toasters

toasters@lists.teaparty.net

1 participants
13523 discussions

alternate shelves/disks for F330?
by Bill Bradford 30 Apr '01

30 Apr '01

Looks like 2 and 4G storageworks cannisters are going to run at least $100 each, and heck, I only paid $150 for the F330.. 8-( I know its unsupported as hell, but since this is standard SE narrow SCSI, would it work if I just slapped a Sun disk multipack on the filer? I'm just trying to get this up and working at home, as cheaply as possible... Bill -- Bill Bradford mrbill(a)mrbill.net Austin, TX

1 0

RE: Backup Software
by Benn, Paul 29 Apr '01

29 Apr '01

If the data on the filer has NTFS ACLs, you'll need to backup over CIFS or a use a package that supports NDMP. If you back up over NFS, you'll loose any NTFS ACLs and as well as any DOS file attributes. If you backup over CIFS, you'll not only retain the ACLs and the DOS bits, you'll retain the UNIX file permissions as well. Plus Data ONTAP keeps an archive bit (DOS) on UNIX files so that you can do "incremental" backups of UNIX data. Regards, Paul Benn Network Appliance -----Original Message----- From: lee kessinger [mailto:leek@uptime.net] Sent: Sunday, April 29, 2001 9:15 AM To: 'toasters(a)mathworks.com' Subject: Backup Software Hello: Any suggestions on backup software involving an F85, 4 LINUX servers, and a 2 drive tape library with 15 slots? Software must be inexpensive (Ok cheap), backup window large enough to allow backing the F85 up over the wire. Thanks, Lee Kessinger

1 0

More case stuff
by Jan Chrillesen 29 Apr '01

29 Apr '01

Reading through the last couple of weeks posts about the case surveys and how much NetApp appreciates feedback I realised that there's a few things about the case handling that could use some improvement. The "Receive email notification on status change" feature is nice, but being a regular user of Cisco's CCO I miss the following features: * Being able to add adresses to CC on case updates * When I get a mail about the an update, it's just a link to the case. It would be great if the mail included the text that was added to the case. Some way to force a core dump (halt -d) without opening a new case. I've tried stuff like (halt -d forced-dump-for-case-123456), but new cases is opened anyway. A "magic" string to pass to -d would be fine. Sometimes I turn off autosupport before dumping a core, but that's also a bit annoying. Finally, why can't I close a case? Sometimes engineers seems to forget about cases and they stay open forever, even after I ask the engineer to close the case. I know I can close a case, when the problem is considered to be solved, but with a forgotten case this is not possible. 179738 is such a case, in case someone within NetApp would bother closing it. /jan

1 0

Backup Software
by lee kessinger 29 Apr '01

29 Apr '01

Hello: Any suggestions on backup software involving an F85, 4 LINUX servers, and a 2 drive tape library with 15 slots? Software must be inexpensive (Ok cheap), backup window large enough to allow backing the F85 up over the wire. Thanks, Lee Kessinger

1 0

RE: Netcache rsh admin access
by Eurich, Bruno 28 Apr '01

28 Apr '01

You need to use user 'root' for admin access. So for example, "rsh netcache -l root:password df". It's a filer-thing ;-) Cheers, -- Bruno > -----Original Message----- > From: parker(a)redback.com [mailto:parker@redback.com] > Sent: 27 April 2001 18:41 > To: toasters(a)mathworks.com > Subject: Netcache rsh admin access > > > Hi, > > We have a C720s Netcache box which I'm trying to set up for a demo. As > demo equipment, we don't have full access to now.netapp.com, > so I've got > no docs available... > > I've got everything working fine EXCEPT I can't get rsh administrative > access working. > > I have config.admin.console.enable turned on, and I have put the host > (and have tried the entire network as well) I want to rsh from into > config.admin.trusted_hosts. I've also added the host I want > to rsh from > into config.system.hosts. I have set up usernames for the users coming > in from the admin host in config.auth.users, and those users > are in the > NetCache group. config.admin.access_control_type is currently set to > 'anywhere' as I test this. > > Each & every rsh attempt is met with (on the netcache console): > > Permission denied to rsh request from xxx at yyy > > (xxx and yyy of course being the usernames & hosts I'm trying > to come in > as) > > Is there the equivalent of a hosts.equiv file on the netcache? Some > other trick? > > Oh, we're running 5.0D2, with firmware 2.3_a2. > > Thanks! > > Ross > -- > Ross Parker | > | "Lisp has all the visual appeal of > Diagnostic Engineer | oatmeal with fingernail clippings > Redback Networks Inc. | mixed in" - Larry Wall > parker(a)redback.com | >

