toasters

toasters@lists.teaparty.net

13529 discussions

RE: rsh/ssh return code
by Yoder, Alan 07 Nov '00

07 Nov '00

> > The short answer: sshd returns whatever rshd returns. > > Since I don't have ssh installed on any of my filers, could > someone just tell me if this is a "yes" or "no" answer? :) I don't > even know if filer commands have a concept of "exit codes" (I assume > they do, given the UNIX-ness of the command environment). There is no concept of a command exit code in a currently shipping release. Rsh returns based on the success of the rsh call itself. We are considering moving toward making the return result of the last executed command be available via a special "result" command or something like that, but most commands don't currently return anything. Alan =============================================================== Alan G. Yoder agy(a)netapp.com ===============================================================

1 0

RE: rsh/ssh return code
by Lam, Murphy 07 Nov '00

07 Nov '00

> Hrm, yeah... I poked around FreeBSD's and rshd source, and it > doesn't seem to have a mechanism to pass return values back to the > client. SSH definitely does have this feature though... what is the > behaviour like with Data ONTAP's sshd? The short answer: sshd returns whatever rshd returns. More details: For Data ONTAP, sshd sits in the middle between an ssh client and rshd. sshd decrypts data from the client and forwards it via localhost to rshd to fulfill the request. It is rshd that actually executes the command. Results (including return codes) returned by rshd are then encrypted by sshd before being sent back to the client. Murphy Lam -- mlam(a)netapp.com

2 1

RE: Backup Exec on 760 NT filer
by Benn, Paul 07 Nov '00

07 Nov '00

Have you seen our white paper on NT based backup. It's a little long in the tooth but still useful. http://www.netapp.com/tech_library/3052.html The latest versions of Veritas BackupExec (8.x) supposedly now require that all backup clients have a backup agent installed. You can't install an agent on the filer. -----Original Message----- From: Coder, James (STP) [mailto:james.coder@guidant.com] Sent: Monday, November 06, 2000 3:55 PM To: 'toasters(a)mathworks.com' Subject: Backup Exec on 760 NT filer We are looking at using Seagate Backup exec to back up data on our NT 760 filer. It's currently running 5.6.3 and looking to move to 6.0. Have approx. 1TB of data and currently using NetBackup. Any comments, concerns, good stories that I can share? Thx in advance James Coder Guidant Corporation Unix Admin

1 0

Sharing Filers among different user groups
by newbie netapp 07 Nov '00

07 Nov '00

With the advent of the F840, we are thinking of doing some massive server consolidation: using a F840 to replace many existing nfs/cifs servers among different user groups. What are the issues with sharing a filer among different user groups? I can see: 1) uid issues: Dept A is already using uid 101 for user smith, and Dept B has a different smith, or has a 101 for a different users ... etc. 2) security issues: we want to make absolutely sure Dept A cannot see or mount or share Dept B's data. 3) what if Dept A is using a different DNS than Dept B's? I don't think we can run 2 different resolvers, one per exported volumes ... 3) similarly, for NIS, and NT domains. Any insights, comments are appreciated. Xt _________________________________________________________________________ Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com. Share information about yourself, create your own public profile at http://profiles.msn.com.

1 0

Backup Exec on 760 NT filer
by Coder, James (STP) 06 Nov '00

06 Nov '00

We are looking at using Seagate Backup exec to back up data on our NT 760 filer. It's currently running 5.6.3 and looking to move to 6.0. Have approx. 1TB of data and currently using NetBackup. Any comments, concerns, good stories that I can share? Thx in advance James Coder Guidant Corporation Unix Admin

1 0

Permissions problem with CVS
by Clarke, John L. (CIS) 06 Nov '00

06 Nov '00

Hello, We ran into a weird problem last week. We moved several CVS directories from a SunOS server to our NetApp F740. When a user went to check in a file that had been originally created by another user, the final mv of the file caused a "rename: Permission Denied" message. We went into the directory in question and did some experiments. I can copy the file to a new name, create a new file, and do a "mv newfile oldfile", and it works. However, if I try to do the same thing with the actual files being worked on, the mv newfile oldfile gives me the same "rename: Permission Denied" message. The qtree is configured for mixed CIFS/NFS permissions, but all the file moves have been from the Unix side via NFS. We are thinking of changing the qtree settings to NFS only. Looking for a cure, John

1 0

FS: Netapp 4gb SCSI Narrow disks (Model X212) - $75.00
by ScottUCE＠aol.com 06 Nov '00

06 Nov '00

Netapp 4gb SCSI narrow disk (Model X212) w/ 90-day warranty -- $75.00 Netapp disk shelf w/ single power supply, SCSI cable and power cord -- $195.00. PACKAGE DEAL: SEVEN 4gb disks (28gb total) with shelf -- $595.00 Scott Fischmann Union Computer Exchange, Inc. 6233 Idylwood Lane Minneapolis, MN 55436 (952) 935-7282 (952) 935-5056 - FAX www.unioncomputer.com

1 0

Clustering
by Davinder Gupta 06 Nov '00

06 Nov '00

Hi, We are looking into using filers in Windows NT 4 Enterprise environment. In this environment filers will be serving Oracle databases. We are conerned if MS supports this environment with NT4 or may be with Win2K advanced server. Any thoughts?? Thanks Davinder

1 0

RE: Exchange 2k
by Mankovsky, Mike 06 Nov '00

06 Nov '00

Both Exchange 5.5 and Exchange 2000 use 4KB pages to store data in the Exchange database. There are very few Exchange database related files that are "small" An empty Exchange database file is 1 to 2 MB and a typical size of an Exchange database file is well over 10GB. Exchange transaction logs are always 5MB, regardless if they are full or not. The smallest Exchange database file that would reside on a filer is the Check Point file, which is 8KB. Regards, Mike Mankovsky Network Appliance Inc. -----Original Message----- From: Steve Losen [mailto:scl@sasha.acc.virginia.edu] Sent: Monday, November 06, 2000 6:48 AM To: toasters(a)mathworks.com Subject: Re: Exchange 2k > 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 > All files potentially waste space, regardless of size. With a block size of 4k, you can expect each file to waste an average of 2k. A 17k file uses 5 blocks (20k) of which 3k is wasted. A 15k file uses 4 blocks (16k) of which 1k is wasted. So the amount of storage wasted is roughly the number of files multiplied by 2k bytes. Divide this by the total disk space used to get the percentage of space wasted. I just checked one of our volumes that contains user home directories. It has 3680867 files and 146203264K used, which means about 5% is wasted. Steve Losen scl(a)virginia.edu phone: 804-924-0640 University of Virginia ITC Unix Support

1 0

Re: Exchange 2k
by Supak backup e-mail account 06 Nov '00

06 Nov '00

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/

3 2

Jump to page:

2026

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