toasters

toasters@lists.teaparty.net

13531 discussions

RE: One more netbackup question...
by Joe Luchtenberg 11 Apr '02

11 Apr '02

Following reply re Unix ACLs came directly to me from NetApp: <<snip>> There is going to be unified ACL support when NFSv4 finally comes out. By this, all OS will be able to support ACL over NFS, if they speak version 4. Go http://www.ietf.org and try and find out more if you choose. <<end snip>> Asked for clarification whether it necessarily follows that when NFSv4 is adopted and the various Unices come out with standard ACLs that ONTAP will preserve those ACLs when backing up via CIFS. Will post reply when received. Joe Joe Luchtenberg Dataline, Inc. Email: joe.luchtenberg(a)data-line.com Phone: 757-457-0504 (direct line) 757-858-0600 (front desk) 757-285-1223 (mobile) Fax: 757-858-0606 Please visit us at www.data-line.com > -----Original Message----- > From: kevin graham [mailto:kgraham@dotnetdotcom.org] > Sent: Wednesday, April 10, 2002 3:08 PM > To: Joe Luchtenberg > Cc: toasters(a)mathworks.com > Subject: RE: One more netbackup question... > > > > On Wed, 10 Apr 2002, Joe Luchtenberg wrote: > > > > Previously ONTAP did not support Unix ACLs, because of their diverse > > implementations. However, I thought newer versions of NFS > were supposed > > to address this. What's the current status of ONTAP > support for Unix > > ACLs? If Unix ACLs are supported, then are they preserved, too? > > (speaking only for Solaris) ACL's are processed over nfs via > nfs_acl (RPC > service 100227). Looking at a 6.2 filer now, I don't see that its even > registered, so it would be a safe guess that its still not > supported at > all. > > ObCIFS_NFS_InteropNightmare: I guess if it did that would > require a new > qtree security model, 'mixed_up'. > > ..kg.. >

1 0

home dirs can not be found for ftp users who are authenticated by NIS
by Zhonghua-Dennis.Huang＠nokia.com 11 Apr '02

11 Apr '02

Hi all, I use NIS to authenticate UNIX users, of course the users' home dirs are on my F840 filer, which look like /mount point/user name. However, my users request to access the filer via ftp, this time I also want to authenticate users by NIS, but only to find the users can not find their home directories. I know I have to configure their home dirs like /vol/vol0/home/..., but I don't think it is possible to do that at my NIS server. Is there another way to do that ? Could anybody give me a piece of good advice ? Thanks advance.

