toasters

toasters@lists.teaparty.net

13520 discussions

trunking questions
by pdunkin＠lucent.com 29 Jan '03

29 Jan '03

First, thanks again to all who responded to my questions about migration to a new switch. The next question concerns NetApp support for trunking. Our F760 has two quad Ethernet cards, and our F740 has one. Each group of four is currently trunked together, and we would like to keep them that way. The guy in charge of the new switch wants to know how NetApps support groupings: port based, address based, or round robin? This <http://forums.netapp.com/conversation.asp?tid=1&vid=9553&thd=1&cid=51> says trunking is done on a per MAC address level, but in the archives of this list I saw references to round robin and didn't know if that may also be an option. So, what should I tell the switch manager? And, if it's something that can be administered on the NetApp, what command or commands do you use, with what parameters? I think I understand the vif command, but the versions I have (Release 5.3.4R3 on the F740; Release 5.3.6R2 on the F760) don't seem to have a parameter that selects a trunking algorithm. Thanks! -- Patricia Dunkin Lucent Technologies pdunkin(a)lucent.com 600 Mountain Avenue 2F-213 Phone: 908-582-5843 Murray Hill, NJ 07974-0636 Fax: 908-582-3662

1 0

RE: wafl scan
by jwitham＠takedapharm.com 28 Jan '03

28 Jan '03

We use 'wafl scan reallocate' weekly to reorder our Exchange 5.5 databases. They keep growing, and are over 100GB apiece. The wafl scan reallocate helps our use of SnapManager verifications greatly. We have been known to run it in the middle of the day, but with a big performance hit (as you have seen). Haven't tried it in conjunction with SnapMirror. Just for grins, we also use 'wafl scan measure_layout' before and after the reallocate to ensure that we've accomplished something. We affectionately refer to the process as 'reshuffling the wafl house'. HTH, -john -----Original Message----- From: Ambrose_Earle(a)shamrockfoods.com [mailto:Ambrose_Earle@shamrockfoods.com] Sent: Thursday, January 23, 2003 7:28 PM To: toasters(a)mathworks.com Subject: wafl scan Does anyone have any (good) experience with the wafl scan commands? I am testing Snapmirror and used it to mirror 7x34's to 10x34's. Of course, the data was only written to the first seven drives, so I used 'wafl scan reallocate <volume>' and it seemed to improve the layout quite dramatically. Is this a good use of the command? Other than affecting performance, I'm assuming everything is accessible during the run of this command? Thanks in advance, This message is for the designated recipient only and may contain privileged or confidential information. If you have received it in error, please notify the sender immediately and delete the original. Any other use of the email by you is prohibited.

1 0

On Board Fiber Channel performance
by Walter Ellinthorpe 28 Jan '03

28 Jan '03

I have Filers in several locations. My newest installation has a noticeable DECREASE in performance. Of all the possible factors (OS version, network hardware/software etc..) the only common denominator is that all of my previous installations have filers with two PCI Fiber Channel Cards and the filers in the new location use One PCI Fiber Channel card and one On-Board Fiber Channel adapter. Are there any known issues with using the on-board Fiber Channel adapter vs. PCI Fiber Channel adapters ?? Thanks in advance, --Walter Ellinthorpe -- =============================================================== | Walter Ellinthorpe United Messaging Field Engineer | | Walter.Ellinthorpe(a)UnitedMessaging.com (W) 703-234-5305 | | 13800 Coppermine Road Suite 279 Herndon, VA 20171 |

