toasters

toasters@lists.teaparty.net

13520 discussions

accessing local group
by Bui, Marcus 02 Jan '03

02 Jan '03

All, I have a test F85 (ONTAP 6.2.2) in an NT4 Domain but I am unable to access the local group on the filer. The box was previously in W2K AD but was moved to an NT4 domain. The filer is listed in the domain. I logged as Domain Admin but still get 'access denied' when trying to access the filer's local group. Did 'cifs testdc' and it is authenticating to the correct DC. Any suggestions is appreciated. thanks, Marcus Bui

1 0

CONGRATULATIONS!!!
by ALPHA LOTTERY INTERNATIONAL 02 Jan '03

02 Jan '03

ALPHA LOTTERY INTERNATIONAL FROM: INTERNATIONAL PROMOTION/PRIZE AWARD DEPT. REF: OGS/2311786008/01 BATCH: 14/011/IPD /NL RE: WINNING NOTIFICATION / FINAL NOTICE Sir/Madam We are pleased to inform you of the result of the of the Lottery Winners International programs held on the 1st of January 2003. Your e-mail address attached to ticket number 20511465886-629 with serial number 3772-99 drew lucky numbers 7-14-17-23-31-22 which consequently won in the 2nd category, you have therefore been approved for a lump sum pay out of 1,000,000.00 Euro. (One Million Euro) CONGRATULATIONS!!! Due to mix up of some numbers and names, we ask that you keep your winning information confidential until your claims has been processed and your money Remitted to you. This is part of our security protocol to avoid double claiming and unwarranted abuse of this program by some participants. All participants were selected through a computer ballot system drawn from over 100,000 company and 50,000,000 individual email addresses and names from all over the world. This promotional program takes place every three year. We hope with part of your winning you will take part in our end of year 50 million Euro International lottery. To file for your claim, please contact our fiducially agent MR DUCK HAVARD of the, NORTH ATLANTIC CONSULTANCY TEL:+31-627 431 470 FAX:+31-641 744 645 Email: duckhavard(a)netscape.net Remember, all winning must be claimed not later than 31st of January 2003. After this date all unclaimed funds will be included in the next stake. Please note in order to avoid unnecessary delays and complications please remember to quote your reference number and batch numbers in all correspondence. Furthermore, should there be any change of address do inform our agent as soon as possible. Congratulations once more from our members of staff and thank you for being part of our promotional program. Note: Anybody under the age of 18 is automatically disqualified. Sincerely yours, Mrs. Elizabeth Van Bosch Lottery Coordinator.

1 0

gigabit disappointment
by Piotr KUCHARSKI 31 Dec '02

31 Dec '02

Welcome toasters, I must say I'm pretty disappointed with gigabit. Having ATM OC3 in filer and OC12 in Solaris 2.6 I was getting 12MB/s read. After installing gigabit cards in both it is now max 15MB/s -- I was rather expecting more than 30MB/s. UDP/TCP no matter (well, TCP is a bit slower), rsize and wsize are 32k, so is xfersize. I start to seriously consider buying OC12 for filer and use it for (more or less) back to back connection with that Sun, which might seem to be more effective. (I'll try to get such card for testing, though.) Gigabit in Sun is SunGigabit, in filer is GbE-II in slot 8 (e8: GbE-II is self-configuring - mediatype ignored, so I cannot disable negotation, like I used to in FE). I'm waiting for Sun GigaSwift and perhaps GbE-III, but don't know if it's going to help. Any pieces of advice, perhaps? p. PS Sun processors are 4x450MHz, latest Solaris/GbE patches applied, filer is 740 with 6.2.1 -- Beware of he who would deny you access to information, for in his heart he dreams himself your master. -- Commissioner Pravin Lal http://nerdquiz.sgh.waw.pl/ -- polska wersja quizu dla nerdów ;)