1 0

RE: One more netbackup question...
by Joe Luchtenberg 10 Apr '02

10 Apr '02

DISCLAIMER: Non-engineer speaking -- alarm bells should be ringing... It was my understanding that CIFS will preserve standard Unix Read/Write/Execute file permissions. However, does the filer even support Solaris ACLs? Not sure which other flavors of Unix have similar features (at least AIX does, and I would suspect essentially all do; different implementations, though). Previously ONTAP did not support Unix ACLs, because of their diverse implementations. However, I thought newer versions of NFS were supposed to address this. What's the current status of ONTAP support for Unix ACLs? If Unix ACLs are supported, then are they preserved, too? TIA. Joe Joe Luchtenberg Dataline, Inc. Email: joe.luchtenberg(a)data-line.com Phone: 757-457-0504 (direct line) 757-858-0600 (front desk) 757-285-1223 (mobile) Fax: 757-858-0606 Please visit us at www.data-line.com > -----Original Message----- > From: Breniser, Larry [mailto:larry_breniser@mentorg.com] > Sent: Wednesday, April 10, 2002 12:45 PM > To: 'Coder, James (STP)'; 'Stephen Manley'; 'Surlow, Jim' > Cc: 'Alfred Lim'; 'toasters(a)mathworks.com' > Subject: RE: One more netbackup question... > > > > One more time? > > I have been told that backing up over CIFS will preserve UNIX > permissions > (see: http://www.netapp.com/tech_library/3052.html) > > I stand corrected! > > LB > > > > -----Original Message----- > From: Breniser, Larry > Sent: Wednesday, April 10, 2002 8:18 AM > To: 'Coder, James (STP)'; 'Stephen Manley'; 'Surlow, Jim' > Cc: 'Alfred Lim'; 'toasters(a)mathworks.com' > Subject: RE: One more netbackup question... > > > > I heard that I may have phrased this badly, and now that I > read it I agree. Let me try again. > > If you CIFS at your site, then the NT permissions may be > important to you. If you back up over NFS, you will not > capture the NT permissions on tape. Of course, if you back > up over CIFS, the UNIX permissions are not captured. > > LB > > > -----Original Message----- > From: Breniser, Larry > Sent: Tuesday, April 09, 2002 2:48 PM > To: 'Coder, James (STP)'; 'Stephen Manley'; Surlow, Jim > Cc: 'Alfred Lim'; toasters(a)mathworks.com > Subject: RE: One more netbackup question... > > > > The disadvantage (if you use CIFS) is tht the Windows > security information is not backed up. > > LB > > -----Original Message----- > From: Coder, James (STP) [mailto:James.Coder@guidant.com] > Sent: Monday, April 08, 2002 2:48 PM > To: 'Stephen Manley'; Surlow, Jim > Cc: 'Alfred Lim'; toasters(a)mathworks.com > Subject: RE: One more netbackup question... > > > Another solution while waiting for netbackup and dar to come > about- if you > are using the filer in an nfs environment, you can nfs mount > the directories > / volumes. We've been doing this for the past 2 years and have good > performance - we also run the backups over a separate backup > lan running > gig. The advantage is you don't have to dedicate the drives to the > filer(s), you can break up the volumes to little more > manageable sizes (use > bpstart / bpend scripts - downside is you don't have the > speed you get from > ndmp. did some testing when we put our 760 into place 2 > years ago and made > the decision then to use nfs. > > also don't know if DAR will allow you to not dedicate drives to the > filer(s). > > cheers - jc > > James C. Coder > Sr. UNIX Administrator > Guidant Corporation > 4100 Hamline Avenue North > St. Paul, MN 55112 > Tel: 651-582-4797 Fax 651-582-4285 > email: james.coder(a)guidant.com > > > > -----Original Message----- > From: Stephen Manley [mailto:stephen@netapp.com] > Sent: Friday, April 05, 2002 5:49 AM > To: Surlow, Jim > Cc: 'Alfred Lim'; toasters(a)mathworks.com > Subject: RE: One more netbackup question... > > > Most of what you say is correct, but Ontap 6.0 and greater > supports DAR, > due to NDMP allowing for cooperation between NDMP client and > NDMP server. > > > When you run the backup, the filer