3 2

RE: Backup performances
by matej.moskon＠ourspace.si 28 Jan '03

28 Jan '03

Yes, I do backups on DLT 4500 drive and I use DLT IV media (40/80 GB). When I produce some aditionaly load thrue NFS, I can write on DLT as much fast as you are (5MB/s), but with no load (except backup), I get 500kB/s. Isn't that wierd? -----Original Message----- From: Jeff Burton [mailto:burtonj@pprd.abbott.com] Sent: Monday, January 27, 2003 3:54 PM To: toasters(a)mathworks.com Subject: Re: Backup performances Assuming you are backing up to tape, how many and what type of tape drives are you writing to? We are mostly backing up to DLT's and they max out around 5555kB/s. I have never used OmniBak Disk Agent, but in NetBackup we increased the number of data streams to 4 so we can get about 80GB an hour. -------------------------------------------------------------- Jeff Burton UNIX Administrator Dept. GB34/Bldg. AP9A-LL EMAIL: burtonj(a)pprd.abbott.com Abbott Laboratories PHONE: 847-935-5778 100 Abbott Park Rd. FAX: 847-935-0142 Abbott Park, IL 60064-6115 On Mon, Jan 27, 2003 at 09:51:22AM +0100, matej.moskon(a)ourspace.si wrote: > Hi toasters! > > I'm facing with very odd performance issue during the backup of snapshots. I have OmniBak Disk Agent instaled on HP-UX 11.0 and F740 DOT 6.0.1R3 when I start with backup procedure, the performances are as follow (sysstat 2): > > CPU NFS CIFS HTTP Net kB/s Disk kB/s Tape kB/s Cache > 21% 179 12 0 113 1061 2205 0 0 0 1 > 19% 207 8 0 167 1153 1132 0 0 0 1 > 21% 127 8 0 114 555 1473 868 0 0 1 > 17% 128 51 0 118 514 525 0 0 0 1 > 16% 114 15 0 124 319 353 0 0 0 1 > 16% 109 11 0 116 347 656 0 0 0 1 > 16% 123 5 0 127 308 369 0 0 0 1 > 20% 168 10 0 117 894 878 844 0 0 1 > 16% 115 5 0 143 331 543 0 0 0 1 > 16% 123 12 0 138 283 241 0 0 0 2 > 18% 147 9 0 131 623 1370 0 0 0 2 > 29% 364 7 0 183 2970 6333 0 0 0 2 > > As you can see, there is practicaly no network traffic. When I perform more load on Filer thrue HP server (such as tar or copy data on filer), the speed of writing on LTO is about 10 times faster: > > CPU NFS CIFS HTTP Net kB/s Disk kB/s Tape kB/s Cache > 76% 1093 41 0 388 23459 22188 1114 0 0 0 > 69% 1065 8 0 296 23111 22049 0 0 0 0 > 65% 735 6 0 342 20897 20332 0 0 0 0 > 58% 673 14 0 270 17603 17106 0 0 0 0 > 68% 869 48 0 257 22127 21323 0 0 0 0 > 82% 1020 50 0 7776 14957 13749 1315 0 0 0 > 77% 925 15 0 3213 13063 13185 8583 0 0 0 > 76% 1163 10 0 350 25681 24400 0 0 0 0 > 67% 986 63 0 389 19134 19058 0 0 0 0 > 68% 922 288 0 315 19461 18464 0 0 0 0 > 66% 943 101 0 248 20260 18998 0 0 0 0 > 75% 1067 9 0 277 23741 23182 458 0 0 0 > 79% 1025 14 0 270 22664 22671 4621 0 0 0 > 76% 891 24 0 236 26903 25523 0 0 0 0 > 80% 1064 164 0 314 26847 25485 0 0 0 0 > > > Do you have any idea what is going on? > > > Matej > > > > > > ---------------------------------------- > Matej Moškon > Our Space Appliances d.o.o. > Tbilisijska 59, 1111 Ljubljana > email: matej.moskon(a)ourspace.si > tel: + 386 01 24 25 392 > faks: + 386 01 24 25 382 > http://www.ourspace.si > ---------------------------------------- >

