toasters

toasters@lists.teaparty.net

1 participants
13528 discussions

Adding disks to existing aggregates
by Woods, Bill 25 Feb '15

25 Feb '15

Unfortunately this is an older system running older 7 code. Next time I have the opportunity to perform this task, I'll check with the GUI first. Thanks, Bill =================================== Please consider the environment before printing this e-mail Cleveland Clinic is ranked as one of the top hospitals in America by U.S.News & World Report (2014). Visit us online at http://www.clevelandclinic.org for a complete listing of our services, staff and locations. Confidentiality Note: This message is intended for use only by the individual or entity to which it is addressed and may contain information that is privileged, confidential, and exempt from disclosure under applicable law. If the reader of this message is not the intended recipient or the employee or agent responsible for delivering the message to the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution or copying of this communication is strictly prohibited. If you have received this communication in error, please contact the sender immediately and destroy the material in its entirety, whether electronic or hard copy. Thank you.

1 0

Multiple vCenter VSC installations facing the same storage targets?
by RM 25 Feb '15

25 Feb '15

Supported configuration? We're carving off a dev VMware environment that will continue to leverage the production NetApps. This new dev cluster will have its own vCenter plus VSC. Can multiple VSCs point to the same storage targets? RM

2 1

FAS3270 SP max password length
by Momonth 25 Feb '15

25 Feb '15

Hello, I had to change root's password on FAS3270 and noticed that OnTAP 8.1.1 is OK with 23 characters long password (including spaces), but SP cuts it to 17 characters. I couldn't find any relevant document explaining this behavior. Is it expected? Maybe a bug? SP filer*> version Booted primary firmware version 1.3.1 Primary firmware version 1.3.1 Backup firmware version 1.2.3 Cheers, Vladimir

3 5

Checking partition alignment of a powered-on VM
by RM 20 Feb '15

20 Feb '15

Can mbrscan check a powered-on VM? I know it needs to be off to remediate; at this time I only need to *identify* the misaligned VMs. I can't see guest VM alignment from the VSC GUI because old version. :-/

5 7

FAS2240-4 'cluster' with 4 SSDs
by Edward Rolison 20 Feb '15

20 Feb '15

Can I sanity check something? I've got a cluster in a box - in the form of a 2240-4. Single shelf, but it's got 4 SSDs installed. Which works as two per head. Looking at it, I can't actually configure a hybrid aggregate, because I have to match RAID types (RAID-DP on two drives doesn't work). That's on my current code rev of 8.1.3 Upgrading to 8.2 might be a solution, because then I could RAID4 my SSDs. But I'm wondering - what happens, given a system with no spares, one of the SSDs dies? (Or indeed, whether running with no spares is actually a good idea in the first place - I do have spares for my SAS drives, but not SSDs). With that in mind - am I onto a bit of a loser here? And I should just be looking to replace my SSDs with some drives to match what I've got already? Or perhaps have one head with flashpool, 3 drives + spare and one without?

6 8

Metrocluster-Cluster 8.3
by Mike Michalakis 19 Feb '15

19 Feb '15

Hi I was wondering if anyone have deployed a new FAS8xxx Fabric Attached MetroCluster-Cluster using 8.3 I would love to get in contact with you about your experience, configuration setup and areas to be careful of, as we are looking to deploy such a solution ourselves Any good feedback or comments are absolutely welcome /Mike

2 1

8.2.x on a 2240 or 3240?
by Philbert Rupkins 18 Feb '15

18 Feb '15

Hello Toasters, Just curious if anybody is running an ONTAP 8.2.x 7-mode release on a 2240, 3240 or comparable unit? If so, was there a noticeable increase in cpu utilization and/or client response time following the upgrade to 8.2.x? We are currently evaluating an 8.2.3 7-mode upgrade from 8.1.3. On 8.1.3, we do see periods in which average processor utilization is in the 80-90% range. We're told we may want to avoid upgrading those units to an 8.2 release as 8.2 requires an additional 10-20% cpu out of the gate. Thanks, Phil

4 5

IOPs from a controller
by Edward Rolison 14 Feb '15

14 Feb '15

Does anyone have a very rough rule of thumb as to IOPs you might expect out of a controller? I've got a FAS6280 that's starting to 'be a bit sluggish'. I'm inclined to shrug and say 'yes, it's doing 20K IOPs'. I know there's very much an 'it depends' in there - but 'very rough' is good enough for me here. (Disk wise - it's not particularly high on disk utilisation, nor is the network bandwidth particularly full).