sends "file history" > information to the > NDMP client. This information allows the NDMP client (Legato, Veritas, > WorkStation Solutions, ArcServe, etc) to create the index of > files in the > backup _and_ their location in the backup stream (byte offset). > > Meanwhile, the NDMP clients also track the amount of data > written to each > tape. So, when you do a DAR, the NDMP client tells the NDMP > server (e.g. > the filer) the list of files it wants restored and the > offsets of those > files. The filer and the NDMP client cooperate to load and > position the > tape to those offsets. > > At each offset, the filer will extract the data and restore > the requested > file. > > Which means: > A) If you run an NDMP backup without file history (i.e. indexing) you > can't run a direct access restore. > B) To run a DAR, you need the functionality from the client > and server. > C) DAR is _possible_ using NDMP V2, V3, and V4 (all these versions > support file history and the other commands necessary for DAR) > D) Data Ontap 6.0 and greater supports DAR. > > > Hopefully this helps, > Stephen Manley > Member of the NDMP version of the Osmond family > > On Thu, 4 Apr 2002, Surlow, Jim wrote: > > > Even though Networker might support DAR, does OnTap? > > > > I did some research on this a while back (so my info may be > dated), but my > > understanding is this: > > > > The backup server initiates the NDMP command to the Filer > (or other NDMP > > device), the OS on that device then begins to send data to > tape by using > > means that it is aware of. In the case of OnTap, it uses > the typical Unix > > dump command. > > > > With dump/restore, there is no index created, thus, to > recover, one has to > > scan from the beginning of tape of the first tape in the > dump set until > the > > data is found (on whatever tape). And the user waiting for > the file will > > likely hope that their file is closer to the first part of > the first tape > > rather than the last part of the last tape. > > > > Netbackup & Networker will have an index knowing which NDMP > tape set that > a > > file is on, but I would guess that they would have no idea > as to which > tape > > in the set it is - or where on that tape (set: being number > of tapes for > > that night's incremental, full, whatever). > > > > If I'm off base, please clarify. > > > > Thanks, > > > > Jim Surlow > > CSG Systems > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Alfred Lim [mailto:alfred@ptc.net] > > Sent: Thursday, April 04, 2002 10:23 AM > > To: toasters(a)mathworks.com > > Subject: Re: One more netbackup question... > > > > > > Well one thing for Legato Networker, > > it support NDMP V3 and have this DAR feature. > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: "Jeff Kennedy" <jlkennedy(a)amcc.com> > > To: Don.Hickey(a)alcatel.com > > Date: Thu, 04 Apr 2002 08:56:46 -0800 > > Subject: Re: One more netbackup question... > > > > > Get a new backup software? The problem is that some > vendors do not > > > support Direct Access Restore, meaning it will search > through every tape > > > starting at the first and scan the whole thing. If no DAR, you're > > > basically bummed. > > > > > > Do you use snapshots? If you have the space it is a life-saver at > > > times. > > > > > > ~JK > > > > > > Don.Hickey(a)alcatel.com wrote: > > > > > > > > I find restoring from a tape extraordinarly slowwwww. > I have home > > > > directories on a clustered pair of F840 running 6.1.1r2. I have > > > > several volumes at about 300gb usable. When I need to > restore a file > > > > from a users directory it can take up to 6+ hours (DLT > 8000). It > > > > appears most of the time is taken searching for the > files... is there > > > > anything you can suggest (including any white papers) > to speed up this > > > > process? > > > > > > > > thanks again > > > > > > > > Don > > > > > > -- > > > ===================== > > > Jeff Kennedy > > > Unix Administrator > > > AMCC > > > jlkennedy(a)amcc.com > > > > >