1 0

RE: Can Autosupport use multiple MailHosts?
by Mohler, Jeff 28 Jan '03

28 Jan '03

RR is half correct, use MX. Will ASUP honor MX tables???/ -----Original Message----- From: Alan McLachlan [mailto:amclachlan@asi.com.au] Sent: Monday, January 27, 2003 5:14 PM To: Borders, Rich Cc: toasters(a)mathworks.com Subject: RE: Can Autosupport use multiple MailHosts? Hi Rich, 10 Points for quick thinking, but Round Robin DNS is BAD BAD BAD - for nearly everything. Why? Because it doesn't do health checks or test responses. (just ask your own NetCache guys, Brian or Kurt or someone, about why they recommend L4-7 switches rather than RRDNS for load balancing web servers). If you have only one mailhost listed on the filer, it will only make one attempt to send the autosupport email. If that hostname is rotated via RRDNS to multiple real servers, then if one of those real servers fails 1/N autosupport emails (where N is the number of real servers) will fail to go anywhere. If that happens to be a critical message (i.e. major component failure or overheating), you don't want to be responsible for the message not getting through. Using multiple mailhosts in the list on the filer itself is much safer. regards, Alan McLachlan Senior Systems Engineer Storage Management Solutions NetAppCA#0000019, FCNE ASI Solutions www.asi.com.au Ph +61 2 6230 1566 Fax +61 2 6230 5343 Mobile +61 428 655644 e-mail amclachlan(a)asi.com.au -----Original Message----- From: Borders, Rich [mailto:Rich.Borders@netapp.com] Sent: Tuesday, 28 January 2003 5:48 AM To: 'Walter Ellinthorpe'; Chris Thompson Cc: toasters(a)mathworks.com; david.lugo(a)unitedmessaging.com Subject: RE: Can Autosupport use multiple MailHosts? Round robin dns would work also. Network Appliance Technical Support Engineer rborders(a)netapp.com Telephone: 1-919-993-5866 Hotline: 1-888-4-NETAPP Working Hrs.: SUNDAY - WEDNESDAY 7:00 AM to 6:00 PM EDT Get answers NOW! - Netapp On the Web - http://now.netapp.com <http://now.netapp.com/> Everyone at Network Appliance is committed to the highest level of customer satisfaction. If at any time you feel that you're less than very satisfied with our support please contact my manager Richard Bondranko at 919-993-5837 or rbond(a)netapp.com. -----Original Message----- From: Walter Ellinthorpe [mailto:walter.ellinthorpe@unitedmessaging.com] Sent: Monday, January 27, 2003 12:33 PM To: Chris Thompson Cc: toasters(a)mathworks.com; david.lugo(a)unitedmessaging.com Subject: Re: Can Autosupport use multiple MailHosts? Thanks, One more Question: the only way I was able to get autosupport to work when I set these filers up was to have an entry in the /etc/hosts file looking something like this.... 192.168.1.16 SMTP-A mailhost So, to use multiple smtp hosts, would I need to have entries like.... 192.168.1.16 SMTP-A mailhost 192.168.1.17 SMTP-B mailhost 192.168.1.18 SMTP-C mailhost 192.168.1.19 SMTP-D mailhost Thanks again, --Walter Chris Thompson wrote: walter.ellinthorpe(a)unitedmessaging.com <mailto:walter.ellinthorpe@unitedmessaging.com> (Walter Ellinthorpe) writes: I have NetApp Filers from Chicago to South Carolina and I use Autosupport to keep track of the health and happiness of each one. They all have multiple SMTP servers on their local LAN. 1. Can I configure the Filers to use multiple SMTP gateways (e.g. if SMTP-A fails, try SMTP-B. If SMTP-B fails try SMTP-C... etc.)? 2. If this CAN be done, how do I configure the Filers to do this? options autosupport.mailhost SMTP-A,SMTP-B,SMTP-C The na_options(1) man page says there can be up to five hosts in the comma-separated list. I have used it successfully with three. Chris Thompson Email: cet1(a)cam.ac.uk <mailto:cet1@cam.ac.uk> -- =============================================================== | Walter Ellinthorpe United Messaging Field Engineer | | Walter.Ellinthorpe(a)UnitedMessaging.com <mailto:Walter.Ellinthorpe@UnitedMessaging.com> (W) 703-234-5305 | | 13800 Coppermine Road Suite 279 Herndon, VA 20171 | **** ASI Solutions Disclaimer **** The material transmitted may contain confidential and/or privileged material and is intended only for the addressee. If you receive this in error, please notify the sender and destroy any copies of the material immediately. ASI will protect your Privacy according to the 10 Privacy Principles outlined under the new Privacy Act, Dec 2001. This email is also subject to copyright. Any use of or reliance upon this material by persons or entities other than the addressee is prohibited. E-mails may be interfered with, may contain computer viruses or other defects. Under no circumstances do we accept liability for any loss or damage which may result from your receipt of this message or any attachments. **** END OF MESSAGE ****

