toasters

toasters@lists.teaparty.net

13520 discussions

oracle does not respond during the failover of 960c
by ilya.birman＠abnamro.com 21 Feb '03

21 Feb '03

We have a clustered node of 960c. During the failover, when we issue cf takeover, all ORACLE DB's became unresponsive, you can not attach yourself to DB at all until the giveback. During the failover, you can browse the mount points, create file on shares etc. I am sure we have tested this out before on other clustered nodes. Completely puzzled why these nodes are not working properly. Can anyone suggest anything please Ilya --------------------------------------------------------------------------- This message (including any attachments) is confidential and may be privileged. If you have received it by mistake please notify the sender by return e-mail and delete this message from your system. Any unauthorised use or dissemination of this message in whole or in part is strictly prohibited. Please note that e-mails are susceptible to change. ABN AMRO Bank N.V. (including its group companies) shall not be liable for the improper or incomplete transmission of the information contained in this communication nor for any delay in its receipt or damage to your system. ABN AMRO Bank N.V. (or its group companies) does not guarantee that the integrity of this communication has been maintained nor that this communication is free of viruses, interceptions or interference. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------

1 0

FW: DataONTAP and Solaris 8 NIS Update
by Brent.Killion＠pinnaclewest.com 21 Feb '03

21 Feb '03

Toasters- An update on this posting I made last month: We discovered that by disabling Solaris IP Network Multipathing which we use on the Solaris 8 NIS master and slave to provide network redundancy, the filers bind successfully. Just curious out of the respondents who said "I'm using Solaris 8 NIS and DataONTAP just fine", is there anyone else who is using the Solaris 8 IPNM functionality with NIS and DataONTAP? Thanks, The Outlaw Filer Admin -----Original Message----- From: Killion, Brent (Z03173) Sent: Friday, January 31, 2003 4:10 PM To: toasters(a)mathworks.com Subject: DataONTAP and Solaris 8 NIS Update Toasters- A rather interesting update for everyone on the problem I posted yesterday with an 880c and FAS960c clusters that refused to bind to a Solaris 8 NIS server. Just to help us isolate the problem between OS and NIS, we initialized a Solaris 2.6 system, as a NIS slave to the Solaris 8 NIS server that we couldn't get the filers to bind to. Surprisingly, the FAS960c bound with no problems to the Solaris 2.6 NIS slave. To us, this rules out a configuration issue with the NIS domain itself and focuses the problem back to an apparent Solaris 8 NIS/DataONTAP incompatibility. I was somewhat surprised that no one replied that they are using Solaris 8 NIS with DataONTAP. I have updated the tech support case I have opened with both Sun and NetApp and I'll keep the list informed as the solution moves along. Thanks, Brent Killion

