Re: [gpfsug-discuss] AFM gateway node scaling

[Engeli Willi (ID SD)]

We are using AFM as well on a relatively small cluster. But if I see the
recommended scaling factors, the cluster will grow in Gateway nodes quicker
then everywhere else. 
I have had a recovery during a multiple week period. I understand the
reasons for the limits.
I would wish that the communication between home and cash system get
realized in a way that latencies and number of requests are handled more
efficiently. That would allow to set the limitations to Bandwidth and
Volume.
Kind regards
Willi


smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME cryptographic signature
___
gpfsug-discuss mailing list
gpfsug-discuss at spectrumscale.org
http://gpfsug.org/mailman/listinfo/gpfsug-discuss

[gpfsug-discuss] CTDB RFE opened @ IBM Would like to ask for your votes

[Engeli Willi (ID SD)]

Dear Collegues,
[WE] I have missed the discussion on the CTDB upgradeability with
interruption free methods. However, I hit this topic  as well and some of
our users where hit by the short interruption badly because of the kind of
work they had running. 
This motivated me to open an Request for Enhancement for CTDB to support in
a future release the interruption-less Upgrade.
Here is the Link for the RFE:

http://www.ibm.com/developerworks/rfe/execute?use_case=viewRfe_ID=117919

I hope this time it works at 1. Place..

Thanks in advance
Willi


smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME cryptographic signature
___
gpfsug-discuss mailing list
gpfsug-discuss at spectrumscale.org
http://gpfsug.org/mailman/listinfo/gpfsug-discuss

[gpfsug-discuss] asking for your vote for an RFE to support NFS V4.1

[Engeli Willi (ID SD)]

Hello Group,

I’ve just created a request for enhancement (RFE) to have ganesha supporting
NFS V4.1.

It is important, to have this new Protocol version supported, since our
Linux clients default support is more then 80% based in this version by
default and Linux distributions are actively pushing this Protocol.

The protocol also brings important corrections and enhancements with it.

 

I would like to ask you all very kindly to vote for this RFE please.

You find it here: https://www.ibm.com/developerworks/rfe/execute

Headline:NFS V4.1 Support

ID:117398

 

 

Freundliche Grüsse

 

Willi Engeli

ETH Zuerich

ID Speicherdienste

Weinbergstrasse 11

WEC C 18

8092 Zuerich

 

Tel: +41 44 632 02 69

 



smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME cryptographic signature
___
gpfsug-discuss mailing list
gpfsug-discuss at spectrumscale.org
http://gpfsug.org/mailman/listinfo/gpfsug-discuss

Re: [gpfsug-discuss] Spectrum Scale CES adds only Domain Admin to local

[Engeli Willi (ID SD)]

Hi Christoph,
This solved my issues in most areas.
Now I will probably add our Storage Management Group to local Administrators
group, this way we are able to use all strong utilities like subinacl etc,
and will be able to migrate to Spectrum Scale using robocopy with /ZB option
working properly.

For our Share-responsible Administrator we probably will add their
Management user to the 'admin Users' option of the specific share allowing
them to do wat ever they need to do, knowing that some tools may work with
limitations. 

Do you know if we may also add a builtin group named BackupOperators?

Regards
Willi

-Ursprüngliche Nachricht-
Von: gpfsug-discuss-boun...@spectrumscale.org
[mailto:gpfsug-discuss-boun...@spectrumscale.org] Im Auftrag von
gpfsug-discuss-requ...@spectrumscale.org
Gesendet: Freitag, 31. März 2017 13:00
An: gpfsug-discuss@spectrumscale.org
Betreff: gpfsug-discuss Digest, Vol 62, Issue 82

Send gpfsug-discuss mailing list submissions to
gpfsug-discuss@spectrumscale.org

To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
http://gpfsug.org/mailman/listinfo/gpfsug-discuss
or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
gpfsug-discuss-requ...@spectrumscale.org

You can reach the person managing the list at
gpfsug-discuss-ow...@spectrumscale.org

When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific than
"Re: Contents of gpfsug-discuss digest..."