7 9

Unstable cluster (or actually interconnects)
by Karsten Meinster 13 Feb '15

13 Feb '15

Hi all, We got some major issue's with our interconnects (or maybe ISL's at this moment I have no idea), some background first: We have a 3160 MC running Ontap 8.0.2 running stable for the last 3 years, however we are in the middle of upgrading to ontap 8.2 and for that we need to upgrade the FOS's to a higher version (we came from 6.3 and we want/need to go to 7). After we upgraded the first fabric to 7.0.0b everything seemed to work fine, however later on the day we saw a lot of errors on the netapps and on the switches, by then we changed some settings that helped us in the past for these errors (port based routing instead of exchange based which would actually be the best practice following the guides) and we started upgrading the second fabric to the intermediate FOS (6.4.2) and then immediately saw the errors coming up again at which time we stopped upgrading to 7.0.0. So long story short, we now have 2 fabrics, 1 running at 7.0.0b and one at 6.4.2b, which obviously is not recommended but we can't do much at the moment since things are extremely unstable connection wise. The switches themselves are set up by the best practice PDF that was available at that time, but even with the settings that changed in the meantime (basically only the portcfgfillword and I think the IOD and DLS options) we don't see any improvements, below some snippets of the log files, the data in the snippets are continuously popping up in our logfiles. The fabrics have a single ISL (so yeah data and CI data goes through the same ISL) and we have the old DS14 ESH4 shelfs. The weird thing is this really only happened after the FOS upgrade, we monitor all our devices quiet heavily and we haven't seen these kind of errors in the past, both the netapp errors as well as the switch errors(brocade by the way, well yeah FOS :)). At this time we're kind of clueless, Netapp support doesn't tell us much either we didn't get much further than asking for lots of log files and reseating SFP's which don't seem to work and we are still waiting (and calling) for the log analysis's. Sorry in advance for the weird buildup of this mail but we're making some long days at the moment ;-) If any more info might be helpfull I can send it ;-) (but don't want to flood the list right now). Thanks! Karsten Porterrshow on one of the switches (all switches give the same type of results, port 0 = FCVI, port 4 = ISL: nodes01witch10:root> porterrshow frames enc crc crc too too bad enc disc link loss loss frjt fbsy c3timeout tx rx in err g_eof shrt long eof out c3 fail sync sig tx rx ======================================================================================================================= 0: 16.5m 29.8m 0 0 0 0 0 0 90 0 4 4 4 0 0 0 0 1: 44.9m 22.9m 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2: 47.9m 22.3m 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4: 50.8m 59.2m 26 24 22 0 0 2 26 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 5: 14.2m 25.2m 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 6: 14.7m 30.3m 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 7: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 8: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 9: 4.5m 3.4m 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 10: 861.6k 1.1m 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 11: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 12: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 13: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 