2 1

RE: One more netbackup question...
by Breniser, Larry 10 Apr '02

10 Apr '02

One more time? I have been told that backing up over CIFS will preserve UNIX permissions (see: http://www.netapp.com/tech_library/3052.html) I stand corrected! LB -----Original Message----- From: Breniser, Larry Sent: Wednesday, April 10, 2002 8:18 AM To: 'Coder, James (STP)'; 'Stephen Manley'; 'Surlow, Jim' Cc: 'Alfred Lim'; 'toasters(a)mathworks.com' Subject: RE: One more netbackup question... I heard that I may have phrased this badly, and now that I read it I agree. Let me try again. If you CIFS at your site, then the NT permissions may be important to you. If you back up over NFS, you will not capture the NT permissions on tape. Of course, if you back up over CIFS, the UNIX permissions are not captured. LB -----Original Message----- From: Breniser, Larry Sent: Tuesday, April 09, 2002 2:48 PM To: 'Coder, James (STP)'; 'Stephen Manley'; Surlow, Jim Cc: 'Alfred Lim'; toasters(a)mathworks.com Subject: RE: One more netbackup question... The disadvantage (if you use CIFS) is tht the Windows security information is not backed up. LB -----Original Message----- From: Coder, James (STP) [mailto:James.Coder@guidant.com] Sent: Monday, April 08, 2002 2:48 PM To: 'Stephen Manley'; Surlow, Jim Cc: 'Alfred Lim'; toasters(a)mathworks.com Subject: RE: One more netbackup question... Another solution while waiting for netbackup and dar to come about- if you are using the filer in an nfs environment, you can nfs mount the directories / volumes. We've been doing this for the past 2 years and have good performance - we also run the backups over a separate backup lan running gig. The advantage is you don't have to dedicate the drives to the filer(s), you can break up the volumes to little more manageable sizes (use bpstart / bpend scripts - downside is you don't have the speed you get from ndmp. did some testing when we put our 760 into place 2 years ago and made the decision then to use nfs. also don't know if DAR will allow you to not dedicate drives to the filer(s). cheers - jc James C. Coder Sr. UNIX Administrator Guidant Corporation 4100 Hamline Avenue North St. Paul, MN 55112 Tel: 651-582-4797 Fax 651-582-4285 email: james.coder(a)guidant.com -----Original Message----- From: Stephen Manley [mailto:stephen@netapp.com] Sent: Friday, April 05, 2002 5:49 AM To: Surlow, Jim Cc: 'Alfred Lim'; toasters(a)mathworks.com Subject: RE: One more netbackup question... Most of what you say is correct, but Ontap 6.0 and greater supports DAR, due to NDMP allowing for cooperation between NDMP client and NDMP server. When you run the backup, the filer sends "file history" information to the NDMP client. This information allows the NDMP client (Legato, Veritas, WorkStation Solutions, ArcServe, etc) to create the index of files in the backup _and_ their location in the backup stream (byte offset). Meanwhile, the NDMP clients also track the amount of data written to each tape. So, when you do a DAR, the NDMP client tells the NDMP server (e.g. the filer) the list of files it wants restored and the offsets of those files. The filer and the NDMP client cooperate to load and position the tape to those offsets. At each offset, the filer will extract the data and restore the requested file. Which means: A) If you run an NDMP backup without file history (i.e. indexing) you can't run a direct access restore. B) To run a DAR, you need the functionality from the client and server. C) DAR is _possible_ using NDMP V2, V3, and V4 (all these versions support file history and the other commands necessary for DAR) D) Data Ontap 6.0 and greater supports DAR. Hopefully this helps, Stephen Manley Member of the NDMP version of the Osmond family On Thu, 4 Apr 2002, Surlow, Jim wrote: > Even though Networker might support DAR, does OnTap? > > I did some research on this a while back (so my info may be dated), but my > understanding is this: > > The backup server initiates the NDMP command to the Filer (or other NDMP > device), the OS on that device then begins to send data to tape by using > means that it is aware of. In the case of OnTap, it uses the typical Unix > dump command. > > With dump/restore, there is no index created, thus, to recover, one has to > scan from the beginning of tape of the first tape in the dump set until the > data is found (on whatever tape). And the user waiting for the file will > likely hope that their file is closer to the first part of the first tape > rather than the last part of the last tape. > > Netbackup & Networker will have an index knowing which NDMP tape set that a > file is on, but I would guess that they would have no idea as to which tape > in the set it is - or where on that tape (set: being number of tapes for > that night's incremental, full, whatever). > > If I'm off base, please clarify. > > Thanks, > > Jim Surlow > CSG Systems > > -----Original Message----- > From: Alfred Lim [mailto:alfred@ptc.net] > Sent: Thursday, April 04, 2002 10:23 AM > To: toasters(a)mathworks.com > Subject: Re: One more netbackup question... > > > Well one thing for Legato Networker, > it support NDMP V3 and have this DAR feature. > > > -----Original Message----- > From: "Jeff Kennedy" <jlkennedy(a)amcc.com> > To: Don.Hickey(a)alcatel.com > Date: Thu, 04 Apr 2002 08:56:46 -0800 > Subject: Re: One more netbackup question... > > > Get a new backup software? The problem is that some vendors do not > > support Direct Access Restore, meaning it will search through every tape > > starting at the first and scan the whole thing. If no DAR, you're > > basically bummed. > > > > Do you use snapshots? If you have the space it is a life-saver at > > times. > > > > ~JK > > > > Don.Hickey(a)alcatel.com wrote: > > > > > > I find restoring from a tape extraordinarly slowwwww. I have home > > > directories on a clustered pair of F840 running 6.1.1r2. I have > > > several volumes at about 300gb usable. When I need to restore a file > > > from a users directory it can take up to 6+ hours (DLT 8000). It > > > appears most of the time is taken searching for the files... is there > > > anything you can suggest (including any white papers) to speed up this > > > process? > > > > > > thanks again > > > > > > Don > > > > -- > > ===================== > > Jeff Kennedy > > Unix Administrator > > AMCC > > jlkennedy(a)amcc.com > >