1 0

Re: On Board Fiber Channel performance
by Walter Ellinthorpe 28 Jan '03

28 Jan '03

Art, Do you know of any documentation that I can refer to for precise comparisons? Thanks for everything, --Walter Art Hebert wrote: >It is my understanding that you should stay away from the onboard fiber >port. You can buy cards pretty cheap on ebay > >art > > >-----Original Message----- >From: Walter Ellinthorpe [mailto:walter.ellinthorpe@unitedmessaging.com] >Sent: Monday, January 27, 2003 1:13 PM >To: toasters(a)mathworks.com >Cc: David Lugo >Subject: On Board Fiber Channel performance > > >I have Filers in several locations. My newest installation has a >noticeable DECREASE in performance. > >Of all the possible factors (OS version, network hardware/software >etc..) the only common denominator is that all of my previous >installations have filers with two PCI Fiber Channel Cards and the >filers in the new location use One PCI Fiber Channel card and one >On-Board Fiber Channel adapter. > >Are there any known issues with using the on-board Fiber Channel adapter >vs. PCI Fiber Channel adapters ?? > >Thanks in advance, > >--Walter Ellinthorpe > > > -- =============================================================== | Walter Ellinthorpe United Messaging Field Engineer | | Walter.Ellinthorpe(a)UnitedMessaging.com (W) 703-234-5305 | | 13800 Coppermine Road Suite 279 Herndon, VA 20171 |