1 0

Slow Solaris 2.6 NFS client
by Dan O'Brien 31 Dec '02

31 Dec '02

Hello, We are having trouble with a Solaris client having slow read performance. Both the Filer, F630 running 5.3.6R2, and Solaris, Ultra 2 running 2.6, client are on 100BT networks coupled thru Linksys EF24G2 Fast Etherswitch. I looked at the obvious, all ethernet devices are in 100BT mode, running full duplex. SUNW,hme0: Using Internal Transceiver SUNW,hme0: 100 Mbps full-duplex Link Up slot 4: 10BaseT/100BaseTX Quad-Ethernet Controller e4a MAC Address: 00:c0:95:e0:2f:48 (100tx-fd-up) Both are running V3 NFS over UDP. I set the filer to nfs.udp.xfersize=8192. (We changed this from the default value with only small improvement in performance.) The filer is serving just a few clients and at this point the only real, demanding, client is this one Sun. Reads are quote slow. Here's what the filer says during this time: mlswfsa> sysstat CPU NFS CIFS HTTP Net kB/s Disk kB/s Tape kB/s Cache in out read write read write age 1% 0 0 0 0 2 42 42 0 0 >60 1% 0 0 0 0 2 45 52 0 0 >60 1% 0 0 0 0 1 27 27 0 0 >60 1% 2 0 0 1 2 15 14 0 0 >60 1% 0 0 0 0 2 43 52 0 0 >60 3% 18 0 0 3 52 197 83 0 0 >60 I do see a some timeouts and retrans on the Solaris box: Client rpc: Connection oriented: calls badcalls badxids timeouts newcreds badverfs 929582 9 1 8 0 0 timers cantconn nomem interrupts 0 0 0 1 Connectionless: calls badcalls retrans badxids timeouts newcreds 28489619 630 323405 5 324069 0 badverfs timers nomem cantsend 0 238992 0 0 Any pointers? Thanks in advance. Dan O'Brien, dmobrien(a)lcsi.net Cell: 614-783-4859 Work: 614-476-8473 Home: 740-927-2178 Pataskala, OH

3 3

RE: Slow Solaris 2.6 NFS client
by Toal, Dave 30 Dec '02

30 Dec '02

Dan, What does iostat -xnp 1 on the sun box look like? Are nfs mounts at 100% busy? 2.6 is a real dog when it comes to concurrent nfs i/o; start a cp in a mounted dir, and ls (from another terminal, cd to that same dir) will hang for 30 seconds sometimes. 2.8, no problem. -- Dave Toal Systems Architect Thomson & Thomson N. Quincy, MA -----Original Message----- From: Dan O'Brien To: 'toasters(a)mathworks.com' Cc: Wijit Siripun Sent: 12/30/02 4:17 PM Subject: Slow Solaris 2.6 NFS client Hello, We are having trouble with a Solaris client having slow read performance. Both the Filer, F630 running 5.3.6R2, and Solaris, Ultra 2 running 2.6, client are on 100BT networks coupled thru Linksys EF24G2 Fast Etherswitch. I looked at the obvious, all ethernet devices are in 100BT mode, running full duplex. SUNW,hme0: Using Internal Transceiver SUNW,hme0: 100 Mbps full-duplex Link Up slot 4: 10BaseT/100BaseTX Quad-Ethernet Controller e4a MAC Address: 00:c0:95:e0:2f:48 (100tx-fd-up) Both are running V3 NFS over UDP. I set the filer to nfs.udp.xfersize=8192. (We changed this from the default value with only small improvement in performance.) The filer is serving just a few clients and at this point the only real, demanding, client is this one Sun. Reads are quote slow. Here's what the filer says during this time: mlswfsa> sysstat CPU NFS CIFS HTTP Net kB/s Disk kB/s Tape kB/s Cache in out read write read write age 1% 0 0 0 0 2 42 42 0 0 >60 1% 0 0 0 0 2 45 52 0 0 >60 1% 0 0 0 0 1 27 27 0 0 >60 1% 2 0 0 1 2 15 14 0 0 >60 1% 0 0 0 0 2 43 52 0 0 >60 3% 18 0 0 3 52 197 83 0 0 >60 I do see a some timeouts and retrans on the Solaris box: Client rpc: Connection oriented: calls badcalls badxids timeouts newcreds badverfs 929582 9 1 8 0 0 timers cantconn nomem interrupts 0 0 0 1 Connectionless: calls badcalls retrans badxids timeouts newcreds 28489619 630 323405 5 324069 0 badverfs timers nomem cantsend 0 238992 0 0 Any pointers? Thanks in advance. Dan O'Brien, dmobrien(a)lcsi.net Cell: 614-783-4859 Work: 614-476-8473 Home: 740-927-2178 Pataskala, OH