14: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 15: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 16: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 17: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 18: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 19: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 20: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 21: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 22: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 23: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 nodes01witch10:root> node01*> Fri Feb 13 01:37:28 CET [node01: cf.fsm.takeoverByPartnerDisabled:notice]: Failover monitor: takeover of node01 by node02 disabled (unsynchronized log). Fri Feb 13 01:38:53 CET [node01: scsi.cmd.transportErrorEMSOnly:debug]: Disk device eetrsansw10:10.28: Transport error during execution of command: HA status 0x9: cdb 0x28:12a6c7b0:0060. Fri Feb 13 01:39:33 CET [node01: cf.nm.nicTransitionDown:warning]: Cluster Interconnect link 0 is DOWN Fri Feb 13 01:39:53 CET [node01: cf.rv.notConnected:error]: Connection for 'cfo_rv' failed. Fri Feb 13 01:39:53 CET [node01: cf.rv.notConnected:error]: Connection for 'cfo_rv2' failed. node01*> cf status node02 is up, takeover disabled because of reason (interconnect error) node01 has disabled takeover by node02 (interconnect error) VIA Interconnect is down (link 0 up, link 1 up). node01*> Fri Feb 13 01:40:03 CET [node01: cf.nm.nicTransitionDown:warning]: Cluster Interconnect link 1 is DOWN Thu Feb 12 19:00:14 CET [node01: scsi.cmd.notReadyCondition:notice]: Disk device eetrsansw10:9.32: Device returns not yet ready: CDB 0x2a:325a93d8:0200: Sense Data SCSI:not ready - Drive spinning up (0x2 - 0x4 0x1 0x2)(1705). Thu Feb 12 19:00:14 CET [node01: scsi.cmd.notReadyCondition:notice]: Disk device eetrsansw10:9.32: Device returns not yet ready: CDB 0x2a:325a95d8:0200: Sense Data SCSI:not ready - Drive spinning up (0x2 - 0x4 0x1 0x2)(1689). Thu Feb 12 19:00:14 CET [node01: scsi.cmd.notReadyCondition:notice]: Disk device eetrsansw10:9.32: Device returns not yet ready: CDB 0x28:325a9c90:0100: Sense Data SCSI:not ready - Drive spinning up (0x2 - 0x4 0x1 0x2)(1698). Thu Feb 12 19:00:14 CET [node01: scsi.cmd.notReadyCondition:notice]: Disk device eetrsansw10:9.32: Device returns not yet ready: CDB 0x28:325a9c58:0008: Sense Data SCSI:not ready - Drive spinning up (0x2 - 0x4 0x1 0x2)(1699). Thu Feb 12 19:00:14 CET [node01: scsi.cmd.notReadyCondition:notice]: Disk device eetrsansw10:9.32: Device returns not yet ready: CDB 0x2a:325a97d8:0200: Sense Data SCSI:not ready - Drive spinning up (0x2 - 0x4 0x1 0x2)(1686). Thu Feb 12 19:00:14 CET [node01: scsi.cmd.notReadyCondition:notice]: Disk device eetrsansw10:9.32: Device returns not yet ready: CDB 0x2a:325a99d8:0200: Sense Data SCSI:not ready - Drive spinning up (0x2 - 0x4 0x1 0x2)(1690). Thu Feb 12 19:00:14 CET [node01: scsi.cmd.notReadyCondition:notice]: Disk device eetrsansw10:9.32: Device returns not yet ready: CDB 0x2f:2f27b400:0400: Sense Data SCSI:not ready - Drive spinning up (0x2 - 0x4 0x1 0x2)(474). Thu Feb 12 19:00:14 CET [node01: scsi.cmd.notReadyCondition:notice]: Disk device eetrsansw10:9.32: Device returns not yet ready: CDB 0x2a:325a91d8:0200: Sense Data SCSI:not ready - Drive spinning up (0x2 - 0x4 0x1 0x2)(1768). Thu Feb 12 19:02:59 CET [node01: cf.nm.nicTransitionDown:warning]: Cluster Interconnect link 0 is DOWN Thu Feb 12 19:02:59 CET [node01: cf.nm.nicTransitionUp:info]: Interconnect link 0 is UP Thu Feb 12 19:03:19 CET [node01: cf.rv.notConnected:error]: Connection for 