toasters

toasters@lists.teaparty.net

2 participants
13529 discussions

RE: getting dump messages into messages file
by Traitel, Eyal 12 Mar '01

12 Mar '01

You can turn on our own NDMP logging using: ndmpd debug 50 You can control logging only to a file by turning off logging to console ndmpd debug screen This will create files called /etc/ndmplog*, which contains much more than the dump messages, but you can obviously grep it by "dump"... I do not know if it has any performance issues on the dump itself though. Hope it helps, Eyal. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- eTraitel - I'm the new eBuzzword around !!! ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Eyal Traitel - Filer Escalation Engineer CNA, MCSE, CSA, NetApp CA Network Appliance BV Holland Office Center Kruisweg 799b 2132 NG, Hoofddorp The Netherlands Office: +31 23 567 9685 Cellular: +31 6 5497 2568 Email: eyal(a)netapp.com ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Get answers NOW! - NetApp On the Web - http://now.netapp.com ---------------------------------------------------------------------- -----Original Message----- From: Moshe Linzer [mailto:Moshe.Linzer@nsc.com] Sent: Monday, March 12, 2001 11:40 AM To: Stephen Manley Cc: toasters(a)mathworks.com Subject: Re: getting dump messages into messages file Stephen Manley wrote: > For now, you either want to capture dump logs by running > via rsh, or if you use an NDMP client, they generally > capture the dump messages in their logs. Does anyone know how to see the NDMP dump output messages from within Legato or Veritas? We have tested both products, but neither allowed us to view the NDMP dump messages like we do in Budtool. We checked all the logs, but maybe there is a logging option that needs to be turned on? Moshe -- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- - Moshe Linzer | On the Internet, Unix Systems Manager | National Semiconductor, Israel | nobody knows you're a moron. Phone: 972-9-970-2247 | Fax: 972-9-970-2001 | - Network Magazine Email: moshel(a)nsc.com | ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- -

2 1

logging cifs deletes on F760
by nick.mayrath＠webmd.net 12 Mar '01

12 Mar '01

Is it possible to log what user is deleting what files on an F760 running 5.3.6r2 and CIFS only? Nick Mayrath ExpressBill, Inc. 800-453-8439 ext. 216

1 0

Re: getting dump messages into messages file
by Steve Kappel 12 Mar '01

12 Mar '01

Moshe Linzer wrote: >Stephen Manley wrote: > >> For now, you either want to capture dump logs by running >> via rsh, or if you use an NDMP client, they generally >> capture the dump messages in their logs. > >Does anyone know how to see the NDMP dump output messages from within Legato or >Veritas? We have tested both products, but neither allowed us to view the >NDMP dump messages like we do in Budtool. We checked all the logs, but maybe >there is a logging option that needs to be turned on? Current releases of NetBackup NDMP put these messages into the NDMP debugging log which isn't externally supported. Starting with the next major release (fall) they will go into the bptm log and possibly the user log. __________________________________________________________________________ Steve Kappel steve.kappel(a)veritas.com VERITAS Software steve.kappel(a)iname.com (Personal)

1 0

getting dump messages into messages file
by neil lehrer 12 Mar '01

12 Mar '01

hi, i noticed that dump messages were not being recorded in the messages file. i did not have a syslog.conf file so i created one like this: *.* /etc/messages *.* /dev/console no change. am i doing something wrong? f760 ontap 5.36r2. thanks. -- regards

6 8

How are NDMP incrementals so fast?
by Tom "Mad Dog" Yergeau 11 Mar '01

11 Mar '01

Obviously from all the NDMP messages I'm sending this week, we just started using NDMP. :-) I just saw the results of our first incremental NDMP backups and I was flabbergasted at how fast they ran. I even double-checked the logs to make sure it actually was backing stuff up. When doing an incremental backup over CIFS, it would take about three hours to go through about 200 GB of stuff (1.8 million inodes). Doing it with NDMP, it takes 20-30 minutes. That's quite an improvement. It's obvious that when doing an incremental NDMP backup, there is something going on that allows the filer to determine extremely quickly which files have changed since the full backup. Can someone tell us what's going on? Does the filer keep a log of stuff that's changed? Is this just something WAFL is really good at? Thanks! MD