2 1

RE: DataONTAP and Solaris 8 NIS Update
by ray.griffith＠bt.com 21 Feb '03

21 Feb '03

We have been using NIS+ on a Solaris 2.6 environment for 5 years and NIS+ on a separate environment for over a year with no issues at all. (Both in compatibility mode) We regard to the NIS Group update issue it is probably a line in the group file that is over 1024 characters in length. We have this happen regularly and the effect is that people have access problems usually via CIFS. We have to "manage" the entry to less than 1024 characters and the group update works OK. This will eventually cause us a problem as there is only so much slack in the one entry that we can take out. There is no way that we can split the group as it is used to manage access to a third party product. One to watch for... :) Ray Griffith -----Original Message----- From: Clawson, Simon [mailto:simon_clawson@mentorg.com] Sent: 21 February 2003 09:44 To: 'Brent.Killion(a)pinnaclewest.com'; toasters(a)mathworks.com Subject: RE: DataONTAP and Solaris 8 NIS Update Hi, We have been using a Solaris 8 NIS Slave, and a Solaris 2.6 NIS Master for over a year now. We have no major hassles, though I do see a message in the syslog on the filer - Fri Feb 21 00:00:55 GMT [nis_grp_updater:warning]: NIS group map has invalid entry in line 7. Continuing to build Local NIS Group Cache. Fri Feb 21 00:00:55 GMT [nis_grp_updater:warning]: NIS group map has invalid entry in line 27. Continuing to build Local NIS Group Cache. Which I guess is due to some spurious entry in the group file. I will eventually sort this out (maybe even today) but apart from that there seems to be no NIS issues at all. FYI, I just did a ypwhich on the filer and it binds to the Solaris 8 slave. Recently we had NT PDC issues, and the only way onto the filer was by NFS mounted shares, so it seems to be as robust as ever. Simon -----Original Message----- From: Brent.Killion(a)pinnaclewest.com [mailto:Brent.Killion@pinnaclewest.com] Sent: 31 January 2003 23:10 To: toasters(a)mathworks.com Subject: DataONTAP and Solaris 8 NIS Update Toasters- A rather interesting update for everyone on the problem I posted yesterday with an 880c and FAS960c clusters that refused to bind to a Solaris 8 NIS server. Just to help us isolate the problem between OS and NIS, we initialized a Solaris 2.6 system, as a NIS slave to the Solaris 8 NIS server that we couldn't get the filers to bind to. Surprisingly, the FAS960c bound with no problems to the Solaris 2.6 NIS slave. To us, this rules out a configuration issue with the NIS domain itself and focuses the problem back to an apparent Solaris 8 NIS/DataONTAP incompatibility. I was somewhat surprised that no one replied that they are using Solaris 8 NIS with DataONTAP. I have updated the tech support case I have opened with both Sun and NetApp and I'll keep the list informed as the solution moves along. Thanks, Brent Killion

1 0

RE: DataONTAP and Solaris 8 NIS Update
by Clawson, Simon 21 Feb '03

21 Feb '03

Hi, We have been using a Solaris 8 NIS Slave, and a Solaris 2.6 NIS Master for over a year now. We have no major hassles, though I do see a message in the syslog on the filer - Fri Feb 21 00:00:55 GMT [nis_grp_updater:warning]: NIS group map has invalid entry in line 7. Continuing to build Local NIS Group Cache. Fri Feb 21 00:00:55 GMT [nis_grp_updater:warning]: NIS group map has invalid entry in line 27. Continuing to build Local NIS Group Cache. Which I guess is due to some spurious entry in the group file. I will eventually sort this out (maybe even today) but apart from that there seems to be no NIS issues at all. FYI, I just did a ypwhich on the filer and it binds to the Solaris 8 slave. Recently we had NT PDC issues, and the only way onto the filer was by NFS mounted shares, so it seems to be as robust as ever. Simon -----Original Message----- From: Brent.Killion(a)pinnaclewest.com [mailto:Brent.Killion@pinnaclewest.com] Sent: 31 January 2003 23:10 To: toasters(a)mathworks.com Subject: DataONTAP and Solaris 8 NIS Update Toasters- A rather interesting update for everyone on the problem I posted yesterday with an 880c and FAS960c clusters that refused to bind to a Solaris 8 NIS server. Just to help us isolate the problem between OS and NIS, we initialized a Solaris 2.6 system, as a NIS slave to the Solaris 8 NIS server that we couldn't get the filers to bind to. Surprisingly, the FAS960c bound with no problems to the Solaris 2.6 NIS slave. To us, this rules out a configuration issue with the NIS domain itself and focuses the problem back to an apparent Solaris 8 NIS/DataONTAP incompatibility. I was somewhat surprised that no one replied that they are using Solaris 8 NIS with DataONTAP. I have updated the tech support case I have opened with both Sun and NetApp and I'll keep the list informed as the solution moves along. Thanks, Brent Killion

1 0

RE: Adding two DS14 Disks to a filer with FC7 & FC9 shelves
by Paul McGuinness (ext. 771) 20 Feb '03

