toasters

toasters@lists.teaparty.net

13515 discussions

support.netapp.com returns DNS error?
by Walfherder 22 Jul '21

22 Jul '21

Anyone able to access support.netapp.com? It seems to down for me, I get a strange DNS error from the server i.e. Service Unavailable - DNS failure The server is temporarily unable to service your request. Please try again later. Reference #11.d7b51002.1626969421.263fbd7 This is for the URI I get re-directed to: https://mysupport.netapp.com/site/ Cheers, Robb.

8 8

Re:
by Joseph Zoda 22 Jul '21

22 Jul '21

AMZN: Amazon, UPS, PlayStation Network part of major site outage -- so netapp may be caught up in this as well ? On Thu, Jul 22, 2021 at 12:23 PM Gilbert, Mike via Toasters < toasters(a)teaparty.net> wrote: > > > > ---------- Forwarded message ---------- > From: "Gilbert, Mike" <gilbert32(a)llnl.gov> > To: "mkopenski(a)gmail.com" <mkopenski(a)gmail.com>, "toasters(a)teaparty.net" < > toasters(a)teaparty.net> > Cc: > Bcc: > Date: Thu, 22 Jul 2021 16:17:17 +0000 > Subject: Re: support.netapp.com returns DNS error? > > I’m unable to get there as well. https://isitup.org also says it’s down. > > > > *From: *Toasters <toasters-bounces(a)teaparty.net> on behalf of " > mkopenski(a)gmail.com" <mkopenski(a)gmail.com> > *Date: *Thursday, July 22, 2021 at 9:09 AM > *To: *"toasters(a)teaparty.net" <toasters(a)teaparty.net> > *Subject: *Re: support.netapp.com returns DNS error? > > > > Was working for me earlier today but seems down as well as > mysupport.netapp.com > <https://urldefense.us/v3/__http:/mysupport.netapp.com__;!!G2kpM7uM-TzIFchu!…> > seems down as well > > > > On Thu, Jul 22, 2021 at 12:05 PM Walfherder <toasters(a)tson.de> wrote: > > > Anyone able to access support.netapp.com > <https://urldefense.us/v3/__http:/support.netapp.com__;!!G2kpM7uM-TzIFchu!hp…>? > It seems to down for me, I get > a strange DNS error from the server i.e. > > Service Unavailable - DNS failure > The server is temporarily unable to service your request. Please try > again later. > Reference #11.d7b51002.1626969421.263fbd7 > > This is for the URI I get re-directed to: > https://mysupport.netapp.com/site/ > <https://urldefense.us/v3/__https:/mysupport.netapp.com/site/__;!!G2kpM7uM-T…> > > Cheers, > Robb. > > _______________________________________________ > Toasters mailing list > Toasters(a)teaparty.net > https://www.teaparty.net/mailman/listinfo/toasters > <https://urldefense.us/v3/__https:/www.teaparty.net/mailman/listinfo/toaster…> > > > > > ---------- Forwarded message ---------- > From: "Gilbert, Mike via Toasters" <toasters(a)teaparty.net> > To: "mkopenski(a)gmail.com" <mkopenski(a)gmail.com>, "toasters(a)teaparty.net" < > toasters(a)teaparty.net> > Cc: > Bcc: > Date: Thu, 22 Jul 2021 17:17:27 +0100 > Subject: > _______________________________________________ > Toasters mailing list > Toasters(a)teaparty.net > https://www.teaparty.net/mailman/listinfo/toasters -- Joe Zoda Infrastructure & Systems Support Division of Information Technology The School District of Palm Beach County 3300 Forest Hill Blvd., Suite B-332 West Palm Beach, FL 33406 joseph.zoda(a)palmbeachschools.org (561) 649-6810 http://www.PalmBeachSchools.org <http://www.palmbeachschools.org/> -- *Disclaimer: *Under Florida law, e-mail addresses are public records. If you do not want your e-mail address released in response to a public records request, do not send electronic mail to this entity. Instead, contact this office by phone or in writing.

1 0

UNMAP space issue
by Heino Walther 07 Jul '21

07 Jul '21

Hi there We have an old 7-mode NetApp on which we have created several 16TB LUNs and presented them via FC to a Windows host on which we have created one large drive using StoragePools. We now have the issue that space is not unmapped on the NetApp as we delete files from out large drive… SnapDrive does not see the LUNs we have mapped because StoragePools uses them, so we cannot start the Space Reclaimer. We have tried sdelete.exe with the -z option, but it does not seem to work for us… I have read that we should be able to use defrag /L or Optimize-Volume X -ReTrim -SlabConsolidate But I was wondering if anyone has tested this? The StoragePool was created on Windows 2016, but has since been moved to a Windows 2019 platform.. Any suggestions are very welcome 😊 We are talking very large volumes, so I would rather not test that much 😉 /Heino

2 1

10GbE to 40GbE Upgrade
by Carl Howell 15 Jun '21

15 Jun '21

We currently have an A300 cluster, each node has 2x10GbE interfaces in a multimode_lacp ifgrp connected to 2xCisco 9K's. We are upgrading each node with 2x40GbE interfaces. The question is how best to go about doing the upgrade? It would of course be nice if we could just add the 40GbE interfaces to the current port channels and ifgrp's, but I don't think the 9K's will allow us to mix speeds in a port channel. Perhaps it's possible on the 9K side to set the new interfaces to 10GbE, add them to the ifgrp's and port channels, drop the original 10GbE interfaces out and raise the speed on the new interfaces up to 40GbE. . . Thanks in advance for any help. --Carl