2 1

RE: cluster using F740 and F760
by Traitel, Eyal 10 Mar '01

10 Mar '01

Todd, I cannot answer on behalf of our marketing group etc., but I would see a few obstacles: 1. Partner node needs to take care of both nodes activity in takeover mode, so it cannot be that much lower than other node. 2. We sell active-active clustering, so both nodes are active, and customer is not wasting his money for any passive protection. It leads you to the point that it may not worth the complexity to sell such a setup. 3. Technically, you must have same NVRAM size, and I believe you should also have reasonably close response times for any NVRAM mirroring and general underlying OS activity. That just makes non-equal nodes business more complex than one might think. 4. Anyway - customers reactions are always welcome here, and I'll run this to cluster devel. group, and see if they have to say anything.... Yours, Eyal. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- eTraitel - I'm the new eBuzzword around !!! ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Eyal Traitel - Filer Escalation Engineer CNA, MCSE, CSA, NetApp CA Network Appliance BV Holland Office Center Kruisweg 799b 2132 NG, Hoofddorp The Netherlands Office: +31 23 567 9685 Cellular: +31 6 5497 2568 Email: eyal(a)netapp.com ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Get answers NOW! - NetApp On the Web - http://now.netapp.com ---------------------------------------------------------------------- -----Original Message----- From: Todd C. Merrill [mailto:tmerrill@mathworks.com] Sent: Friday, March 09, 2001 6:11 PM To: Traitel, Eyal Cc: 'max chan'; toasters(a)mathworks.com Subject: RE: cluster using F740 and F760 From: max chan [mailto:maxchan0@yahoo.com] > Is it possible to use F740 and F760 as a cluster pair? On Mon, 5 Mar 2001, Traitel, Eyal wrote: > No, sorry. > This is unsupported. Ah, but is it *possible*? ;) You can put 1 GB of memory into an F740 to match the 1 GB in an F740. That is unsupported too, but possible. Ask me how I know. So, what's the real reason why it's not supported, clustering two non-exact-but-in-the-same-family filers? Is there something technically preventing it? Is is a marketing/sales decision? Is it to protect the unwashed masses from their own stupidity? Why not allow a lower-end filer take over a higher-end one? You're in a degraded mode in the first place during a failover condition, so why not allow a calculated risk? 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 ---

3 2

RE: Multiple Oracle DBs on a filer
by Jennifer Armenta 09 Mar '01

09 Mar '01

Since putting everything on the filer would be ideal it's not a reality as you have stated just in case there is a problem. Im consolidating 6 unix servers running Oracle dbase to 840 filer. I was thinking it would be nice to run the ORACLE_HOME dirs and logs from 2 unix servers rather than 6. Wonder if anyone has thought about consolidating that way or even if it a good idea... -----Original Message----- From: Yarmas, Tom [mailto:Tom.Yarmas@netapp.com] Sent: Friday, March 09, 2001 1:14 PM To: 'Jennifer Armenta'; 'George Kahler'; toasters(a)mathworks.com Subject: RE: Multiple Oracle DBs on a filer > Is there a "best" method for where everything should be for > multi dbases? "Best" method, hmmm. I guess the easy answer is everything on the Filer, and if you need to save some space, have multiple instances share the ORACLE_HOME. But in reality, there are enough variables that it depends on what you are trying to acomplish and how much local storage your database machine has. Typically, I find ORACLE_HOME on the database machine storage, and all of the datafiles, redo logs, etc on the Filer. Often the boot drives are large and mirrored, so there is plenty of space. Plenty being relative ;) Of course this tends to preclude failover in the case of a failed database machine unless a backup machine has an ORACLE_HOME installed on it. And if you duplicate the ORACLE_HOME onto multiple machines for failover, then there is a risk that some change was not propogated to all machines. Of course, having multiple database instances within a single Filer volume has implications on SnapShots and SnapRestore/SnapMirror since these technologies work at the volume level. If you needed to do a SnapRestore for one instance, any others in the same volume would be affected. Similarly, when you take a SnapShot, the SnapShot would be for the entire volume, so it may be worthwhile to have multiple instances down (for a cold backup) or in hot backup mode for a hot backup. You generally do not want to have a seperate volume for each database instance unless they are large databases simply because each volume must have at least one parity disk, and you don't want volumes made up of a small number of drives if you can help it for performance. The only things that need to be on local storage are the alert logs and the trace files directory. That is so that if a connection to the Filer is lost, Oracle can write it's alert info for troubleshooting. If you can't talk to your Filer, you want to be able to see info in the alert log to take action. And if you can't talk to your local disks, you know immediatly. -tom