1 0

NetApp at home - licenses?
by Bill Bradford 28 Apr '01

28 Apr '01

I'll soon be the proud owner of a F330 at home, but I've gotta scrounge up some 2 or 4G drives for this StorageWorks shelf, and then the big problem - it comes with no licenses. Am I correct in assuming that without an installed NFS license, I cant export anything to anywhere? Or, can I only export stuff to the admin host? I know NetApp isnt about to give out any kind of "Hobbyist" licenses any time soon.. but I used F220s back in '97-98, and jumped at the chance to pick this unit up; I hope it ends up being more than a doorstop. Any help or suggestions would be appreciated. Also looking for 2 or 4G Storageworks disk cannisters for a BA350 shelf (narrow SE scsi). Bill -- Bill Bradford mrbill(a)mrbill.net Austin, TX

1 0

RE: Netcache rsh admin access
by Rousseau, Deborah 27 Apr '01

27 Apr '01

The hosts.equiv file is case sensitive to the case of the user name. should read: hostname username The hostname needs to be resolvable, so host file entry helps. The rsh command could be improved with the -l username perameter. rsh filername -l username command Try those. Deborah Rousseau -----Original Message----- From: parker(a)redback.com To: toasters(a)mathworks.com Sent: 4/27/01 10:41 AM Subject: Netcache rsh admin access Hi, We have a C720s Netcache box which I'm trying to set up for a demo. As demo equipment, we don't have full access to now.netapp.com, so I've got no docs available... I've got everything working fine EXCEPT I can't get rsh administrative access working. I have config.admin.console.enable turned on, and I have put the host (and have tried the entire network as well) I want to rsh from into config.admin.trusted_hosts. I've also added the host I want to rsh from into config.system.hosts. I have set up usernames for the users coming in from the admin host in config.auth.users, and those users are in the NetCache group. config.admin.access_control_type is currently set to 'anywhere' as I test this. Each & every rsh attempt is met with (on the netcache console): Permission denied to rsh request from xxx at yyy (xxx and yyy of course being the usernames & hosts I'm trying to come in as) Is there the equivalent of a hosts.equiv file on the netcache? Some other trick? Oh, we're running 5.0D2, with firmware 2.3_a2. Thanks! Ross -- Ross Parker | | "Lisp has all the visual appeal of Diagnostic Engineer | oatmeal with fingernail clippings Redback Networks Inc. | mixed in" - Larry Wall parker(a)redback.com |

2 1

Netcache rsh admin access
by parker＠redback.com 27 Apr '01

27 Apr '01

Hi, We have a C720s Netcache box which I'm trying to set up for a demo. As demo equipment, we don't have full access to now.netapp.com, so I've got no docs available... I've got everything working fine EXCEPT I can't get rsh administrative access working. I have config.admin.console.enable turned on, and I have put the host (and have tried the entire network as well) I want to rsh from into config.admin.trusted_hosts. I've also added the host I want to rsh from into config.system.hosts. I have set up usernames for the users coming in from the admin host in config.auth.users, and those users are in the NetCache group. config.admin.access_control_type is currently set to 'anywhere' as I test this. Each & every rsh attempt is met with (on the netcache console): Permission denied to rsh request from xxx at yyy (xxx and yyy of course being the usernames & hosts I'm trying to come in as) Is there the equivalent of a hosts.equiv file on the netcache? Some other trick? Oh, we're running 5.0D2, with firmware 2.3_a2. Thanks! Ross -- Ross Parker | | "Lisp has all the visual appeal of Diagnostic Engineer | oatmeal with fingernail clippings Redback Networks Inc. | mixed in" - Larry Wall parker(a)redback.com |

1 0

RE: "Case survey" stuff from NetApp; Comments on NOW page
by Collins, Brian 27 Apr '01

