toasters

toasters@lists.teaparty.net

3 participants
13514 discussions

RE: Exchange 2k (long)
by Bercovici, Val 15 Nov '00

15 Nov '00

Hi Supak et al, Please let me clarify your support statement below. Microsoft does not currently support NAS for Exchange Server 5.5 or 2000. Network Appliance fully supports Exchange 5.5 on filers via our SnapManager 1.x for Exchange software. We have engaged IBM Global Services' highly-regarded Enterprise Services for Microsoft Technologies Practice for our escalation path regarding Exchange-specific issues that we cannot resolve. Please refer to the two press releases on this topic for more details: http://www.netapp.com/news/press/news_rel_20000207.html http://www.netapp.com/news/press/news_rel_20000207a.html Network Appliance is actively working with the Microsoft Exchange group in order to comply with their requirements for certification of our unique leading-edge technology in an Exchange 2000 environment. In the meantime, NetApp has had tremendous success with our SnapManager 1.x product line for Microsoft Exchange 5.5. To date, over 100 SnapManager customers in the ASP, Financial, Networking Equip. Providers, Telecom, State & Federal Govt, E-Commerce and Healthcare sectors (among others) have enjoyed the benefits of the industry's ONLY online Snapshot Backup and Recovery technology for Microsoft Exchange Server. A couple of SnapManager for Exchange case-studies are available online: ASP - UNITED MESSAGING http://www.netapp.com/case_studies/ftp/united_mess.pdf FINANCIAL - BANK OF OKLAHOMA http://www.netapp.com/case_studies/ftp/bok.pdf Finally, some excellent technical whitepapers discussing the architecture and deployment of Exchange 5.5 on NetApp filers with SnapManager (demonstrating excellent performance at high users loads such 599ms response time for 9600 users) are available at: http://www.netapp.com/tech_library/3067.html http://www.netapp.com/tech_library/3054.html http://www.netapp.com/tech_library/3074.html Should you have any further questions, I would be happy to talk with anyone on this list regarding our Microsoft Exchange-related offerings at any time. Thanks, -Val. Manager, Collaborative Strategy Network Appliance Inc. WHO STORES MORE THAN HALF THE WORLD'S E-MAILBOXES? FIND OUT AT: www.netapp.com 613.724.8674 - Phone 847.589.6510 - Fax 800.489.6924 - Pager E-Mail: valb(a)netapp.com -----Original Message----- From: Supak backup e-mail account [mailto:supaklailert@yahoo.com] Sent: Friday, November 03, 2000 10:31 PM To: Martin Hannigan; rdobbins(a)netmore.net Cc: toasters(a)mathworks.com Subject: Re: Exchange 2k NetApp filer is fully supported for use with MS Exchange. I don't see how this could lead to a problem more than any direct-attaced storage. NetApp choking on lots of small files? I don't think so. WAFL handles small files far better than most file systems notably UFS. Waste of space? Maybe. NetApp uses 4K blocks so if you have lots of really small files <4K then you'll waste quite a bit of space. Supak --- Martin Hannigan <hannigan(a)world.std.com> wrote: > > > > > > For both performance and supportability reasons, > it is extremely inadvisable > > to put Exchange mailboxes/private stores/public > stores on anything other > > than a filesystem which is directly-connected to > the NT server in question. > > > > People do all sorts of odd things with NetApps > just because they can - and > > don't get me wrong, I love my F740 - but this is > just plain crazy. For your > > own peace of mind, don't do it. > > > So the netapp still chokes on lots of active small > files i.e. like > usenet news, etc? We were thinking about turning > ours into a hardcore > news spool..but I remember a few years ago there was > some issue with the > millions of < 64KB file sizes.. > > -M > __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Thousands of Stores. Millions of Products. All in one Place. http://shopping.yahoo.com/

