About kryan

kryan · ‎2012-04-16

Importing relationships into a virtual dataset is not supported. https://communities.netapp.com/message/77015#77015

kryan · ‎2012-04-13

Have a look at this KB article and let us know if you get it working: https://kb.netapp.com/support/index?page=content&id=1011987

kryan · ‎2012-04-05

These SV relationships are not in the proper format for DFM/OC to manage or discover them: netapp5:/vol/FN_Dati netapp6:/vol/bck_FN_Dati/FN_Dati Source 00:49:00 Idle netapp5:/vol/FN_e_vault netapp6:/vol/bck_FN_e_vault/FN_e_vault Source 13:33:08 Idle If you look in the svmon.log you will most likely see errors regarding the two relationships. They need to look like this to allow DFM/OC to discover and manage them: netapp5:/vol/FN_Dati/- netapp6:/vol/bck_FN_Dati/FN_Dati Source 00:49:00 Idle netapp5:/vol/FN_e_vault/- netapp6:/vol/bck_FN_e_vault/FN_e_vault Source 13:33:08 Idle Note that the source volumes have a trailing "/-". ONTAP allows these relationships and default to "/-" behavior but DFM/OC will require the proper format. In order to get that added tot he source volumes you will need to run a "snapvault modify ..." CLI on the controller and then perform a "snapvault update ..." to make the change take effect. Then after you run a "dfm host discover ..." they should appear.

kryan · ‎2012-04-05

If you are sure the SV relationships should be present (that is others from the same filer are present, you have ensured connectivity from the DFM/OC server to the filer is working, etc.), then you can use the "dfbm primary dir add ... ..." CLI to "import" the existing SV relationship into the DFM db. At that point it will show up in the external relationships and can be imported, barring any conditions that would prevent importing. Note when you run this command it will say it is creating the relationship, but as long as the syntax is correct and the relationship indeed exists this will not happen. The job detail on the "Backup" tab of the UI will show it was imported.

kryan · ‎2012-03-28

Is this an ONTAP 8.1.x filer? If so, ensure you are running OCSM 2.0R1D1.

kryan · ‎2012-03-28

Using OCSM Version 2.0R1D1 against an ONTAP 8.1.x filer, I see "Solaris EFI" as an option in lun create (see screen capture). On which ONTAP version are you attempting to create the LUN?

kryan · ‎2012-03-23

I installed OCHP 1.1 on a Windows 2008R2 OC 5.0 server today and although there are lots of debug level messages in the server log, none are exactly like the messages above.

kryan · ‎2012-02-15

Please open a support case and have it added RFE 387647. It was filed to add the ability to generate an event for "link break detected" which would allow alarm generation.

kryan · ‎2012-02-06

Scott, I am not aware of any method to get those links into the alert emails in OC 5. The fix will be in a future release of OC, not ONTAP. Kevin

kryan · ‎2012-02-06

Scott, There is a bug for restoring these links (537978) similar to what was in DFM 4.x. http://now.netapp.com/NOW/cgi-bin/bol?Type=Detail&Display=537978 Kevin

kryan · ‎2012-01-19

This appears to be a Volume Report. http://DFMSERVER:8080/help/monitoring/rpt_vol.htm Volume reports The Volume reports display information about all volumes and their performance characteristics. This table lists and describes all fields in the Volume reports. Effective Used The active file system (AFS) data in the volume without deduplication space savings, that is, if deduplication was not enabled on the volume. Physical Used The active file system (AFS) data in the volume with deduplication space savings.

kryan · ‎2012-01-19

You can refer to the "Help --> About this page" topic in the OM GUI for details about report fields on the report currently being viewed.

kryan · ‎2012-01-06

If I recall correctly, that started with SDW 6.2. It is referred to as RBAC support for SDW.

