp.com] Sent: Tuesday, March 11, 2003 3:18 PM To: tom.felbinger(a)synopsys.com Subject: RE: Weired Linux error Tom, The following link is for the approved patches for NFS (this is the home website for the developer/maintainer of Linux NFS). A lot of these patches were actually done by NetApp. NetApp has spent quite a bit of time looking at Linux issues with NFS over the last year. A lot of this work shows up in these patches. Regards, Mike ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- ------- Serving Data By Design - Network Appliance, Inc Michael Kade Technology Evangelist (480) 510-8002 mkade(a)netapp.com -----Original Message----- From: Tom Felbinger [mailto:tom.felbinger@synopsys.com] Sent: Tuesday, March 11, 2003 7:04 AM To: toasters(a)mathworks.com Subject: RE: Weired Linux error A couple folks mentioned running NFS over TCP for linux. However, I've encountered data corruption (i.e. running a filer hosted binary will core dump) with RH 7.1 and 7.2 with NFS over TCP. Is there some patch/kernel rev/something I need to apply??? I stopped pursuing this because RedHat and NetApp said this was a known issue. Sounds like some people have it working though. Tom -----Original Message----- From: owner-toasters(a)mathworks.com [mailto:owner-toasters@mathworks.com]On Behalf Of Steve Losen Sent: Monday, March 10, 2003 6:04 PM To: toasters(a)mathworks.com Subject: Re: Weired Linux error > A few RedHat 7.2 nfs clients mounting a F840 volume via automount error out with > the following. I have looked into everyting including NIS timeouts, filer > sysstat, network performance and everything looks to be fine. Intrestingly all > the other non linux Clients accessing the same auto-mount are working perfectly. > > > Mar 9 06:35:12 linuxclient kernel: nfs: server filer OK > Mar 9 06:35:13 linuxclient last message repeated 52 times > Mar 9 06:35:31 linuxclient kernel: nfs: server filer not responding, still > trying > Mar 9 06:35:41 linuxclient kernel: nfs: server filer OK > Mar 9 06:35:54 linuxclient kernel: nfs: server filer not responding, still > trying > Mar 9 06:36:34 linuxclient kernel: nfs: server filer OK > Mar 9 06:36:46 linuxclient kernel: nfs: server filer not responding, still > trying > Mar 9 06:38:36 linuxclient kernel: nfs: task 41929 can't get a request slot > Mar 9 06:38:41 linuxclient kernel: nfs: task 43328 can't get a request slot Be sure you are mounting with the "tcp" flag. We have found that a Linux NFS v3 client using udp has this problem, but it goes away if you use tcp. I think Linux defaults to udp. You may need to enable tcp on the filer with options nfs.tcp.enable on

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