1 0

RE: Can Autosupport use multiple MailHosts?
by Alan McLachlan 28 Jan '03

28 Jan '03

Hi Rich, 10 Points for quick thinking, but Round Robin DNS is BAD BAD BAD - for nearly everything. Why? Because it doesn't do health checks or test responses. (just ask your own NetCache guys, Brian or Kurt or someone, about why they recommend L4-7 switches rather than RRDNS for load balancing web servers). If you have only one mailhost listed on the filer, it will only make one attempt to send the autosupport email. If that hostname is rotated via RRDNS to multiple real servers, then if one of those real servers fails 1/N autosupport emails (where N is the number of real servers) will fail to go anywhere. If that happens to be a critical message (i.e. major component failure or overheating), you don't want to be responsible for the message not getting through. Using multiple mailhosts in the list on the filer itself is much safer. regards, Alan McLachlan Senior Systems Engineer Storage Management Solutions NetAppCA#0000019, FCNE ASI Solutions www.asi.com.au Ph +61 2 6230 1566 Fax +61 2 6230 5343 Mobile +61 428 655644 e-mail amclachlan(a)asi.com.au -----Original Message----- From: Borders, Rich [mailto:Rich.Borders@netapp.com] Sent: Tuesday, 28 January 2003 5:48 AM To: 'Walter Ellinthorpe'; Chris Thompson Cc: toasters(a)mathworks.com; david.lugo(a)unitedmessaging.com Subject: RE: Can Autosupport use multiple MailHosts? Round robin dns would work also. Network Appliance Technical Support Engineer rborders(a)netapp.com Telephone: 1-919-993-5866 Hotline: 1-888-4-NETAPP Working Hrs.: SUNDAY - WEDNESDAY 7:00 AM to 6:00 PM EDT Get answers NOW! - Netapp On the Web - http://now.netapp.com <http://now.netapp.com/> Everyone at Network Appliance is committed to the highest level of customer satisfaction. If at any time you feel that you're less than very satisfied with our support please contact my manager Richard Bondranko at 919-993-5837 or rbond(a)netapp.com. -----Original Message----- From: Walter Ellinthorpe [mailto:walter.ellinthorpe@unitedmessaging.com] Sent: Monday, January 27, 2003 12:33 PM To: Chris Thompson Cc: toasters(a)mathworks.com; david.lugo(a)unitedmessaging.com Subject: Re: Can Autosupport use multiple MailHosts? Thanks, One more Question: the only way I was able to get autosupport to work when I set these filers up was to have an entry in the /etc/hosts file looking something like this.... 192.168.1.16 SMTP-A mailhost So, to use multiple smtp hosts, would I need to have entries like.... 192.168.1.16 SMTP-A mailhost 192.168.1.17 SMTP-B mailhost 192.168.1.18 SMTP-C mailhost 192.168.1.19 SMTP-D mailhost Thanks again, --Walter Chris Thompson wrote: walter.ellinthorpe(a)unitedmessaging.com <mailto:walter.ellinthorpe@unitedmessaging.com> (Walter Ellinthorpe) writes: I have NetApp Filers from Chicago to South Carolina and I use Autosupport to keep track of the health and happiness of each one. They all have multiple SMTP servers on their local LAN. 1. Can I configure the Filers to use multiple SMTP gateways (e.g. if SMTP-A fails, try SMTP-B. If SMTP-B fails try SMTP-C... etc.)? 2. If this CAN be done, how do I configure the Filers to do this? options autosupport.mailhost SMTP-A,SMTP-B,SMTP-C The na_options(1) man page says there can be up to five hosts in the comma-separated list. I have used it successfully with three. Chris Thompson Email: cet1(a)cam.ac.uk <mailto:cet1@cam.ac.uk> -- =============================================================== | Walter Ellinthorpe United Messaging Field Engineer | | Walter.Ellinthorpe(a)UnitedMessaging.com <mailto:Walter.Ellinthorpe@UnitedMessaging.com> (W) 703-234-5305 | | 13800 Coppermine Road Suite 279 Herndon, VA 20171 | **** ASI Solutions Disclaimer **** The material transmitted may contain confidential and/or privileged material and is intended only for the addressee. If you receive this in error, please notify the sender and destroy any copies of the material immediately. ASI will protect your Privacy according to the 10 Privacy Principles outlined under the new Privacy Act, Dec 2001. This email is also subject to copyright. Any use of or reliance upon this material by persons or entities other than the addressee is prohibited. E-mails may be interfered with, may contain computer viruses or other defects. Under no circumstances do we accept liability for any loss or damage which may result from your receipt of this message or any attachments. **** END OF MESSAGE ****

1 0

RE: Permissions on Folder are incorrectly ordered error
by Kevin Skelly 27 Jan '03

