toasters

toasters@lists.teaparty.net

13520 discussions

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

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

12 Mar '03

From: Tom Felbinger [mailto:tom.felbinger@synopsys.com] Sent: Wednesday, March 12, 2003 10:48 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

CIFS getattr load
by Todd C. Merrill 11 Mar '03

11 Mar '03

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 ---

1 0

ClearCase 5.x on NetApp, mixed NFS/CIFS setup issues
by John Stoffel 11 Mar '03

11 Mar '03

Hi all, We're starting to roll out a new ClearCase instance here, and we're taking advantage of the support between Rational and Network Appliance to put all the data onto our F760 running 6.3.1 with both NFS and CIFS licenses. The VOB and View servers just run the lock managers and other processes. The clients (NT and Linux) just access the storage directly from the NetApp after getting the info they need from the VOB/View servers. We've setup a seperate volume for ClearCase (CC) VOBs and VIEWs with 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 And we've tried to use the following cifs options: > options cifs cifs.audit.enable off cifs.audit.file_access_events.enable on cifs.audit.logon_events.enable on cifs.audit.logsize 524288 cifs.audit.saveas /etc/log/adtlog.evt cifs.bypass_traverse_checking on cifs.comment cifs.guest_account cifs.home_dir cifs.home_dir_namestyle cifs.idle_timeout 1800 cifs.max_mpx 50 cifs.netbios_aliases cifs.netbios_over_tcp.enable on cifs.nfs_root_ignore_acl on cifs.oplocks.enable on cifs.oplocks.opendelta 8 cifs.per_client_stats.enable off cifs.perm_check_ro_del_ok on cifs.perm_check_use_gid on cifs.restrict_anonymous.enable off cifs.save_case on cifs.scopeid cifs.search_domains cifs.show_snapshot off cifs.shutdown_msg_level 2 cifs.sidcache.enable on cifs.sidcache.lifetime 1440 cifs.snapshot_file_folding.enable off cifs.symlinks.cycleguard on cifs.symlinks.enable on cifs.trace_login off cifs.wins_servers X,Y,Z Along with the following for share security: tswtoast> cifs shares Name Mount Point Description ---- ----------- ----------- vobstg /vol/ccvol/vobstg everyone / Full Control mss-ccase{g} / Full Control mss-eng{g} / Full Control NA05\sa106068ccalbd / Full Control viewstg /vol/ccvol/viewstg everyone / Full Control mss-eng{g} / Full Control NA05\sa106068ccalbd / Full Control clearcase /vol/vol0/clearcase everyone / Full Control Any hints or help would be appreciated. Thanks, John John Stoffel - Senior Unix Systems Administrator - Lucent Technologies stoffel(a)lucent.com - http://www.lucent.com - 978-399-0479

2 1

RE: Snmp traps
by Yee, Steven 11 Mar '03

11 Mar '03

netapp.mib describes the Network Appliance custom MIB which includes the built-in traps that a NetApp appliance may send (assuming you have snmp configured correctly) traps.dat is an *aid* that provides a short name to numeric OID mapping for most of the netapp.mib variables (its not so good for table entries) that can be used if you wish to create custom, user-defined snmp traps via the 'snmp traps' command. steve. -----Original Message----- From: Rune Bakken [mailto:rb@telenor.net] Sent: Tuesday, March 11, 2003 6:41 AM To: Asbjørn Bjørkelund Cc: toasters(a)mathworks.com Subject: Re: Snmp traps Asbjørn Bjørkelund <asbjorn.bjorkelund(a)proact.no> writes: > Hello Toasters > > We are looking for some help for defining snmp traps, or to be more correct > is there anybody who has already created > lists with traps. i'm looking for 6-7 traps for example for Clusters: this > filer is dead, Clusters: CFO this filer cannot takeover, CFO partner may be > down, > disk failed, power supply failed. Have you checked the files under filer:/etc/mib/ netapp.min traps.dat ?? >>>>>>.rune -- Rune Bakken Senior System Administrator Telenor Business Solutions (Nextra), ManagedServices/*/IP-Services http://ips.telenor.net/

1 0

CIFS shares and auditing
by Geoff Hardin 11 Mar '03

11 Mar '03

Toasters, Let me start by stating that I am a UNIX admin and I administer my filers strictly by command line or scripts we've written. Most of our data is shared via NFS with a few CIFS shares setup on only a couple filers. That said, a user want a log of who accesses his share and which files were viewed/changed. Reading the man pages and the admin guide for ONTAP 6.1, it appears that the best/only solution is the cifs.audit.enable option. I have enabled this per the instructions in the System Administrators Guide (http://now.netapp.com/NOW/knowledge/docs/ontap/rel61r1/html/sag/cifs36.htm#…). According to this document, you can turn auditing on in five simple steps. My problem is with step number 4: "Activate access auditing for individual files and directories according to your Windows documentation." Since I'm a UNIX admin, I don't understand the Windows aspect of filer administration. I tried getting our NT admins to take a look at it, but they say they can't set the file and directory auditing on the filer using the User Manager tool (the menu items under the Policies menu are unselectable). I have tried creating a non-root, administrative account using the useradmin console command, but that left them with fewer rights on the filer than as the domain admin. Any help or pointers would be greatly appreciated. Thanks, Geoff Hardin geoff.hardin(a)dalsemi.com This space is for rent in order to increase company revenue.