27 Apr '01

Has anyone give thought to letting users view the autosupport data we have on their filers ala the access that the TSEs have? bc > -----Original Message----- > From: La Londe, Renee [mailto:Renee.LaLonde@netapp.com] > Sent: Thursday, April 26, 2001 7:04 PM > To: 'tmerrill(a)mathworks.com<tmerrill(a)mathworks.com>' > Cc: Braden, Jesse; dl-now; 'toasters(a)mathworks.com' > Subject: RE: "Case survey" stuff from NetApp; Comments on NOW page > > > > Hi Todd, > > Thanks for sharing your candid thoughts on the recent changes > to the NOW site. > > Making the Service and Support home page one of the > customizable options is an awesome idea and we will put it on > the roadmap and let you know when we have it in place. > > We created the new Service and Support home page because > there are other sections on NOW (such as Reseller Corner, > etc) and some customers have complained that these sections > were taking away valuable real-estate from the Service and > Support tools on NOW. So we created the new (one-stop-shop) > page that is 100% totally dedicated to Service and Support. > This was done to make your life easier on the NOW site-- so > your feedback is key to making sure we get it right. We will > definitely make this new home page one of the customizable > options and continue to minimize the marketing and use of > frames,etc on this page. > > FYI, within Case Status Tool > [http://now.netapp.com/Self-Service/FORMS/frmSearch.asp?ObjTyp e=NA_WEB_PPAGE_CASE] , you can check the status > of a Netapp case(s) by > > Entering the following: > > Netapp serial number > Netapp case number > > OR > > Selecting the following: > > Last 7 days by location (ALL for your location) > Last 7 days by Company (ALL for your company) > Last 30 days by location (ALL for your location) > Last 30 days by Company (ALL for your company) > Open cases by location > Open cases by company > All by location > All by company > Just my cases (just the ones you have submitted) > > > > Makes me think that our UI may not be that clear if you > weren't aware of these options... If you have any feedback > on how we can make it better let me know-- but we will > definitely look into it. > > Thanks again, > > Renee > > Renee La Londe > Director, E-service Customer Facing Web Programs > Network Appliance, Inc. > 495 E. Java > Sunnyvale CA 94089 > Get Answers on NOW (Netapp on the Web)! > http://now.netapp.com > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > From: Todd C. Merrill [mailto:tmerrill@mathworks.com] > Sent: Thursday, April 26, 2001 5:53 AM > To: Sullivan, Justin > Cc: toasters(a)mathworks.com > Subject: RE: "Case survey" stuff from NetApp > > > On Wed, 25 Apr 2001, Sullivan, Justin wrote: > > > We would certainly like to have more surveys returned - we > should like to see EVERY survey returned. > > I have to admit, I used to fill these out, thinking NetApp was > using some random sampling of cases in order to generate > their metrics. > But, it became quickly apparent that *every* call seems to generate a > survey. > > Now I just delete them, unless the service was extremely good > or extremely bad. More often than not, it's just "okay." > Filling out a > survey saying "you guys did a middle-of-the-road job" is like > watching a > newscast that report on a plane on a routine flight that > landed successfully > at the airport. <yawn> > > > Might I suggest the suvey's include at least a descriptive ...ah > ... description of the case? The last one I got said "Failure Error > Message." And, which of the half-dozen cases I've entered in the past > few weeks was that? Looking up the details in NOW revealed > the subject > there says "RBCLTO:Cluster Notification from filername > (REBOOT (CLUSTER > TAKEOVER))." Oh, yeah, now I remember. > > And, while I'm at it, the NOW pages have become way more > cluttered, and slower, than they used to be. There are loads of > icons/images "advertising" features of NetApps and NOW that are just > getting in the way. It took me 2-3 minutes after logging > into NOW just > now to figure out where TF I could look back at my previous cases. It > was buried under "Services and Support." Isn't that what NOW *is*? > Didn't that used to be the "main" NOW page? And, why can't I > look up a > case solely by case number? I have to remember which filer it was > associated with, too? Well, give me all the cases in the last month, > then... > > Can the personal customization of NOW include an option "Expert > mode - avoid icons and marketing crap" or allow me to set my > "home" NOW > page to http://now.netapp.com/Self-Service/Forms/SupportHome.asp > instead? Sure, I could bookmark it, but when I'm in the machine room > and need to grab a random machine and login not under my own > account... > > Uh-oh. Looks like somebody is cranky this morning. Somebody > hasn't had their juice box yet. > > Until next time... > > The Mathworks, Inc. 508-647-7000 x7792 > 3 Apple Hill Drive, Natick, MA 01760-2098 508-647-7001 FAX > tmerrill(a)mathworks.com http://www.mathworks.com ---