'cfo_rv' failed. Thu Feb 12 19:03:19 CET [node01: cf.rv.notConnected:error]: Connection for 'cfo_rv2' failed. Thu Feb 12 19:03:28 CET [node01: cf.nm.nicTransitionDown:warning]: Cluster Interconnect link 1 is DOWN Thu Feb 12 19:04:37 CET [node01: cf.nm.nicReset:warning]: Initiating soft reset on Cluster Interconnect card 1 due to rendezvous connection timeout Thu Feb 12 19:06:10 CET [node01: cf.fsm.takeoverByPartnerDisabled:notice]: Failover monitor: takeover of node01 by node02 disabled (unsynchronized log). Thu Feb 12 19:08:16 CET [node01: cf.ic.qlgc.viErr:error]: Qlogic VI FC Adapter: ISP_CS_VI_ERROR vinum = 0xa state = 0x3 code = 0x6 Thu Feb 12 19:13:09 CET [node01: cf.fsm.takeoverByPartnerDisabled:notice]: Failover monitor: takeover of node01 by node02 disabled (interconnect error). Thu Feb 12 19:18:14 CET [node01: cf.fsm.takeoverByPartnerDisabled:notice]: Failover monitor: takeover of node01 by node02 disabled (unsynchronized log). Thu Feb 12 19:20:47 CET [node01: cf.fsm.takeoverOfPartnerDisabled:notice]: Failover monitor: takeover of node02 disabled (interconnect error). Thu Feb 12 19:21:35 CET [node01: cf.fsm.takeoverByPartnerDisabled:notice]: Failover monitor: takeover of node01 by node02 disabled (unsynchronized log). Thu Feb 12 19:22:24 CET [node01: cf.fsm.takeoverOfPartnerDisabled:notice]: Failover monitor: takeover of node02 disabled (interconnect error). Thu Feb 12 19:29:13 CET [node01: cf.ic.qlgc.viErr:error]: Qlogic VI FC Adapter: ISP_CS_VI_ERROR vinum = 0x7 state = 0x3 code = 0x2 Thu Feb 12 19:29:33 CET [node01: cf.rv.notConnected:error]: Connection for 'cfo_rv' failed. Thu Feb 12 19:29:33 CET [node01: cf.rv.notConnected:error]: Connection for 'cfo_rv2' failed. Thu Feb 12 19:30:04 CET [node01: cf.nm.nicTransitionDown:warning]: Cluster Interconnect link 0 is DOWN Thu Feb 12 19:30:05 CET [node01: cf.nm.nicTransitionDown:warning]: Cluster Interconnect link 1 is DOWN Thu Feb 12 19:34:44 CET [node01: cf.fsm.takeoverByPartnerEnabled:notice]: Failover monitor: takeover of node01 by node02 enabled Thu Feb 12 19:36:54 CET [node01: cf.ic.qlgc.viErr:error]: Qlogic VI FC Adapter: ISP_CS_VI_ERROR vinum = 0xa state = 0x3 code = 0x6 Thu Feb 12 19:45:51 CET [node01: raid.mirror.aggrSnapUse:warning]: Aggregate Snapshot copies are used in SyncMirror aggregate 'aggr0'. That is not recommended. Thu Feb 12 19:51:57 CET [node01: cf.fsm.takeoverByPartnerDisabled:notice]: Failover monitor: takeover of node01 by node02 disabled (unsynchronized log). Thu Feb 12 19:58:42 CET [node01: cf.fsm.takeoverOfPartnerEnabled:notice]: Failover monitor: takeover of node02 enabled Thu Feb 12 20:00:16 CET [node01: cf.takeover.disabled:warning]: Controller Failover is licensed but takeover of partner is disabled due to reason : unsynchronized log. Thu Feb 12 20:00:43 CET [node01: cf.fsm.takeoverByPartnerEnabled:notice]: Failover monitor: takeover of node01 by node02 enabled Thu Feb 12 20:04:10 CET [node01: cf.fsm.takeoverOfPartnerEnabled:notice]: Failover monitor: takeover of node02 enabled Thu Feb 12 20:05:29 CET [node01: cf.fsm.takeoverByPartnerDisabled:notice]: Failover monitor: takeover of node01 by node02 disabled (interconnect error). Thu Feb 12 20:14:59 CET [node01: cf.fsm.takeoverByPartnerDisabled:notice]: Failover monitor: takeover of node01 by node02 disabled (interconnect error). Thu Feb 12 20:15:44 CET [node01: cf.ic.qlgc.viErr:error]: Qlogic VI FC Adapter: ISP_CS_VI_ERROR vinum = 0xa state = 0x3 code = 0x6 Thu Feb 12 20:16:04 CET [node01: cf.rv.notConnected:error]: Connection for 'cfo_rv' failed. Thu Feb 12 20:16:04 CET [node01: cf.rv.notConnected:error]: Connection