1 0

Weired Linux error
by Premanshu Jain 11 Mar '03

11 Mar '03

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

6 7

Re: Snmp traps
by Rune Bakken 11 Mar '03

11 Mar '03

Asbjørn Bjørkelund <asbjorn.bjorkelund(a)proact.no> writes: > Hello Toasters > > We are looking for some help for defining snmp traps, or to be more correct > is there anybody who has already created > lists with traps. i'm looking for 6-7 traps for example for Clusters: this > filer is dead, Clusters: CFO this filer cannot takeover, CFO partner may be > down, > disk failed, power supply failed. Have you checked the files under filer:/etc/mib/ netapp.min traps.dat ?? >>>>>>.rune -- Rune Bakken Senior System Administrator Telenor Business Solutions (Nextra), ManagedServices/*/IP-Services http://ips.telenor.net/

1 0

RE: Weired Linux error
by Touretsky, Gregory 11 Mar '03

11 Mar '03

What are your mount options? We run NFS over TCP on all our machines, including hundreds of RH7.1 Linux boxes. No data corruption so far (or at least, we hope so ;-) -- Gregory -----Original Message----- From: Tom Felbinger [mailto:tom.felbinger@synopsys.com] Sent: Tuesday, March 11, 2003 4:04 PM 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

Re: Network Appliance's used equipment policies
by ScottUCE＠aol.com 11 Mar '03

11 Mar '03

Hello, Dan: NetApp's "Used-Equipment Support" policy described at http://www.netapp.com/support/ues.html does not support the following claims that are being made by some NetApp reps: 1) "The installation of used NetApp add-ons will void your filer's maintenance service agreement" 2) "If you buy used NetApp add-ons, you will be required to pay NetApp's recertification fee, even if you elect not to place these add-ons under your existing NetApp service contract" 3) "Used NetApp gear can only be purchased from "authorized" NetApp dealers" 4) "3rd party maintenance coverage is not allowed, as it will void your filer's software license agreement" 5) "Allowing hardware or software coverage to lapse will void your filer's software license agreement" We acknowledge that NetApp's standard policy is very clear with regard to "used software." However, NetApp makes exceptions, and as you know, Union Computer has resold many NetApp filers with transferable NFS, CIFS and CLUSTER licenses where Network Appliance actually processes the license transfers, free of charge. 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: Network Appliance's used equipment policies > Date:3/9/2003 8:33:57 PM Central Standard Time > From:<A HREF="mailto:Dan.Warmenhoven@netapp.com">Dan.Warmenhoven(a)netapp.com</A> > To:<A HREF="mailto:ScottUCE@aol.com">ScottUCE(a)aol.com</A>, <A HREF="mailto:toasters@mathworks.com">toasters(a)mathworks.com</A> > CC:<A HREF="mailto:scott@unioncomputer.com">scott(a)unioncomputer.com</A>, <A HREF="mailto:Andy.Kryder@netapp.com">Andy.Kryder(a)netapp.com</A>, <A HREF="mailto:Steven.Gomo@netapp.com">Steven.Gomo(a)netapp.com</A>, > <A HREF="mailto:mark.santora@netapp.com">mark.santora(a)netapp.com</A>, <A HREF="mailto:Valentin.Bercovici@netapp.com">Valentin.Bercovici(a)netapp.com</A> > Sent from the Internet > > > > Scott, > > I must disagree with your claims. Our used equipment policy is clearly > documented, and is not as you stated. I suggest you read it at: > <A HREF="http://www.netapp.com/support/ues.html">http://www.netapp.com/support/ues.html</A> > > Dan Warmenhoven > > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ > Dan Warmenhoven dan(a)netapp.com > Chief Executive Officer phone: 408-822-6600 > Network Appliance, Inc. fax: 408-822-6603 > > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ > > > > > -----Original Message----- > From: ScottUCE(a)aol.com [mailto:ScottUCE@aol.com] > Sent: Sunday, March 09, 2003 2:47 PM > To: toasters(a)mathworks.com > Cc: scott(a)unioncomputer.com > Subject: Network Appliance's used equipment policies > > > An active secondary market is developing for NetApp systems, parts, add-ons > and maintenance. This market is enabling NetApp users to save money on > current products as well as to secure out-of-production features, parts and > add-ons that are no longer available from Network Appliance. > > Unfortunately -- and with increasing frequency -- we are hearing of NetApp > sales reps making false statements about NetApp's used equipment policies. > Examples are: > > > 1) "The installation of used NetApp add-ons will void your filer's > maintenance service agreement" > > 2) "If you buy used NetApp add-ons, you will be required to pay NetApp's > recertification fee, even if you elect not to place these add-ons under > your existing NetApp service contract" > > 3) "Used NetApp gear can only be purchased from "authorized" NetApp > dealers" > > 4) "3rd party maintenance coverage is not allowed, as it will void your > filer's software license agreement" > > 5) "Allowing hardware or software coverage to lapse will void your filer's > software license agreement" > > 6) "NetApp has never negotiated transferable protocol licenses on new filer > purchases." > > > Should you ever be confronted with claims such as these, you might want to > ask your NetApp rep to put them > in writing ;-) > > > 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 >

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