1 0

RE: Multiple Oracle DBs on a filer
by Yarmas, Tom 09 Mar '01

09 Mar '01

> Is there a "best" method for where everything should be for > multi dbases? "Best" method, hmmm. I guess the easy answer is everything on the Filer, and if you need to save some space, have multiple instances share the ORACLE_HOME. But in reality, there are enough variables that it depends on what you are trying to acomplish and how much local storage your database machine has. Typically, I find ORACLE_HOME on the database machine storage, and all of the datafiles, redo logs, etc on the Filer. Often the boot drives are large and mirrored, so there is plenty of space. Plenty being relative ;) Of course this tends to preclude failover in the case of a failed database machine unless a backup machine has an ORACLE_HOME installed on it. And if you duplicate the ORACLE_HOME onto multiple machines for failover, then there is a risk that some change was not propogated to all machines. Of course, having multiple database instances within a single Filer volume has implications on SnapShots and SnapRestore/SnapMirror since these technologies work at the volume level. If you needed to do a SnapRestore for one instance, any others in the same volume would be affected. Similarly, when you take a SnapShot, the SnapShot would be for the entire volume, so it may be worthwhile to have multiple instances down (for a cold backup) or in hot backup mode for a hot backup. You generally do not want to have a seperate volume for each database instance unless they are large databases simply because each volume must have at least one parity disk, and you don't want volumes made up of a small number of drives if you can help it for performance. The only things that need to be on local storage are the alert logs and the trace files directory. That is so that if a connection to the Filer is lost, Oracle can write it's alert info for troubleshooting. If you can't talk to your Filer, you want to be able to see info in the alert log to take action. And if you can't talk to your local disks, you know immediatly. -tom

1 0

RE: Multiple Oracle DBs on a filer
by Jennifer Armenta 09 Mar '01

09 Mar '01

Is there a "best" method for where everything should be for multi dbases? Oracle home on separate server or everything on the filer (database and Oracle home)? -----Original Message----- From: Yarmas, Tom [mailto:Tom.Yarmas@netapp.com] Sent: Friday, March 09, 2001 11:56 AM To: 'George Kahler'; toasters(a)mathworks.com Subject: RE: Multiple Oracle DBs on a filer There are 2 things to keep in mind here. First, there is the oracle account's home directory, and second there is an environment variable known as ORACLE_HOME. These 2 things can be different. ORACLE_HOME used to have to be unique among instances of Oracle, but with OFA in version 8.x, that has been somewhat relaxed. In versions prior to 8.x, it is more difficult for Oracle instances to share the ORACLE_HOME directory (but not impossible, at least not with unix). As a standard practice, I never install the Oracle software in the oracle account's home directory. That way I can put things in the home directory that affect multiple instances (i.e. shell scripts or sql scripts, etc.), and if I have multiple ORACLE_HOME directories then I don't have to copy things around when I make changes. Oracle will look at the ORACLE_HOME and ORACLE_SID environment variables to determine where it should find certain files by default. I have had various Oracle instances share the same ORACLE_HOME directory without consequence. One of the drawbacks of multiple instances sharing the ORACLE_HOME is that if you upgrade from one version of Oracle to another, it affects all of the instances that were using that ORACLE_HOME. That may not be a good outcome. I prefer that each Oracle instance have it's own ORACLE_HOME, if possible. You could of course create multiple oracle user account (i.e. oraprod1, oraprod2, or something more informative) instead of simply oracle. There is nothing magical in the user oracle and the group dba. They happen to be the default. However, in order to use different user names, you must re-link the Oracle S/W since the group is bound in to the oracle kernel at link time (trivial procedure). However, if multiple users are sharing the Oracle executables, then they must share the same unix group id (since it is linked into the code). Typically, I find that it is best to create a single oracle account (or a small number of oracle accounts for related instances), and use a shell script to display a choice of various Oracle instance names to the user. Then depending on the response, the ORACLE_HOME, ORACLE_SID and other variables are set. Then when the user logs in, all the environment variables are set correctly, and the ORACLE_HOME directory is different than the oracle account's home directory. And, if I install a new version of Oracle, it lives in it's own ORACLE_HOME directory, and each individual instance is not affected by changes made to another, I simply have to edit the script that lives in the oracle account's home directory so it sets the environment variables correctly. You should be able to create qtrees and/or volumes and mount points so that the Filer matches exactly what your DBA's see today in an existing environment, if that would make them happier. -tom > -----Original Message----- > From: George Kahler [mailto:george@YorkU.CA] > Sent: Thursday, March 08, 2001 10:05 AM > To: toasters(a)mathworks.com > Subject: Multiple Oracle DBs on a filer > > > Hi, > I'm setting up an 840 filer for our DBA group to run about > 4-to-5 Oracle > OLT databases and 4-to-5 Oracle DSS databases being served from about > 1/2 a dozen Unix servers. This is something new to the DBAs > in that they > are not experienced with NFS or anything like a filer; a common disk > storage. Their databases are married to specific Unix servers. The > project mandates that the environment needs to be set up in such a way > that if any Unix server fails, the database service that it was > providing could easily be brought up on any other available Unix > server. (So far no problem) > > I have created and mapped out a quota tree into which I installed the > Oracle distribution. It looks something like: > /softwr/oracle/product/7.3.4 > /7.3.5 > this is then exported to all of the Unix servers. > > The problem I have with is the Unix Oracle home directory that I also > created in /softwr/oracle/home, ie. > oracle:x:600:211:Oracle user:/softwr/oracle/home:/bin/ksh > but the DBAs are telling me that the oracle home directory > needs to be unique > for each Unix server and Database running on that server because the > home directory is the place where they keep their environment. > > How do other people deal with this? Do you create specific Unix > accounts for each Oracle database running on a server? > > Thanks > George > > -------------------------------------------------------------- > ----------------- > George Kahler e-mail: > george(a)yorku.ca > Sr. Systems Administrator humans: (416) > 736-2100 x.22699 > Computing and Network Services machines: (416) 736-5830 > Ontario, Canada, M3J-1P3 >