1 0

RE: One more netbackup question...
by Breniser, Larry 10 Apr '02

10 Apr '02

I heard that I may have phrased this badly, and now that I read it I agree. Let me try again. If you CIFS at your site, then the NT permissions may be important to you. If you back up over NFS, you will not capture the NT permissions on tape. Of course, if you back up over CIFS, the UNIX permissions are not captured. LB -----Original Message----- From: Breniser, Larry Sent: Tuesday, April 09, 2002 2:48 PM To: 'Coder, James (STP)'; 'Stephen Manley'; Surlow, Jim Cc: 'Alfred Lim'; toasters(a)mathworks.com Subject: RE: One more netbackup question... The disadvantage (if you use CIFS) is tht the Windows security information is not backed up. LB -----Original Message----- From: Coder, James (STP) [mailto:James.Coder@guidant.com] Sent: Monday, April 08, 2002 2:48 PM To: 'Stephen Manley'; Surlow, Jim Cc: 'Alfred Lim'; toasters(a)mathworks.com Subject: RE: One more netbackup question... Another solution while waiting for netbackup and dar to come about- if you are using the filer in an nfs environment, you can nfs mount the directories / volumes. We've been doing this for the past 2 years and have good performance - we also run the backups over a separate backup lan running gig. The advantage is you don't have to dedicate the drives to the filer(s), you can break up the volumes to little more manageable sizes (use bpstart / bpend scripts - downside is you don't have the speed you get from ndmp. did some testing when we put our 760 into place 2 years ago and made the decision then to use nfs. also don't know if DAR will allow you to not dedicate drives to the filer(s). cheers - jc James C. Coder Sr. UNIX Administrator Guidant Corporation 4100 Hamline Avenue North St. Paul, MN 55112 Tel: 651-582-4797 Fax 651-582-4285 email: james.coder(a)guidant.com -----Original Message----- From: Stephen Manley [mailto:stephen@netapp.com] Sent: Friday, April 05, 2002 5:49 AM To: Surlow, Jim Cc: 'Alfred Lim'; toasters(a)mathworks.com Subject: RE: One more netbackup question... Most of what you say is correct, but Ontap 6.0 and greater supports DAR, due to NDMP allowing for cooperation between NDMP client and NDMP server. When you run the backup, the filer sends "file history" information to the NDMP client. This information allows the NDMP client (Legato, Veritas, WorkStation Solutions, ArcServe, etc) to create the index of files in the backup _and_ their location in the backup stream (byte offset). Meanwhile, the NDMP clients also track the amount of data written to each tape. So, when you do a DAR, the NDMP client tells the NDMP server (e.g. the filer) the list of files it wants restored and the offsets of those files. The filer and the NDMP client cooperate to load and position the tape to those offsets. At each offset, the filer will extract the data and restore the requested file. Which means: A) If you run an NDMP backup without file history (i.e. indexing) you can't run a direct access restore. B) To run a DAR, you need the functionality from the client and server. C) DAR is _possible_ using NDMP V2, V3, and V4 (all these versions support file history and the other commands necessary for DAR) D) Data Ontap 6.0 and greater supports DAR. Hopefully this helps, Stephen Manley Member of the NDMP version of the Osmond family On Thu, 4 Apr 2002, Surlow, Jim wrote: > Even though Networker might support DAR, does OnTap? > > I did some research on this a while back (so my info may be dated), but my > understanding is this: > > The backup server initiates the NDMP command to the Filer (or other NDMP > device), the OS on that device then begins to send data to tape by using > means that it is aware of. In the case of OnTap, it uses the typical Unix > dump command. > > With dump/restore, there is no index created, thus, to recover, one has to > scan from the beginning of tape of the first tape in the dump set until the > data is found (on whatever tape). And the user waiting for the file will > likely hope that their file is closer to the first part of the first tape > rather than the last part of the last tape. > > Netbackup & Networker will have an index knowing which NDMP tape set that a > file is on, but I would guess that they would have no idea as to which tape > in the set it is - or where on that tape (set: being number of tapes for > that night's incremental, full, whatever). > > If I'm off base, please clarify. > > Thanks, > > Jim Surlow > CSG Systems > > -----Original Message----- > From: Alfred Lim [mailto:alfred@ptc.net] > Sent: Thursday, April 04, 2002 10:23 AM > To: toasters(a)mathworks.com > Subject: Re: One more netbackup question... > > > Well one thing for Legato Networker, > it support NDMP V3 and have this DAR feature. > > > -----Original Message----- > From: "Jeff Kennedy" <jlkennedy(a)amcc.com> > To: Don.Hickey(a)alcatel.com > Date: Thu, 04 Apr 2002 08:56:46 -0800 > Subject: Re: One more netbackup question... > > > Get a new backup software? The problem is that some vendors do not > > support Direct Access Restore, meaning it will search through every tape > > starting at the first and scan the whole thing. If no DAR, you're > > basically bummed. > > > > Do you use snapshots? If you have the space it is a life-saver at > > times. > > > > ~JK > > > > Don.Hickey(a)alcatel.com wrote: > > > > > > I find restoring from a tape extraordinarly slowwwww. I have home > > > directories on a clustered pair of F840 running 6.1.1r2. I have > > > several volumes at about 300gb usable. When I need to restore a file > > > from a users directory it can take up to 6+ hours (DLT 8000). It > > > appears most of the time is taken searching for the files... is there > > > anything you can suggest (including any white papers) to speed up this > > > process? > > > > > > thanks again > > > > > > Don > > > > -- > > ===================== > > Jeff Kennedy > > Unix Administrator > > AMCC > > jlkennedy(a)amcc.com > >