Today's Topics:

   1. Re: Spectrum Scale CES adds only Domain Admin to local
  Administrators group (Christof Schmitt)


--

Message: 1
Date: Thu, 30 Mar 2017 13:18:21 -0700
From: "Christof Schmitt" 
To: gpfsug main discussion list 
Subject: Re: [gpfsug-discuss] Spectrum Scale CES adds only Domain
Admin to local Administrators group
Message-ID:



Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"

willi.eng...@id.ethz.ch wrote on 03/30/2017 07:23:40 AM:

> >-Last time I checked simply adding a normal computer object to the
domain
> didn't add the account of the adding user to the local administrators
group
> and CES is no exception.
> 
> We have been using before a competitor Product as a NAS system. With
that
> system, we were able to define virtual NAS Servers, each one joined as
an
> independent object to AD. When joined, we found the 'Domain Admin' 
> group
and
> the joining user as member of local administrators group of that 
> virtual server.
> Since out AD is quite big, it is structured into many OU. We as the
Storage
> OU have OU admin rights, but we are not member of "Domain Admin" group.
> Looking Back, we were able by ourselves to add the required groups as
needed
> to the local Administrators group of the NAS server.
> Why is this important? Since we have quit a mix of OS accessing our
shares,
> some of the create exclusive access rights at the time they create
profiles
> etc. At the end of the lifecycle, one needs to delete those files via
the
> SMB / NFSV4 protocol, which is difficult if not having access rights. 
> On
the
> other hand, we have seen situations, where one OS corrupted the ACL 
> and could not access anymore. Also this needs to be handled by us, 
> giving us
a
> hard time not being member of the administrators group. I.e. the MS 
> tool subinacl does check the privileges before trying to modify ACLs, 
> and if
not
> being member of the Administrators group, not all required privileges
are
> granted.

There is two parts to that in Spectrum Scale:

1) There is an option to declare a user as 'admin users'. The notion  there
is that this user is mapped to root on access, thus this user  can always
access files and fix access issues. The user defined here  should not be
used for normal usage, this is only recommended for  data migrations and to
fix access issues.

2) When joining Spectrum Scale to an Active Directory domain, the  Domain
Admins groups is added to the internal Administrators group  (sometimes
referred to as BUILTIN\Administrators). One way to change  the membership in
that group would be through the MMC on a Windows  client. Initially only
Domain Admins are allowed, a member of this  group would be required to add
other users or groups. Alternatively,  the "net sam" interface can be used
to modify the group from root  access on the protocol nodes:

/usr/lpp/mmfs/bin/net sam listmem Administrators to list the members of the
Administrators groups.

/usr/lpp/mmfs/bin/net sam addmem Administrators  DOMAIN\user to add a
member.

/usr/lpp/mmfs/bin/net sam delmem Administrators DOMAIN\user to remove a
member

This is currently an untested feature and not exposed through the CLI.
If there is a need to have this exposed through the CLI or GUI, that should
be requested through a RFE so that it can feed into the 

[gpfsug-discuss] Spectrum Scale CES adds only Domain Admin to local Administrators group

[Engeli Willi (ID SD)]

Hi everybody,

In our organization, the management of AD is strictly separated from
management of storage. Since we install spectrum scale with protocol SMB and
NFS support, we need to join the systems to AD, and have at least the
joining user added as well to the local administrators group.

 

Any idea of how to achieve this? Asking our Domain Admin is not the correct
method to add other groups, this needs to be in our hands. 

 

Regards Willi

 



smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME cryptographic signature
___
gpfsug-discuss mailing list
gpfsug-discuss at spectrumscale.org
http://gpfsug.org/mailman/listinfo/gpfsug-discuss

[gpfsug-discuss] Performance Tests using Bonnie++ forces expell of the client running the test

[Engeli Willi (ID SD)]

Dear all,

Does one of you know if Bonnie++ io Test is compatible with GPFS and if,
what could force expell of the client from the cluster?

 

Thanks

Willi

 



smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME cryptographic signature
___
gpfsug-discuss mailing list
gpfsug-discuss at spectrumscale.org
http://gpfsug.org/mailman/listinfo/gpfsug-discuss