5 6

RE: Exchange 2k (long)
by Supak backup e-mail account 15 Nov '00

15 Nov '00

Peter, The fact about your employment is relevant for the reader to evaluate your comment. I give more credibility to comment from "neutral" party. Comment from competitor gets lowest credibility. If you work for a company which is not a NetApp competitor, I wouldn't care. Since you work for EMC, you should disclose that fact somewhere in the message. Supak --- Peter Bodifee <bodif36772(a)yahoo.com> wrote: > Brian, > > Congratulations. You passed IP network tracing 101. > > Has it crossed your mind that people who receive > 100+ messages/day > have multiple accounts? To separate message flow > between public and company > private? Probably not. > So it would not make any sense to you either why I > posted my comment on > "MSFT Exchange not supporting NAS" using my yahoo > account. > > BTW, you are also an "expert" in hiding your > employer's identity (AT&T > Canada) by using some obscure > domain (risc.org), so what are you busting me for? > For giving my personal > opinion to serve > the IT user community without showing who pays my > salary? Have a life.... > > Peter > -----Original Message----- > X-Apparently-To: bodif36772(a)yahoo.com via > web4505.mail.yahoo.com > X-Track: 1: 40 > Received: from tor-smtp2.netcom.ca (207.181.101.101) > by mta411.mail.yahoo.com with SMTP; 10 Nov 2000 > 20:00:40 -0800 (PST) > Received: from tor-dev1 (tor-dev1.nbc.netcom.ca > [207.181.89.12]) > by tor-smtp2.netcom.ca (8.8.7-s-4/8.8.7) with ESMTP > id XAA04411; > Fri, 10 Nov 2000 23:00:10 -0500 (EST) > Date: Fri, 10 Nov 2000 23:00:09 -0500 (EST) > From: Brian Tao <taob(a)risc.org> > X-Sender: taob(a)tor-dev1.nbc.attcanada.ca > To: Peter Bodifee <bodif36772(a)yahoo.com> > cc: "'Bercovici, Val'" > <Valentin.Bercovici(a)netapp.com>, > toasters(a)mathworks.com > Subject: RE: Exchange 2k (long) > In-Reply-To: > <000a01c04993$1d0e7200$acab9fa8@bodifeexxxxL> > Message-ID: > <Pine.GSO.4.21.0011102258290.10980-100000(a)tor-dev1.nbc.attcanada.ca> > MIME-Version: 1.0 > Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII > > On Wed, 8 Nov 2000, Peter Bodifee wrote: > > > > Received: from unknown (HELO bodifeexxxxL) > (168.159.171.172) > > by smtp.mail.vip.suc.yahoo.com with SMTP; 8 Nov > 2000 14:50:15 -0000 > [...] > > Busted. :) > > % whois -h whois.arin.net 168.159.171.172 > EMC Corporation (NET-EMC-B1) > 171 South Street > Hopkinton, MA 01748-9103 > > Netname: EMC-B1 > Netnumber: 168.159.0.0 > > Coordinator: > Chambers, Paul A (PAC15-ARIN) pac(a)EMC.COM > (508)435-1000 X1276 (FAX) (508)435-2649 > > Domain System inverse mapping provided by: > > GW.EMC.COM 168.159.1.2 > NS0.EMC.COM 168.159.3.1 > > Record last updated on 24-Apr-1997. > Database last updated on 10-Nov-2000 18:12:36 > EDT. > > > _________________________________________________________ > Do You Yahoo!? > Get your free @yahoo.com address at > http://mail.yahoo.com > __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Yahoo! Calendar - Get organized for the holidays! http://calendar.yahoo.com/

1 0

Anyone seen this? .snapshot missing from readdir() even for mount point
by Chris Thompson 14 Nov '00