27 Jan '03

I experienced this same issue with XCACLS when I was planning our file migration to our filers (from NetWare) about a year ago. XCACLS just doesn't do the job, so I used a utility called REACL.EXE to set the permissions instead. Highly recommended! -----Original Message----- From: Hight, Steve - Perot [mailto:SHight@chw.edu] Sent: Monday, January 27, 2003 11:35 AM To: 'toasters(a)mathworks.com' Subject: Permissions on Folder are incorrectly ordered error After migrating a lot of data I used xcacls.exe on a CIFS only filer to recursively set the permissions on a huge volume of home directories. I am now having the symptoms described in MS article http://support.microsoft.com/default.aspx?scid=kb;en-us;296865 <http://support.microsoft.com/default.aspx?scid=kb;en-us;296865> . When I view the permissions, I get the following error: The permissions on xxxx are incorrectly ordered, which may cause some entries to be ineffective. Click OK to continue and sort the permission correctly, or press CANCEL to reset the permissions. Microsoft Says: This problem can occur because Windows 2000 has introduced a new inheritance model in which directly applied access control entries (ACEs) have precedence over inherited ACEs. The computer implements this precedence by placing directly applied ACEs ahead of inherited ACEs in a discretionary access control list (DACL). Earlier versions of Microsoft Windows NT did not distinguish between inherited and directly applied ACEs. When you use Subinacl to set the permission to grant full permission, the ACE is put at the end of the access control list (ACL). Because the ACE is directly applied, when you view the permission in Registry Editor, you can receive an error message as the ACE must be placed ahead of the other inherited ACEs. Subinacl does not arrange the ACEs properly. Any ideas? Thank you, Steve Hight perotsystems

1 0

RE: Adding Disk to Volume
by Michael Schipp 27 Jan '03

27 Jan '03

Hi Steve, You can use these two commands the first will check to see if you need to reallocate and second will do the job :) wafl scan measure_layout <vol | file> wafl scan reallocate <vol | file> Thank you Michael A Schipp ASI Solutions IT LAN/WAN Administrator E-Mail : mschipp(a)asi.com.au Visit us at http://www.asi.com.au -----Original Message----- From: Steve Evans [mailto:sevans@foundation.sdsu.edu] Sent: Tuesday, 28 January 2003 4:59 AM To: toasters(a)mathworks.com Subject: Adding Disk to Volume Okay I know this has been brought up lately, but I'm not sure what the outcome of it was. I need to add a disk to my root volume. What should I do (or should I do anything) to spread the data across the new disk evenly? Steve Evans SDSU Foundation (619) 594-0653 **** ASI Solutions Disclaimer **** The material transmitted may contain confidential and/or privileged material and is intended only for the addressee. If you receive this in error, please notify the sender and destroy any copies of the material immediately. ASI will protect your Privacy according to the 10 Privacy Principles outlined under the new Privacy Act, Dec 2001. This email is also subject to copyright. Any use of or reliance upon this material by persons or entities other than the addressee is prohibited. E-mails may be interfered with, may contain computer viruses or other defects. Under no circumstances do we accept liability for any loss or damage which may result from your receipt of this message or any attachments. **** END OF MESSAGE ****

1 0

Permissions on Folder are incorrectly ordered error
by Hight, Steve - Perot 27 Jan '03

27 Jan '03

After migrating a lot of data I used xcacls.exe on a CIFS only filer to recursively set the permissions on a huge volume of home directories. I am now having the symptoms described in MS article http://support.microsoft.com/default.aspx?scid=kb;en-us;296865 <http://support.microsoft.com/default.aspx?scid=kb;en-us;296865> . When I view the permissions, I get the following error: The permissions on xxxx are incorrectly ordered, which may cause some entries to be ineffective. Click OK to continue and sort the permission correctly, or press CANCEL to reset the permissions. Microsoft Says: This problem can occur because Windows 2000 has introduced a new inheritance model in which directly applied access control entries (ACEs) have precedence over inherited ACEs. The computer implements this precedence by placing directly applied ACEs ahead of inherited ACEs in a discretionary access control list (DACL). Earlier versions of Microsoft Windows NT did not distinguish between inherited and directly applied ACEs. When you use Subinacl to set the permission to grant full permission, the ACE is put at the end of the access control list (ACL). Because the ACE is directly applied, when you view the permission in Registry Editor, you can receive an error message as the ACE must be placed ahead of the other inherited ACEs. Subinacl does not arrange the ACEs properly. Any ideas? Thank you, Steve Hight perotsystems

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