1 0

RE: Multiple Oracle DBs on a filer
by Yarmas, Tom 09 Mar '01

09 Mar '01

There are 2 things to keep in mind here. First, there is the oracle account's home directory, and second there is an environment variable known as ORACLE_HOME. These 2 things can be different. ORACLE_HOME used to have to be unique among instances of Oracle, but with OFA in version 8.x, that has been somewhat relaxed. In versions prior to 8.x, it is more difficult for Oracle instances to share the ORACLE_HOME directory (but not impossible, at least not with unix). As a standard practice, I never install the Oracle software in the oracle account's home directory. That way I can put things in the home directory that affect multiple instances (i.e. shell scripts or sql scripts, etc.), and if I have multiple ORACLE_HOME directories then I don't have to copy things around when I make changes. Oracle will look at the ORACLE_HOME and ORACLE_SID environment variables to determine where it should find certain files by default. I have had various Oracle instances share the same ORACLE_HOME directory without consequence. One of the drawbacks of multiple instances sharing the ORACLE_HOME is that if you upgrade from one version of Oracle to another, it affects all of the instances that were using that ORACLE_HOME. That may not be a good outcome. I prefer that each Oracle instance have it's own ORACLE_HOME, if possible. You could of course create multiple oracle user account (i.e. oraprod1, oraprod2, or something more informative) instead of simply oracle. There is nothing magical in the user oracle and the group dba. They happen to be the default. However, in order to use different user names, you must re-link the Oracle S/W since the group is bound in to the oracle kernel at link time (trivial procedure). However, if multiple users are sharing the Oracle executables, then they must share the same unix group id (since it is linked into the code). Typically, I find that it is best to create a single oracle account (or a small number of oracle accounts for related instances), and use a shell script to display a choice of various Oracle instance names to the user. Then depending on the response, the ORACLE_HOME, ORACLE_SID and other variables are set. Then when the user logs in, all the environment variables are set correctly, and the ORACLE_HOME directory is different than the oracle account's home directory. And, if I install a new version of Oracle, it lives in it's own ORACLE_HOME directory, and each individual instance is not affected by changes made to another, I simply have to edit the script that lives in the oracle account's home directory so it sets the environment variables correctly. You should be able to create qtrees and/or volumes and mount points so that the Filer matches exactly what your DBA's see today in an existing environment, if that would make them happier. -tom > -----Original Message----- > From: George Kahler [mailto:george@YorkU.CA] > Sent: Thursday, March 08, 2001 10:05 AM > To: toasters(a)mathworks.com > Subject: Multiple Oracle DBs on a filer > > > Hi, > I'm setting up an 840 filer for our DBA group to run about > 4-to-5 Oracle > OLT databases and 4-to-5 Oracle DSS databases being served from about > 1/2 a dozen Unix servers. This is something new to the DBAs > in that they > are not experienced with NFS or anything like a filer; a common disk > storage. Their databases are married to specific Unix servers. The > project mandates that the environment needs to be set up in such a way > that if any Unix server fails, the database service that it was > providing could easily be brought up on any other available Unix > server. (So far no problem) > > I have created and mapped out a quota tree into which I installed the > Oracle distribution. It looks something like: > /softwr/oracle/product/7.3.4 > /7.3.5 > this is then exported to all of the Unix servers. > > The problem I have with is the Unix Oracle home directory that I also > created in /softwr/oracle/home, ie. > oracle:x:600:211:Oracle user:/softwr/oracle/home:/bin/ksh > but the DBAs are telling me that the oracle home directory > needs to be unique > for each Unix server and Database running on that server because the > home directory is the place where they keep their environment. > > How do other people deal with this? Do you create specific Unix > accounts for each Oracle database running on a server? > > Thanks > George > > -------------------------------------------------------------- > ----------------- > George Kahler e-mail: > george(a)yorku.ca > Sr. Systems Administrator humans: (416) > 736-2100 x.22699 > Computing and Network Services machines: (416) 736-5830 > Ontario, Canada, M3J-1P3 >

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