1 0

Weird error
by July ＠ Zerowait 30 Dec '02

30 Dec '02

Hi. Anyone ever seen output like this on booting a F700 series filer? If so, how do I get rid of it!!!? TIA-- July ----------------------- NetApp Release 6.2.1: Tue Jun 25 01:22:35 PDT 2002 Copyright (c) 1992-2002 Network Appliance, Inc. Starting boot on Thu Dec 26 16:56:30 GMT 2002 Thu Dec 26 16:57:09 GMT [net_e0:info]: Ethernet e0: Link up. Thu Dec 26 16:57:09 GMT [snmp.link.up:debug]: Interface 1 is up fm_run: completed stage B4ASSIM Thu Dec 26 16:57:19 GMT [fmmbx_instanceWorke:info]: Disk 7.4 is a primary mailbo x disk Thu Dec 26 16:57:19 GMT [fmmbx_instanceWorke:info]: Disk 7.3 is a primary mailbo x disk Thu Dec 26 16:57:19 GMT [fmmbx_instanceWorke:info]: normal mailbox instance on p rimary side fm_run: completed stage 1 processing Loading volume vol0 fm_run: completed stage 2 processing fm_run: completed stage 3 processing Thu Dec 26 16:57:22 GMT [rc:notice]: The system was down for 136 seconds Thu Dec 26 16:57:26 GMT [ems.engine.startReplay:info]: Replay begins for EMS boo t-time cache Thu Dec 26 16:57:26 GMT [ems.engine.endReplay:info]: Replay ends for EMS boot-ti me cache July Linett Zerowait Corporation tel: 302.266.9408

2 1

NearStore questions
by Haber, David J. 27 Dec '02

27 Dec '02

I'm setting up a new R100 and I'm hoping someone can clarify a few things for me: 1. I was told by a NetApp sales engineer to reserve 4 disks for spares. This sounded like overkill to me. Does anyone have an opinion about this? 2. After the NearStore disks are right sized, how much usable space is left? 3. Is it a bad thing to have the root volume contain data? I will be using the NearStore to store radiology images. The image files are large, static files.

4 3

snapshot_for_backup problem
by Leigh David Heyman 24 Dec '02

24 Dec '02

Hi, I have a snapshot_for_backup which snap list reports as "busy" but it's not. There's no backups currently running. However, when I try to delete this snapshot I get "Snapshot in use by dump or a CIFS share." I've confirmed that dump is not running, nor are any of the cifs sessions touching it. How can I get rid of this snapshot? My snap reserve is about to get dangerously full. Thanks, -Leigh

9 10

RE: snapshot_for_backup problem
by John Clear 20 Dec '02

20 Dec '02

DataOnTap below version <mumble> has this problem. Unfortunately, the only way to clear it is to reboot and then delete it. IIRC, it was fixed in 6.0 or 6.1, since we haven't seen it in awhile. John -----Original Message----- From: Leigh David Heyman To: toasters(a)mathworks.com Sent: 12/20/2002 10:35 AM Subject: snapshot_for_backup problem Hi, I have a snapshot_for_backup which snap list reports as "busy" but it's not. There's no backups currently running. However, when I try to delete this snapshot I get "Snapshot in use by dump or a CIFS share." I've confirmed that dump is not running, nor are any of the cifs sessions touching it. How can I get rid of this snapshot? My snap reserve is about to get dangerously full. Thanks, -Leigh

1 0

RE: snapshot_for_backup problem
by Toal, Dave 20 Dec '02

20 Dec '02

Leigh, Has the filer been rebooted since the snap was created? I've seen failed ndmp (netbackup) jobs leave them in this state, ndmpd status showed none, but reboot killed/closed something. -- Dave Toal Systems reenignE Thomson & Thomson N. Quincy, MA -----Original Message----- From: Leigh David Heyman To: toasters(a)mathworks.com Sent: 12/20/02 1:35 PM Subject: snapshot_for_backup problem Hi, I have a snapshot_for_backup which snap list reports as "busy" but it's not. There's no backups currently running. However, when I try to delete this snapshot I get "Snapshot in use by dump or a CIFS share." I've confirmed that dump is not running, nor are any of the cifs sessions touching it. How can I get rid of this snapshot? My snap reserve is about to get dangerously full. Thanks, -Leigh

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