1 0

Can I watch/check progress of reconstructs?
by Ben Rockwood 09 Apr '02

09 Apr '02

Hello Toasters. I've got a volume that is reconstructing, but I would really like to be able to make estimate on it's time of completion. Generally just a "blah blocks out of blah done" works, since I can do the math to make a logical rough estimate as to the completion time. All I know to do for status during a reconstruct is to use vol status. Is there a better more verbose way that can be issued at will? I suppose you can just watch syslog too, but I'd prefer a command. Btw, I'm open to using a SNMP OID to get the info too, if I knew which IOD is was, and I don't recall any IODs that would tell me. Thanks! brockwood(a)homestead-inc.com

3 2

RE: One more netbackup question...
by Breniser, Larry 09 Apr '02

09 Apr '02

The disadvantage (if you use CIFS) is tht the Windows security information is not backed up. LB -----Original Message----- From: Coder, James (STP) [mailto:James.Coder@guidant.com] Sent: Monday, April 08, 2002 2:48 PM To: 'Stephen Manley'; Surlow, Jim Cc: 'Alfred Lim'; toasters(a)mathworks.com Subject: RE: One more netbackup question... Another solution while waiting for netbackup and dar to come about- if you are using the filer in an nfs environment, you can nfs mount the directories / volumes. We've been doing this for the past 2 years and have good performance - we also run the backups over a separate backup lan running gig. The advantage is you don't have to dedicate the drives to the filer(s), you can break up the volumes to little more manageable sizes (use bpstart / bpend scripts - downside is you don't have the speed you get from ndmp. did some testing when we put our 760 into place 2 years ago and made the decision then to use nfs. also don't know if DAR will allow you to not dedicate drives to the filer(s). cheers - jc James C. Coder Sr. UNIX Administrator Guidant Corporation 4100 Hamline Avenue North St. Paul, MN 55112 Tel: 651-582-4797 Fax 651-582-4285 email: james.coder(a)guidant.com -----Original Message----- From: Stephen Manley [mailto:stephen@netapp.com] Sent: Friday, April 05, 2002 5:49 AM To: Surlow, Jim Cc: 'Alfred Lim'; toasters(a)mathworks.com Subject: RE: One more netbackup question... Most of what you say is correct, but Ontap 6.0 and greater supports DAR, due to NDMP allowing for cooperation between NDMP client and NDMP server. When you run the backup, the filer sends "file history" information to the NDMP client. This information allows the NDMP client (Legato, Veritas, WorkStation Solutions, ArcServe, etc) to create the index of files in the backup _and_ their location in the backup stream (byte offset). Meanwhile, the NDMP clients also track the amount of data written to each tape. So, when you do a DAR, the NDMP client tells the NDMP server (e.g. the filer) the list of files it wants restored and the offsets of those files. The filer and the NDMP client cooperate to load and position the tape to those offsets. At each offset, the filer will extract the data and restore the requested file. Which means: A) If you run an NDMP backup without file history (i.e. indexing) you can't run a direct access restore. B) To run a DAR, you need the functionality from the client and server. C) DAR is _possible_ using NDMP V2, V3, and V4 (all these versions support file history and the other commands necessary for DAR) D) Data Ontap 6.0 and greater supports DAR. Hopefully this helps, Stephen Manley Member of the NDMP version of the Osmond family On Thu, 4 Apr 2002, Surlow, Jim