20 Feb '03

We have a DS-14 connected to a set of FC-9 shelves. The only issue I remember was making sure that you have your shelf ID's are correct and the last DS-14 shelf properly terminated. Apart from that everything else was fairly straightforward. (there is a useful little pullout card on front of the DS-14 with LED error codes for the DS-14 - check this if you are having any problems) Paul -----Original Message----- From: Eisler, Alex [mailto:alex.eisler@intel.com] Sent: 20 February 2003 11:14 To: Clawson, Simon Cc: toasters(a)mathworks.com Subject: RE: Adding two DS14 Disks to a filer with FC7 & FC9 shelves As far as I can remember, You can't connect a DS14 to a chain that contains an FC7 or FC8 - But I may be mistaken... Anyhow, the DS14 should be the last shelf in the chain, with the shelves going from the oldest (connected to the filer) to the newest. This change requires the filer to be turned off, but any other DS14 you add can be added live afterwards. The connection method is the same for all shelves - there's an "IN" port and "OUT" port on each shelf, and you should only have one "out" port on your FC9, which you connect to the "in" port on the DS14. Just make sure the termination on the DS14 is on. Alex. -----Original Message----- From: Clawson, Simon [mailto:simon_clawson@mentorg.com] Sent: Thursday, February 20, 2003 12:40 To: 'toasters(a)mathworks.com' Subject: Adding two DS14 Disks to a filer with FC7 & FC9 shelves Hi, We are adding two DS14 disk shelves to an F760 this weekend, which already has two FC7 and one FC9 shelves. The FC9 is the last shelf in the current chain. The documentation on how to connect the shelves up is a bit ambiguous. Do we connect the DS14 to the first LRC module on the FC9? etc etc. Has anyone connected these disks in this way? Thanks Simon Simon Clawson Mentor Graphics HDL Designer Series R&D Rivergate Systems Administrator London Road Berkshire RG14 2QB TEL: 01635 811409 ************************************************************************** The information contained in this e-mail is confidential, may be privileged and is intended only for the use of the recipient named above. If you are not the intended recipient or a representative of the intended recipient, you have received this e-mail in error and must not copy, use or disclose the contents of this email to anybody else. If you have received this e-mail in error, please notify the sender immediately by return e-mail and permanently delete the copy you received. This email has been swept for computer viruses. However, you should carry out your own virus checks. Registered in Ireland, No. 205721. http://www.FINEOS.com **************************************************************************

1 0

SV: snapmirror.conf, destination_filer must be the "hostname"
by Öberg Mats 20 Feb '03

20 Feb '03

Hi, You can use the local hosts files on the filers to "rename" the interfaces so that filer2-e4 points to filer2-e0's ipaddress. ---- Mats -----Ursprungligt meddelande----- Från: Lim, Weng Kiam [mailto:wklim@rand.com] Skickat: den 20 februari 2003 10:04 Till: toasters(a)mathworks.com Ämne: snapmirror.conf, destination_filer must be the "hostname" Hi All, Currently I am having production data traffic and snapmirror traffic both using the Gigabit interface: Source Target Filer1-e0 Filer2-e0 (100Base-T) (inactive) Filer1-e4 Filer2-e4 (Gigabit) Had been trying to set a private network using the inactive onboard interface just to do the snapmirror. Existing snapmirror.conf of Filer2 Filer1-e4:vol1 Filer2-e4:vol1 - 0 5,9,10,11,12,13,14,15,16,17,18,21 * 1,2,3,4,5,6 New snapmirror.conf of Filer2 Filer1-e0:vol1 Filer2-e0:vol1 - 0 5,9,10,11,12,13,14,15,16,17,18,21 * 1,2,3,4,5,6 However, the hostname of Filer2 is Filer2-e4 and the snapmirror destination has to be the hostname according to the DPG, meaning I can't have an exclusive 100Base-T for the snapmirror traffic. The error is /etc/snapmirror.conf: line 2 destination filer "Filer2-e0" does not match hostname "Filer2-e4", ignoring line Is there any way to make this work? Thanks Lim

1 0

RE: Adding two DS14 Disks to a filer with FC7 & FC9 shelves
by Eisler, Alex 20 Feb '03