kryan · ‎2011-11-23

Doug, Please open a support case to attach to bug 530008. A patch request is already in place for OnCommand 5.0 so another is not needed at this time. Apache 2.2.10 is the version in all shipping versions of DFM and OnCommand. You should not attempt to upgrade Apache manually - this is not supported. This patch will upgrade Apache from 2.2.10 to 2.2.21 within OnCommand 5.0. There will also be a DFM 4.x patch updating Apache to 2.2.21 under bug 532848. Kevin

kryan · ‎2011-11-11

The work will happen under the bug, so there is no real need for further updates under this thread.

kryan · ‎2011-11-11

These behaviors might possibly be related and are being investigated under bug 546876.

kryan · ‎2011-11-10

I was able to get similar behavior one time by removing the config file, reopening OCSM, and then entering a password that ended in "^". Doing this produced a config file with most of the password in plain text - the last character was a NUL. So most of the password was entered in plain text. The username was still encrypted. However, repeating those same steps did not reprodice the exact same result.

kryan · ‎2011-11-10

I am unable to reproduce this behavior using OCSM 2.0R1 and filer passwords ending in the characters below. Please elaborate on how you are getting into this condition. ! ==> normal behavior @ ==> normal behavior # ==> normal behavior $ ==> normal behavior % ==> normal behavior ^ ==> normal behavior & ==> normal behavior * ==> normal behavior ( ==> normal behavior ) ==> normal behavior

kryan · ‎2011-11-09

Chris, If you still have those config files (before and after) I woudl like to see them. I have sent my email address to you. Thanks, Kevin

kryan · ‎2011-11-09

OCSM 2.0R1 on my system is not behaving this way - the usernames and passwords are encrypted. Which versions are in use where they are stored in plain text? If you clear the passwords (Tools -> Options -> Clear existing passwords) does this behavior still happen?

kryan · ‎2011-11-09

I see that from the case notes. We will need data, although I think support bundle should suffice.

kryan · ‎2011-11-09

Please post the case #. Thanks, Kevin

kryan · ‎2011-11-09

SME will create the dataset and populate the primary node with the qtrees in that step in the config wizard as well as assign a backup style policy (mirror is not supported on the SME application dataset). The volume mirrors must already be present and are driven by snapdrive, not DFM.

kryan · ‎2011-11-09

If the config wizard skips that step, snapdrive is either not configured to communicate with DFM or it cannot authenticate with DFM. Does "sdcli dfm_config list" run on the SME server show the DFM credentials, ip address, and protocol? If it does then run through the SME Config wizard again and when the archive step is skipped immediately open the audit.log on the DFM server and look for the SME server ip address and sdcli account to find the cause of the failure. if you don't find an entry for the SME server it is not reaching the DFM server.

kryan · ‎2011-11-03

As I am sure you are aware, you have purged all historical data related to these filers by performing this “delete –f” action. Bug3676432 will allow data to be collected some time, but there is no way to guarantee that collection continues other than upgrade to a version fixed for it (4.0D2 and higher). In other words, the data collection could stop working in the future and it could have simply started working again without any change to your server.

Re: OnCommand 5.0 - Can you import SnapVaults of SMVI-created backups and use with Host Package 1.1?

Re: trying to send real-time snmp trap on maxdirsize

Re: unable to discover external relationships

Re: unable to discover external relationships

Re: Oncommand Mgm Software CIFS Setup Issue

Re: LUN Type solaris_efi not available with the LUN create Wizard

Re: OnCommand Java connection reset errors

Re: Monitor FCP interface?

Re: OnCommand alert custom email

Re: OnCommand alert custom email

Re: Why do volume physical and used capacity slightly differ sometimes?

Re: Why do volume physical and used capacity slightly differ sometimes?

Re: SDW 6.1 and Protection Manager Integration for SMSQL

Re: DFM and apache vulnerabilities

OC System Manager Works Once

OC System Manager Works Once

Re: OC System Manager Works Once

Re: OC System Manager Works Once

OC System Manager Works Once

OC System Manager Works Once

OC System Manager Works Once

Re: OC System Manager Works Once

Re: SME with Protection Manager

Re: SME with Protection Manager

Re: Netapp Operations Manager 4.0.0 - Not reporting on two filers