wrote: > Even though Networker might support DAR, does OnTap? > > I did some research on this a while back (so my info may be dated), but my > understanding is this: > > The backup server initiates the NDMP command to the Filer (or other NDMP > device), the OS on that device then begins to send data to tape by using > means that it is aware of. In the case of OnTap, it uses the typical Unix > dump command. > > With dump/restore, there is no index created, thus, to recover, one has to > scan from the beginning of tape of the first tape in the dump set until the > data is found (on whatever tape). And the user waiting for the file will > likely hope that their file is closer to the first part of the first tape > rather than the last part of the last tape. > > Netbackup & Networker will have an index knowing which NDMP tape set that a > file is on, but I would guess that they would have no idea as to which tape > in the set it is - or where on that tape (set: being number of tapes for > that night's incremental, full, whatever). > > If I'm off base, please clarify. > > Thanks, > > Jim Surlow > CSG Systems > > -----Original Message----- > From: Alfred Lim [mailto:alfred@ptc.net] > Sent: Thursday, April 04, 2002 10:23 AM > To: toasters(a)mathworks.com > Subject: Re: One more netbackup question... > > > Well one thing for Legato Networker, > it support NDMP V3 and have this DAR feature. > > > -----Original Message----- > From: "Jeff Kennedy" <jlkennedy(a)amcc.com> > To: Don.Hickey(a)alcatel.com > Date: Thu, 04 Apr 2002 08:56:46 -0800 > Subject: Re: One more netbackup question... > > > Get a new backup software? The problem is that some vendors do not > > support Direct Access Restore, meaning it will search through every tape > > starting at the first and scan the whole thing. If no DAR, you're > > basically bummed. > > > > Do you use snapshots? If you have the space it is a life-saver at > > times. > > > > ~JK > > > > Don.Hickey(a)alcatel.com wrote: > > > > > > I find restoring from a tape extraordinarly slowwwww. I have home > > > directories on a clustered pair of F840 running 6.1.1r2. I have > > > several volumes at about 300gb usable. When I need to restore a file > > > from a users directory it can take up to 6+ hours (DLT 8000). It > > > appears most of the time is taken searching for the files... is there > > > anything you can suggest (including any white papers) to speed up this > > > process? > > > > > > thanks again > > > > > > Don > > > > -- > > ===================== > > Jeff Kennedy > > Unix Administrator > > AMCC > > jlkennedy(a)amcc.com > >

1 0

RE: Can I watch/check progress of reconstructs?
by Drew O'Donnell 09 Apr '02

09 Apr '02

sysconfig -r -----Original Message----- From: Ben Rockwood [mailto:BRockwood@homestead-inc.com] Sent: Tuesday, April 09, 2002 4:47 PM To: toasters(a)mathworks.com Subject: Can I watch/check progress of reconstructs? Hello Toasters. I've got a volume that is reconstructing, but I would really like to be able to make estimate on it's time of completion. Generally just a "blah blocks out of blah done" works, since I can do the math to make a logical rough estimate as to the completion time. All I know to do for status during a reconstruct is to use vol status. Is there a better more verbose way that can be issued at will? I suppose you can just watch syslog too, but I'd prefer a command. Btw, I'm open to using a SNMP OID to get the info too, if I knew which IOD is was, and I don't recall any IODs that would tell me. Thanks! brockwood(a)homestead-inc.com

