[SunHELP] Disk format solution
David Strom
dstrom at ciesin.columbia.edu
Mon Jan 16 13:35:43 CST 2006
I wasn't able to get the prtvtoc & fmthard combo to work, I think that
fmthard doesn't update the right info on the disk... the A1000 disk info
has fewer sectors than the Sun 9GB disk. I think that this last poster
is right, the A1000 reserves some sectors for itself (kind of like the
private vs. public partitions that Veritas Volume Manager uses). I
don't really know for sure.
But, I did figure out how to change the disk -- format, then select the
disk, then select the "type" option, and select the Sun 9.0GB disk...
and lablel the disk. Voila! Not an A1000 disk any more. I don't
recall ever using the "type" option before.
And, yes, the disks in question were the same Seagate part number. I
will note that all of the Sun part-numbered 9GB disks had the same
number of cylinders, at least the ones I looked at.
--
David Strom
> Message: 1
> Date: Sat, 7 Jan 2006 06:40:54 -0500
> From: velociraptor <velociraptor at gmail.com>
> Subject: Re: [SunHELP] Disk format
> To: The SunHELP List <sunhelp at sunhelp.org>
> Message-ID:
> <b9ce685f0601070340r621b9faegb5a03c5e9d8273de at mail.gmail.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=WINDOWS-1252
>
> On 1/6/06, Connolly, Michael - EC Newton <Michael.Connolly at itt.com> wrote:
>
>>Do both disks have identical Seagate part numbers? Just because they both say
>>9GB doesn't mean they are constructed the same way.
>>
>>You might try prtvtoc on the "good" disk and use the output as input to the
>>fmthard on the "troublesome" disk.
>>
>>man prtvtoc
>>man fmthard
>
> prtvtoc /dev/rdsk/c0t0d0s2 | fmthard s - /dev/rdsk/c0t1d0s2
>
> replacing the c0t0d0s2 with the appropriate drive reference.
>
> This is a quick way to get the same exact partitioning onto two
> like drives, as well; we use it all the time for LVM setup.
>
> Likely as not, the A1000 is reserving some disk area for info
> regarding the disk's location in the array, similar to how Veritas
> Volume Manager "takes over" the entire disk, since it's a disk-
> based LVM. Solstice Disk Suite, aka Solaris SVM is a partition-
> based LVM.
>
> =Nadine=
>
> =Nadine=
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 2
> Date: Mon, 9 Jan 2006 12:14:11 -0700
> From: Micah DesJardins <micahdj at gmail.com>
> Subject: [SunHELP] Terminal Server / SC Management recommendations?
> To: sunhelp at sunhelp.org
> Message-ID:
> <7892f2a50601091114x1629f599lce254630cfee0848 at mail.gmail.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
>
> I'm currently researching my options for console connections on new
> Sun Servers and it looks like I'm going to need some sort of RJ45
> serial connection. I know I could get a Null modem cable to connect
> the machine to my desktop box's serial port but I'm trying to get more
> information about how other people with a small installation (say less
> than 8 servers?) are dealing with console management?
>
> What's the consensus if any on unifying devices? I know there are
> serial expanders, but my understanding is that there can be problems
> if the expander loses power (sends a halt to all servers) I know there
> are some console servers endorsed by Sun (Avocent, Cyclades,
> Lantronix) the cheapest I can find is around 800ish.
>
> How are you dealing with console management for small installations?
>
> TIA
>
> Micah DesJardins
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 3
> Date: Mon, 9 Jan 2006 15:12:04 -0500
> From: "William Enestvedt" <William.Enestvedt at jwu.edu>
> Subject: Re: [SunHELP] Terminal Server / SC Management
> recommendations?
> To: "The SunHELP List" <sunhelp at sunhelp.org>
> Message-ID: <DABB67A101236A43B25C94A2BE2F2EF67C5359 at pvdexc01a.jwu.edu>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
>
> Micah;
> I have a couple of Cyclades TS-1000 units for console servers, and I
> like 'em.