1 0

RE: How would you respond to this
by Riley, Mike 27 Apr '01

27 Apr '01

Hopefully not adding too much fuel to the fire but we just went head-to-head with an IP4700 at a customer site with an F85. The customer ran their tests - we didn't furnish them with any - and the F85 out-performed the IP4700 on a consistent basis. We are asking the customer if we can publish their report. For the record, EMC does make sound products and has been a very successful company with great service. The key footnote, that I believe was mentioned somewhere in this mail chain, is EMC has ventured into a new market where the filesystem and OS "kernel" are integrally interwoven into the storage fabric. This is an entirely different paradigm for direct-attached vendors. Attaching disk to an NT or Unix platform and then expecting the filesystems that live in those operating systems to "do the right thing" is quite a different proposition when compared to NAS. To make a true NAS appliance, it's not as simple as stripping down an open-source OS and cobling it together with a re-cycled filesystem. True, everyone has to start somewhere - even Network Appliance had to start with publicly available device drivers, IP stacks, etc. - but to introduce a robust, functional feature set without compromising customer expectations on ease of use or performance requires knowledge and! vision based on experience. There is no better teacher than experience and Network Appliance has had 9 years to figure this stuff out and we're still working hard to improve, integrate new technology and even break new technological ground (e.g. DAFS). >From that standpoint, (and, yes, I have my NetApp hat firmly on now), claims from EMC that they can do everything NetApp can do (and the stuff that they can't do will ship in <fill in month here>), have to be taken with a huge block/pillar of salt, particularly if you have ever had the opportunity to compare the products side-by-side. Outside of the critical product differences today, the assumption moving forward is that somehow NetApp will stand still and that simply isn't the case; can't be the case. EMC is very new to this game, and as big as they are, if you look at most of their press releases they mention that they are trying to "catch Network Appliance" - their words, not ours. We believe, based on customer input such as yours, that we will continue to lead this market from both a technology and sales perspective. -----Original Message----- From: Network Appliance List [mailto:nalist@mail.bokf.com] Sent: Wednesday, April 25, 2001 5:43 AM To: 'toasters(a)mathworks.com' Cc: Howland , Jerry; Hammack, Tom Subject: FW: How would you respond to this Gawd. I always knew that EMC was lower than a snake's belly in a wagon wheel rut, but gee. I'd just educate the management types, addressing each point. And then ask if they want to do business with a company that uses overt fraud as a marketing tool. Then we could call my buddy Guido and have him pay the miscreants a visit. ("Only break the left knee, Guido!" We want them to hobble, not drag!") Brian Cooper BOkf Technical Services Tulsa, Oklahoma bcooper(a)mail.bokf.com Jerry, Tom: FYI -----Original Message----- From: Barry Lustig [mailto:barry@lustig.com] Sent: Thursday, April 19, 2001 3:41 PM To: toasters(a)mathworks.com Subject: How would you respond to this This is an excerpt of an email that was sent to the management of a company that I'm working with. They had spec'ed F85's for a fairly low performance 10-20Mbits/sec. environment. The main requirement is reliability and ease of use. How does one respond to blatant misrepresentation of a competitors product? barry A few highlights of the comparison: - The F85 is a stripped down, single CPU, low end device with multiple points of failure and a very poor data protection. NetApps service is rated very low by industry experts and they offer next day shipment of parts that the user must install themselves. - The IP4700 is fully redundant, multi-CPU, mid-range device with no single point of failure and hardware based RAID 5 data protection. EMC's world class customer service center has ranked #1 for 6 consecutive years by Gartner Group. Standard 2 year warranty guarantees 4 hours ON SITE w/Parts service by EMC technicians. Plus, our 'call home' proactive maintenance system monitors trends within the system and reports them automatically to our customer service center. Often, EMC technicians will repair a system BEFORE the component actually fails. The 4700 will be configured with 8 drives usable, plus 1 drive for RAID 5 parity and 1 drive for hot swap redundancy. It is scalable all the way to 7000GB (7TB) vs. only 648GB for the F85. The 4700 as configured above is 8RU. In general, the F85 does not scale sufficiently for growth, has poor customer service behind it, has no redundancy, has multiple points of failure, and utilizes a sub-par RAID 0 data protection scheme.

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