4 6

Re:
by tmac 14 Jun '21

14 Jun '21

So far it has been very good to me. I am having my air-gapped customers move to this. We avoided 9.8-9.8P2. P3 came out but was quickly followed by P4. --tmac *Tim McCarthy, **Principal Consultant* *Proud Member of the #NetAppATeam <https://twitter.com/NetAppATeam>* On Mon, Jun 14, 2021 at 12:16 PM Brian Parent via Toasters < toasters(a)teaparty.net> wrote: > > > > ---------- Forwarded message ---------- > From: Brian Parent <bparent(a)ucsd.edu> > To: toasters(a)teaparty.net > Cc: > Bcc: > Date: Mon, 14 Jun 2021 09:12:03 -0700 > Subject: 9.7P12 vs. 9.8P4 ?? > We're at 9.7P12 now. I've got a day or two to decide whether to jump to > 9.8P4, and stay there. > Our AFF8020 apparently isn't qualified for 9.9RC1. > I'm retiring in two weeks, and the crew I'm leaving behind (sorry, not > sorry), doesn't have experience upgrading NetApps. They plan to leave it > as is until they can decommission it in 6-12 months. > > It seems like a good idea to move to 9.8P4 due to the openSSL bug fixes. > Any horror stories about 9.8P4? > > > > ---------- Forwarded message ---------- > From: Brian Parent via Toasters <toasters(a)teaparty.net> > To: toasters(a)teaparty.net > Cc: > Bcc: > Date: Mon, 14 Jun 2021 17:12:24 +0100 > Subject: > _______________________________________________ > Toasters mailing list > Toasters(a)teaparty.net > https://www.teaparty.net/mailman/listinfo/toasters

1 0

9.7P12 vs. 9.8P4 ??
by Brian Parent 14 Jun '21

14 Jun '21

We're at 9.7P12 now. I've got a day or two to decide whether to jump to 9.8P4, and stay there. Our AFF8020 apparently isn't qualified for 9.9RC1. I'm retiring in two weeks, and the crew I'm leaving behind (sorry, not sorry), doesn't have experience upgrading NetApps. They plan to leave it as is until they can decommission it in 6-12 months. It seems like a good idea to move to 9.8P4 due to the openSSL bug fixes. Any horror stories about 9.8P4?

1 0

NDMP Backup speeds
by Heino Walther 02 Jun '21

02 Jun '21

5 7

Re: WAFL error on a flexgroup?
by Vanderyt, Jeff 26 May '21

26 May '21

I don't know that error, but you can see the constituents by: vol show -vserver vserver_name -is-constituent true -jeff From: Toasters <toasters-bounces(a)teaparty.net> on behalf of "Rue, Randy" <randyrue(a)gmail.com> Date: Wednesday, May 26, 2021 at 11:28 AM To: Toasters <toasters(a)teaparty.net> Subject: [SUSPECTED SPAM]WAFL error on a flexgroup? External Email - Use Caution Hello All, Seeing this error repeatedly in the logs: wafl.vol.fsp.full:error]: volume scharp_systems__0002@vserver:51aa02de-9c6e-11eb-9f37-d039ea257af4: insufficient space in FSP wafl_remote_reserve to satisfy a request of 0 holes and 12 overwrites. An online search is giving me nothing meaningful, not even NetApp specific results. Note that this is a constituent volume for a larger flexgroup (which are new to us). Is the constituent volume full? If so, is there some reason data isn't balanced automatically across the constituents of a flexgroup? Hope to hear from you, Randy in Seatlle _______________________________________________ Toasters mailing list Toasters(a)teaparty.net<mailto:Toasters@teaparty.net> https://www.teaparty.net/mailman/listinfo/toasters ********************************************************** Electronic Mail is not secure, may not be read every day, and should not be used for urgent or sensitive issues

4 10

WAFL error on a flexgroup?
by Rue, Randy 26 May '21

26 May '21

Hello All, Seeing this error repeatedly in the logs: wafl.vol.fsp.full:error]: volume scharp_systems__0002@vserver:51aa02de-9c6e-11eb-9f37-d039ea257af4: insufficient space in FSP wafl_remote_reserve to satisfy a request of 0 holes and 12 overwrites. An online search is giving me nothing meaningful, not even NetApp specific results. Note that this is a constituent volume for a larger flexgroup (which are new to us). Is the constituent volume full? If so, is there some reason data isn't balanced automatically across the constituents of a flexgroup? Hope to hear from you, Randy in Seatlle

1 0

Expanding Raid groups to grow an aggregate
by Fred Grieco 25 May '21

25 May '21

Toasters, I am setting up a new A400 that came with 3.5 disk shelves (3 shelves with 24 disks and one shelf with 12 disks), for a total of 84 disks. Setting the partitioning bit aside (I think I have that right..), I configured raid group sizes of 20, two groups each into two aggregates, one on each controller. This uses 2 x 2 x 20 or 80 disks and leaves 2 spare disks on each controller, which are actually 4 partitions per side spread out on the SSDs. There will be an issue if we order SSDs to fill the half shelf. There would be no way to add these disks to the existing aggregates and not have really lopsides RG sizes. But if I expanded each of these raid groups by 2 or 3 disks and added the new disks manually, it would work out great. Is this the best practice for adding disks? Wouldn't that scheme leave data "stranded" on the existing disks? Does this matter even with SSDs in light of the performance per disk. Thanks, Fred

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