> The servers (280Rs to V890s) all have a monitor and keyboard & mouse
> (don't ask), but this gives me a secure, remote conection to the RSC
> cards (which can't and apparently _won't_ do SSH!).
> A recent issue of "SysAdmin" magazine had information about
> terminal/console servers (some of which was more marketing-oriented than
> technical) that might help you geta feel for what's out there. As for
> me, I *like* having a secure, remote connection to the things even when
> they're frozen at the 'go' prompt.
> -wde
> --
> Will Enestvedt
> UNIX System Administrator
> Johnson & Wales University -- Providence, RI
>
>
>>-----Original Message-----
>>From: sunhelp-bounces at sunhelp.org
>>[mailto:sunhelp-bounces at sunhelp.org] On Behalf Of Micah DesJardins
>>Sent: Monday, January 09, 2006 2:14 PM
>>To: sunhelp at sunhelp.org
>>Subject: [SunHELP] Terminal Server / SC Management recommendations?
>>
>>
>>I'm currently researching my options for console connections on new
>>Sun Servers and it looks like I'm going to need some sort of RJ45
>>serial connection. I know I could get a Null modem cable to connect
>>the machine to my desktop box's serial port but I'm trying to get more
>>information about how other people with a small installation (say less
>>than 8 servers?) are dealing with console management?
>>
>>What's the consensus if any on unifying devices? I know there are
>>serial expanders, but my understanding is that there can be problems
>>if the expander loses power (sends a halt to all servers) I know there
>>are some console servers endorsed by Sun (Avocent, Cyclades,
>>Lantronix) the cheapest I can find is around 800ish.
>>
>>How are you dealing with console management for small installations?
>>
>>TIA
>>
>>Micah DesJardins
>>_______________________________________________
>>SunHELP maillist - SunHELP at sunhelp.org
>>http://www.sunhelp.org/mailman/listinfo/sunhelp
>>
>
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 4
> Date: Tue, 10 Jan 2006 15:31:51 +0530
> From: Sunil Rawat <sunil.rawat at techbooks.com>
> Subject: [SunHELP] query
> To: sunhelp at sunhelp.org
> Message-ID: <6.0.3.0.1.20060110152517.0255e8c0 at mail.del.techbooks.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed
>
> Hi all,
> right now we have sun servers running with os Sun OS Ver-7, Sun OS
> Ver-8,Sun OS Ver-9 and
> Application running in our servers are:
> Acrobat Distiller ver 6.0, PDF Hand Shake ver 2.1 , Samba ver 1.1 , Apachi
> ver 1.2 , Adept ver 5.0 , Tetex ver 2.0.2 and emacs 21.1
> but now we are moving to sun OS ver 9 or Sun OS Ver 10 in all . I want to
> know that above all application are running on the sun ver 9 or 10.
> thanks..
> suni rawat
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 5
> Date: Wed, 11 Jan 2006 15:44:48 +0530
> From: Sunil Rawat <sunil.rawat at techbooks.com>
> Subject: [SunHELP] application querry
> To: sunhelp at sunhelp.org
> Message-ID: <6.0.3.0.1.20060111153651.02566b08 at localhost>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed
>
> Hi all,
> We are using sun servers with Sun OS Ver-5.8 and Sun Ver-5.9 .
> We were using Application :
> Ether Share (Helios) Ver:3.1
> PDF Hand Shake Ver-2.1
> Acrobat Distiller Ver-6.0
> Samba
> Apache
> Adept Ver-5.0
> TeTeX-Latex Ver-2.02
> Emacs Ver-21.1
> Mysql.
> Now we are moving to the Sun OS Ver 5.9 or 5.10. Actually i want to know
> that is all the above mentioned application are running on the sun os
> ver-5.9 or 5.10.
> thanks
> sunil rawat
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 6
> Date: Wed, 11 Jan 2006 11:49:27 +0100
> From: Michael Karl <mk at lexcom-net.de>
> Subject: Re: [SunHELP] application querry
> To: <sunhelp at sunhelp.org>
> Message-ID: <BFEAA147.1C547%mk at lexcom-net.de>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"
>
>
>>Hi all,
>>We are using sun servers with Sun OS Ver-5.8 and Sun Ver-5.9 .