14 Nov '00

I was prompted by trawling over Bugs Online to open a call with NetApp about the following problem, which I've known about for a year or more. The call isn't making much progress (we won't go into whose fault that is ...) and as the whole thing was really a request for information ("did you know about this infelicity? is it going to be fixed some year?") I can't conscientiously exert much pressure. But I can waste your time asking whether you've observed the same effect, can't I? :) As I am sure you are all aware, although ".snapshot" can be looked up in any directory, it is only visible to readdir() in NFS mount points (5.3 System Administrator's Guide, p.406: "Actually, the .snapshot in the mount point is "real" to make the pwd command work ..."). The problem is that sometimes ".snapshot" isn't visible to readdir() *even* in mount point directories. This seems to happen only in directories with more than one 4K block (it's notable that "ls -f" shows .snapshot coming after the first block's worth in such directories, if it shows up at all), and rather rarely even then (2 out of over 150 user home directories of >4K that I looked at today), but as long as the directory isn't tinkered with the state remains the same. I've observed this with several OnTap 5.2.x & 5.3.x releases, and several different Solaris releases as clients. It *could* be an NFS client implementation problem, I suppose, but I don't think I believe that. Does this sound familiar to anyone? Chris Thompson University of Cambridge Computing Service, Email: cet1(a)ucs.cam.ac.uk New Museums Site, Cambridge CB2 3QG, Phone: +44 1223 334715 United Kingdom.

1 0

CIFS connections
by Todd C. Merrill 14 Nov '00

14 Nov '00

Upgraded to an F840 running 5.3.7 this weekend. messages file keeps showing oplock break timeouts, and a very tenuous connection to *any* domain controller it tries to connect to. Clients seem fine; DC's seem fine; no apparent problems elsewhere. Thoughts? Tue Nov 14 13:44:49 EST [filer: GbE-e4]: Connection with DC \\DC1 terminated Tue Nov 14 13:44:51 EST [filer: CIFSAdmin]: oplock break timed out to station BAT57NT for file \\filer\HUB\bat\share\bin\clusterx.pm Tue Nov 14 13:45:26 EST [filer: CIFSAdmin]: oplock break timed out to station BAT57NT for file \\filer\HUB\bat\share\environ\R12 Tue Nov 14 13:45:26 EST [filer: CIFSAdmin]: oplock break timed out to station BAT57NT for file \\filer\HUB\bat\share\bin\batlib.pm Tue Nov 14 13:45:34 EST [filer: CIFSAdmin]: oplock break timed out to station BAT57NT for file \\filer\HUB\bat\nt\bin\batnt_start.pl Tue Nov 14 13:46:01 EST [filer: CIFSAdmin]: oplock break timed out to station BAT57NT for file \\filer\HUB\bat\share\bin\batswim.pm Tue Nov 14 13:46:02 EST [filer: CIFSAdmin]: oplock break timed out to station BAT57NT for file \\filer\HUB\bat\share\bin\BatVars2.pm Tue Nov 14 13:47:19 EST [filer: CIFSAuthen]: Connection with DC \\DC2 established Tue Nov 14 13:51:04 EST [filer: CIFSAdmin]: oplock break timed out to station BAT59NT for file \\filer\HUB\bat\nt\bin\OkeyDokey.pl Tue Nov 14 13:51:40 EST [filer: CIFSAdmin]: oplock break timed out to station BAT59NT for file \\filer\HUB\bat\share\bin\pc2unix.pm Tue Nov 14 13:51:50 EST [filer: CIFSAdmin]: oplock break timed out to station BAT59NT for file \\filer\HUB\bat\share\environ\R12student 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: LSA Errors
by lella.r.bennett＠lmco.com 10 Nov '00

10 Nov '00

We are running 5.3.6R2 on this filer. We were seeing the errors before we upgraded and we are continuing to see them after upgrading to 5.3.6R2. Also, the errors will start on a particular filer, I'll see a ton of them for a number of days, and then they disappear just as quickly as they started. I've looked on the logs on the Domian Controllers that the filer is connecting to, but they aren't reporting any errors. ??? -Lella -----Original Message----- From: Paul Lupa [mailto:ra5507@email.sps.mot.com] Sent: Friday, November 10, 2000 3:40 PM To: lella.r.bennett(a)lmco.com Cc: toasters(a)mathworks.com Subject: Re: LSA Errors Check your version of OnTap, I believe this was corrected in 5.3.6 (be sure to go to 5.3.6R2). I had the error for a long time, (along with "access denied" errors from the clients) and it went away with an upgrade. Paul Lupa lella.r.bennett(a)lmco.com wrote: Has anyone ever seen these errors before? We are seeing them consistently after the filer disconnects from its resource domain controller. [CIFSAuthen]: LsaLookupNames: Exception rpc_s_connection_closed caught. [CIFSAuthen]: LsaClose: Exception rpc_s_connection_closed caught. -Lella Bennett Lockheed Martin EIS 303-971-1055 -- ---------------------------- Paul Lupa Motorola (512) 933-6542 Voice (512) 933-6331 Fax Paul.Lupa(a)Motorola.com Pager 1168616(a)skytel.com or 1800759-8352 Pin:1168616