for 'cfo_rv2' failed. Thu Feb 12 20:16:05 CET [node01: cf.nm.nicTransitionUp:info]: Interconnect link 1 is UP Thu Feb 12 20:16:06 CET [node01: cf.nm.nicTransitionDown:warning]: Cluster Interconnect link 0 is DOWN Thu Feb 12 20:16:06 CET [node01: cf.nm.nicTransitionDown:warning]: Cluster Interconnect link 1 is DOWN Fri Feb 13 01:00:17 CET [node02: cf.takeover.disabled:warning]: Controller Failover is licensed but takeover of partner is disabled due to reason : unsynchronized log. Fri Feb 13 01:02:35 CET [node02: cf.fsm.takeoverByPartnerEnabled:notice]: Failover monitor: takeover of node02 by node01 enabled Fri Feb 13 01:03:45 CET [node02: cf.ic.qlgc.viErr:error]: Qlogic VI FC Adapter: ISP_CS_VI_ERROR vinum = 0x8 state = 0x3 code = 0x6 Fri Feb 13 01:03:45 CET [node02: cf.nm.nicReset:warning]: Initiating soft reset on Cluster Interconnect card 0 due to ispfcvi2400 fatal VI error Fri Feb 13 01:12:36 CET [node02: cf.nm.nicTransitionDown:warning]: Cluster Interconnect link 0 is DOWN Fri Feb 13 01:12:42 CET [node02: cf.fsm.takeoverByPartnerEnabled:notice]: Failover monitor: takeover of node02 by node01 enabled Fri Feb 13 01:18:52 CET [node02: cf.fsm.takeoverOfPartnerEnabled:notice]: Failover monitor: takeover of node01 enabled Fri Feb 13 01:20:00 CET [node02: monitor.globalStatus.critical:CRITICAL]: Controller failover of node01 is not possible: unsynchronized log. /vol/db_p_mcs7_iscsi is full (using or reserving 98% of space and 0% of inodes, using 98% of reserve). Fri Feb 13 01:39:33 CET [node02: cf.ic.qlgc.viErr:error]: Qlogic VI FC Adapter: ISP_CS_VI_ERROR vinum = 0xa state = 0x3 code = 0x6 Fri Feb 13 01:39:54 CET [node02: cf.nm.nicTransitionDown:warning]: Cluster Interconnect link 0 is DOWN Fri Feb 13 01:39:54 CET [node02: cf.nm.nicTransitionDown:warning]: Cluster Interconnect link 1 is DOWN Fri Feb 13 01:39:54 CET [node02: cf.rv.notConnected:error]: Connection for 'cfo_rv2' failed. Fri Feb 13 01:52:48 CET [node02: ems.engine.inputSuppress:warning]: Event 'openssh.invalid.channel.req' suppressed 87 times since Fri Feb 13 00:00:04 CET 2015. Fri Feb 13 01:52:48 CET [node02: openssh.invalid.channel.req:warning]: SSH client (SSH-2.0-OpenSSH_5.3) from 10.132.0.72 sent unsupported channel request (10, env).

4 3

VLAN create vs. VLAN add
by Mike Brown 12 Feb '15

12 Feb '15

Thought I'd give this mailing list a try with a softball: I get the difference between vlan create and vlan add in 7-mode: "If a physical interface does not belong to any VLAN, you can use the vlan create command to make the interface a member of one or more VLANs. However, if the interface is already a member of a VLAN, you should use the vlan add command to add the interface to subsequent VLANs." but what's so different about each command behind the scenes such that using "add" is better if a VLAN interface has already been created for an interface group? I've been using "vlan create" in my /etc/rc files for years without noticing a difference. I'll update the way I use each command, but I was wondering what *real* difference was between the two (not just *when* to use them). So in programming, sometimes, one operation is simply more efficient than another or can be completed in less steps, cycles, instructions, or perhaps with some atomicity. I was thinking this might be the reason, but what do you think? Thanks, Mike -- Mike Brown michael.b.brown3(a)gmail.com Blog: http://VirtuallyMikeBrown.com Twitter: http://twitter.com/VirtuallyMikeB <http://twitter.com/#%21/VirtuallyMikeB> LinkedIn: http://linkedin.com/in/michaelbbrown

2 1

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