>>We were using Application :
>>Ether Share (Helios) Ver:3.1
>>PDF Hand Shake Ver-2.1
>>Acrobat Distiller Ver-6.0
>>Samba
>>Apache
>>Adept Ver-5.0
>>TeTeX-Latex Ver-2.02
>>Emacs Ver-21.1
>>Mysql.
>>Now we are moving to the Sun OS Ver 5.9 or 5.10. Actually i want to know
>>that is all the above mentioned application are running on the sun os
>>ver-5.9 or 5.10.
>>thanks
>>sunil rawat
>>_______________________________________________
>>SunHELP maillist - SunHELP at sunhelp.org
>>http://www.sunhelp.org/mailman/listinfo/sunhelp
>
>
> Hi Sunil
>
> all Helios-Applications before UB (latest Version - available since Dec05)
> are not running with Solaris 10, but will work fine with Solaris 9.
> All other should be upgradable for Solaris 10.
>
> Michael
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 7
> Date: Thu, 12 Jan 2006 00:37:13 -0500
> From: velociraptor <velociraptor at gmail.com>
> Subject: Re: [SunHELP] Terminal Server / SC Management
> recommendations?
> To: The SunHELP List <sunhelp at sunhelp.org>
> Message-ID:
> <b9ce685f0601112137g3aa46ca6qc4026ee487cd38e8 at mail.gmail.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
>
> On 1/9/06, Micah DesJardins <micahdj at gmail.com> wrote:
>
>>information about how other people with a small installation (say less
>>than 8 servers?) are dealing with console management?
>>
>>What's the consensus if any on unifying devices? I know there are
>>serial expanders, but my understanding is that there can be problems
>>if the expander loses power (sends a halt to all servers) I know there
>>are some console servers endorsed by Sun (Avocent, Cyclades,
>>Lantronix) the cheapest I can find is around 800ish.
>>
>>How are you dealing with console management for small installations?
>
>
> We are pretty small as far as production operations go (less than 75
> servers for dev, qa, and prod). We have 3 Lantronix--1 32 port and
> 2 16 port.
>
> I think they are worth the extra--but make sure you get good cables
> for them. You *can* get the "break" problem with cheap cables.
> You also still have to be careful with unplugging the RJ45's--it can
> send a break as well. (Turn off keyboard input beforehand if you
> need to unplug while server is live--you can do this from the OS.)
> I am removing the last heads (don't ask, one of the doofus sys
> admins before me) off of our Sun servers with a move in a couple
> of weeks.
>
> I believe that Cisco serial concentrators will do SSH now, as well.
> Last time I checked it was SSH1, but that was several years ago.
>
> This kind of remote access is a *must* if you want to be able to
> do your prod support from off-site. At my last job, I never even
> saw my servers--we were co-located (my company's facility)--
> so if I absolutely needed "hands on" I used the NOC techs.
>
> =Nadine=
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 8
> Date: Thu, 12 Jan 2006 14:18:43 -0600
> From: David Stipp <dstipp at coolhack.net>
> Subject: Re: [SunHELP] Terminal Server / SC Management
> recommendations?
> To: The SunHELP List <sunhelp at sunhelp.org>
> Message-ID: <20060112201843.GF3159 at coolhack.net>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
>
> On Thu, Jan 12, 2006 at 12:37:13AM -0500, velociraptor wrote:
>
>>I think they are worth the extra--but make sure you get good cables
>>for them. You *can* get the "break" problem with cheap cables.
>
>
> RE: Breaks and Sun machines:
>
> The easiest thing to do to ``fix'' the break problem is to enable the
> alternate break sequence.
>
> See http://sysunconfig.net/unixtips/alternate_break_sequence.txt for
> information on this. (sunsolve docid 20427)
>
> After powercycling the supposedly ``break safe'' Digi portserver II
> boxes in the machine room at work during a maintaince window and halting
> every sun machine in there, I set this on everything and haven't had a
> problem since.
>
> David
>
More information about the SunHELP
mailing list