1 0

LSA Errors
by lella.r.bennett＠lmco.com 10 Nov '00

10 Nov '00

Has anyone ever seen these errors before? We are seeing them consistently after the filer disconnects from its resource domain controller. [CIFSAuthen]: LsaLookupNames: Exception rpc_s_connection_closed caught. [CIFSAuthen]: LsaClose: Exception rpc_s_connection_closed caught. -Lella Bennett Lockheed Martin EIS 303-971-1055

2 1

LSA errors
by Lella Bennett 10 Nov '00

10 Nov '00

1 0

LSA errors
by lella.r.bennett＠lmco.com 10 Nov '00

10 Nov '00

1 0

RE: Veritas NetBackup backup hangs
by Kelly Wyatt 10 Nov '00

10 Nov '00

Have you looked to see if the drives are down? We are running NetApp Release 5.3.4R3P2 on our filers, NBU 3.2+latest patches. There is a bug in this version of ontap that causes the tape drives to be downed at, we think, the end of jobs when it comes time to unload the tape or at the change of tapes on a job that needs to span tapes. I understand that 5.3.4 (base) does not have that problem. The thing is, we see this consistently on some filers and rarely on others. As a work around, we ended up having a cron job up the drives hourly. This took care of the problem. Look in the archives around 5/2/00, subject "Network Appliance Upgrade to ONTAP 5.3.4R3P2 and Backups" and you should see more on this problem. Kelly -- Kelly Wyatt, Kelly.Wyatt(a)SAS.com Senior Systems Programmer Strategic Recovery SAS Institute Inc. / SAS Campus Drive / Cary, NC 27513 http://www.sas.com SAS... The Power to Know -----Original Message----- From: Jeffrey Krueger [mailto:jkrueger@qualcomm.com] Sent: Tuesday, November 07, 2000 10:18 PM To: toasters(a)mathworks.com Subject: Veritas NetBackup backup hangs We have recently cut-over to using Veritas NetBackup with NDMP to perform a mixture of backups to filer-attached-tape and 3-way backups to other filers with tape. We are running DOT 5.3.4R3P2 on a mixture of 630's and 760's against NBU 3.2 with a recent patch set (one that includes the 3-way fix). In both instance, we have found that sometimes a filer completes a dump (ndmp session goes away, backup snapshot is deleted, /etc/dumpdates is updates), but the backup job hangs in Veritas-land. This job hangs indefiately until manually killed, at which point it does not record the file history making the backup un-restore-able. We're growing very frustrated with this issue. BudTool has been backing these filers up for 2 years with NDMP and relatively few problems. So far, NBU support has been disappointing to say the least. Has anyone seen this? Is there a workaround or fix? Also, does anyone know the mechanics of the "/etc/ndmpdlog.*" files? They are poorly documented in the DOT manuals. All of ours are zero length, but its unclear whether this is supposed to be the case (no news is good news). Does anyone know what they are supposed to look like? -- Jeff -- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Jeff Krueger E-Mail: jeff(a)qualcomm.com Senior Engineer Phone: 858-651-6709 NetApp Filers / UNIX Infrastructure Fax: 858-651-6627 QUALCOMM, Inc. IT Engineering Web: www.qualcomm.com

1 0

Recall:
by Kissel, Rich 09 Nov '00

09 Nov '00

Kissel, Rich would like to recall the message, "".

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