1 0

secureshare access 3.1 and cmdntapperm not getting perms
by neil lehrer 09 Apr '02

09 Apr '02

hi, has anyone ever seen secureshare access not be able to get permissions for a dir or file? it works thru a cifs drive mapping, but if i use it against a drive mapping created with sun's pc nfs client it comes back with: "Couldn't get permissions for file \\filer\...." or Z:\xxx\europe>cmdntapperm . ---------- 1 4096 04/08/2002 12:10 PM with cmdntapperm. perms are visible from a unix host that has the filer mounted. i suspect it is a problem with the sun client, but it's all we have so i wanted to know if anyone had similar problem. ontap 6.1r1, qtree is unix style. -- thanks.

1 0

RE: NT file permissions lost on shares after logout
by pkeim(contr-ird) 09 Apr '02

09 Apr '02

We've had much success using robocopy version 1.95 available in the Windows 2000 Resource Kit. From the console of the source NT 4 or W2K server, map the Z:\ drive to the appropriate destination volume on the filer. To avoid fragmentation, move the data in two steps -- The /CREATE switch creates a directory tree structure containing zero-length files only. The second pass actually copies the data to the destination. The /SEC switch preserves NTFS permissions. Here's an example . . . PASS ONE robocopy "F:\folderA" "Z:\Accounting_TOP\folderA" /E /SEC /CREATE /R:3 /W:1 /V /LOG:folderA1.TXT PASS TWO robocopy "F:\folderA" "Z:\Accounting_TOP\folderA" /E /SEC /R:3 /W:1 /V /LOG:folderA2.TXT -----Original Message----- From: Wurster, Richard M DSTI [mailto:rick.wurster@SBCCOM.APGEA.ARMY.MIL] Sent: Tuesday, April 09, 2002 11:48 AM To: 'Kitch, David'; 'Pucky, Todd M.'; toasters(a)mathworks.com Subject: RE: NT file permissions lost on shares after logout Definitely Secure Copy (Small Wonders Software) does the job. We migrated a Tb of data successfully last weekend using the product. --Rick Wurster -----Original Message----- From: Kitch, David [ mailto:dkitch@ti.com <mailto:dkitch@ti.com> ] Sent: Tuesday, April 09, 2002 11:21 AM To: 'Pucky, Todd M.'; toasters(a)mathworks.com Subject: RE: NT file permissions lost on shares after logout We haven't had much success copying permissions with ROBOCOPY, even on NT and Win2K. You might try a third party application like SECURECOPY. You might also compare your revision of OnTap to the bug list. Regards, David ----------------------------------------------------- David Kitch Strategic Development Team ITS Design Systems - Texas Instruments Dallas, TX 214-480-1242 dkitch(a)ti.com ----------------------------------------------------- -----Original Message----- From: Pucky, Todd M. [ mailto:Puckyt@timken.com <mailto:Puckyt@timken.com> ] Sent: Tuesday, April 09, 2002 9:49 AM To: toasters(a)mathworks.com Subject: NT file permissions lost on shares after logout I am a rookie on NetApp filers so this may be an easy one for some. I have an F840 filer with mapped NT 4 drives. I used ROBOCOPY.EXE to copy the data to the NetApp box so that file permissions would be maintained. I then went back to my NT box and mapped a drive to the NetApp box. Everything appeared to be fine. I then logged out of the NT box and logged in under a new user ID and all of the NT file permissions were lost. Does anyone have any suggestions on how to maintain these permissions when admins log out. Any suggestions would be appreciated. Thanks. Todd M. Pucky The Timken Company Global Information Systems Programmer/Analyst 330.471.4583 puckyt(a)timken.com ********************************************************************** This message and any attachments are intended for the individual or entity named above. If you are not the intended recipient, please do not forward, copy, print, use or disclose this communication to others; also please notify the sender by replying to this message, and then delete it from your system. The Timken Company **********************************************************************

1 0

Jump to page:

2026

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