20 Feb '03

As far as I can remember, You can't connect a DS14 to a chain that contains an FC7 or FC8 - But I may be mistaken... Anyhow, the DS14 should be the last shelf in the chain, with the shelves going from the oldest (connected to the filer) to the newest. This change requires the filer to be turned off, but any other DS14 you add can be added live afterwards. The connection method is the same for all shelves - there's an "IN" port and "OUT" port on each shelf, and you should only have one "out" port on your FC9, which you connect to the "in" port on the DS14. Just make sure the termination on the DS14 is on. Alex. -----Original Message----- From: Clawson, Simon [mailto:simon_clawson@mentorg.com] Sent: Thursday, February 20, 2003 12:40 To: 'toasters(a)mathworks.com' Subject: Adding two DS14 Disks to a filer with FC7 & FC9 shelves Hi, We are adding two DS14 disk shelves to an F760 this weekend, which already has two FC7 and one FC9 shelves. The FC9 is the last shelf in the current chain. The documentation on how to connect the shelves up is a bit ambiguous. Do we connect the DS14 to the first LRC module on the FC9? etc etc. Has anyone connected these disks in this way? Thanks Simon Simon Clawson Mentor Graphics HDL Designer Series R&D Rivergate Systems Administrator London Road Berkshire RG14 2QB TEL: 01635 811409

1 0

Adding two DS14 Disks to a filer with FC7 & FC9 shelves
by Clawson, Simon 20 Feb '03

20 Feb '03

Hi, We are adding two DS14 disk shelves to an F760 this weekend, which already has two FC7 and one FC9 shelves. The FC9 is the last shelf in the current chain. The documentation on how to connect the shelves up is a bit ambiguous. Do we connect the DS14 to the first LRC module on the FC9? etc etc. Has anyone connected these disks in this way? Thanks Simon Simon Clawson Mentor Graphics HDL Designer Series R&D Rivergate Systems Administrator London Road Berkshire RG14 2QB TEL: 01635 811409

1 0

RE: Snapmanager for Exchange
by Simon Probert 20 Feb '03

20 Feb '03

We had 6 x 150 GB information stores and it took in excess of 10 hours per store so we stopped doing the verification. It deosn't really do anything anyway excpet get NetApp a tick in the box for MS support. We have successfully verified a corrpupted 5.5 database. It is possible to snaprestore an exchange database and then manually ship the logs yourself. It then plays all the logs forward to the time of the failure. There are a number of MS support articles that will help you understand how to do this but the Disaster recovery Whitepaper for Exchange 5.5 is probably the best. Good Luck. -----Original Message----- From: Jay Newton (Email) Sent: 02/20/2003 12:33:45 To: 'toasters(a)mathworks.com' [SMTP:toasters@mathworks.com] Subject: Snapmanager for Exchange For those that run Snapmanager for Exchange, what size are your Exchange databases and how long does it take to verify them? It is taking us 5.5 hours to verify a 100 gig InfoStore. I'd like to know what others are experiencing. Thanks! F840 DOT 6.2.2d8 Exchange 5.5 SP4 SME 1.1 Private GIG network for verification and database transactions ____________________________________________________________________ CAUTION - This message may contain privileged and confidential information intended only for the use of the addressee named above. If you are not the intended recipient of this message you are hereby notified that any use, dissemination, distribution or reproduction of this message is prohibited. If you have received this message in error please notify Air New Zealand immediately. Any views expressed in this message are those of the individual sender and may not necessarily reflect the views of Air New Zealand. _____________________________________________________________________ For more information on the Air New Zealand Group, visit us online at http://www.airnewzealand.com _____________________________________________________________________ _____ This e-mail message has been scanned and cleared by MailMarshal at gen-i limited www.gen-i.co.nz _____

1 0

Snapmanager for Exchange
by Jay Newton (Email) 19 Feb '03

19 Feb '03

For those that run Snapmanager for Exchange, what size are your Exchange databases and how long does it take to verify them? It is taking us 5.5 hours to verify a 100 gig InfoStore. I'd like to know what others are experiencing. Thanks! F840 DOT 6.2.2d8 Exchange 5.5 SP4 SME 1.1 Private GIG network for verification and database transactions

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