Re: Client and AIX mirrored disks...

[Seay, Paul]

No, there is nothing generically that can do this, but I think you can build
scripts before and after that may be able to integrate with the TSM backup.
You will have to look and see.

-Original Message-
From: Greatbanks, Stephen P [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Monday, October 22, 2001 8:12 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Client and AIX mirrored disks...


Zlatko,
Thanks for the information. I do realise that the AIX mirroring is
totally transparent from the user (and TSM) point of view. That is not
really my question though. The current backup procedure is (roughly)

(i) Stop all clients using the filesystems
(ii)Do a mksysb
(iii)   Break off one of the mirror copies
(iv)Re-mount the broken mirror copies as phantoms that we backup
(v) Allow clients to access disks
(vi)Backup the broken mirrors
(vii)   Re-sync the mirrors

The reason we do this is to minimise the downtime for the machine
and to allow a backup to continue whilst clients can use the filesystems.
Effectively we are taking a point-in-time snapshot of the filesystems.
I guess that what I was asking is whether there is anything in the TSM
client (in terms of smarts) to allow it to do something similar.
Am I right in thinking that the client will rely on the filesystem not
changing underneath it?


If we cannot, then we will just have to wear the downtime.

Thanks for that,

Steve Greatbanks

ps - You are of course right about varyon/varyoff working at the VG, rather
than the LV level.

-Original Message-
From: Zlatko Krastev/ACIT [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Tuesday, 23 October 2001 12:28 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Client and AIX mirrored disks...


Stephen,

there is no any need to vary off the logical volumes. Moreover you cannot
vary off the LVs but only the whole VG. And you have no access to logical
volumes in varied off VG, only to the physical disks.
TSM itself does not care is you LV mirrored or not. The B/A client accesses
files on the filesystem created on top of the LV or makes a backup of whole
LV as a single raw data file using image backup. The TDP products access
the data through application APIs and again do not care about mirroring
done by the application or operating system.
The only products which do use something similar to this "split mirror and
backup" procedure are TDP products for ESS and EMC Symmetrix.

Zlatko Krastev
IT Consultant





"Greatbanks, Stephen P" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> on 22.10.2001 07:18:04
Please respond to "ADSM: Dist Stor Manager" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
cc:

Subject:Client and AIX mirrored disks...

Hi,
I am something of a TSM beginner, and this is my first post here
too, so please excuse
any obvious mistakes on my part.
I am in the position of having to implement a TSM backup solution
for our client. This is (in the first instance at least) an all AIX shop.
I've read all the redbooks, and am pretty confident that I know (more or
less!) what needs to be done. However, I would appreciate some feedback
regarding AIX disk mirroring and how this affects the client-side of the
set-up.
Without going into too much detail about our current config, are
there any special considerations regarding the client if you are using AIX
LVM-level mirroring? Our current backups use sysback/sbom which jumps
through a number of hoops to break a copy off the (triple) mirror, which is
then backed up whilst work continues. For simplicity, as much as anything
else, I would far prefer to not have to do this kind of thing as part of
the backup procedure. Is there anything in the TSM client which assists in
the backup of mirrored volumes? Do the logical volumes have to be varied on
(just wondering if varying them off is an option) for TSM to back them up?
Does anybody have any experience with this kind of thing?

Thanks in advance,

Steve Greatbanks
--

Re: Lifespan of media

[Bill Mansfield]

I can't find a machine in our shop to read a 5.25" floppy.  The lifetime of
the media sometimes exceeds the lifetime of the technology.  This is a
particular problem with very long term archival.  Even if the drive can
read the tape, the software needs to be able to interpret it, which TSM has
done pretty well with so far (but it is a proprietary format).

On another topic:  does anybody cycle their TSM tapes?  I suspect that the
"base" backup tapes for the operating system and other unchanging files
tend to not get reclaimed very often.  I know that I could do a query on
the volume for last write date and do a move data from the old tape, but
I'm curious to know if anyone out there does this.  Veritas and the rest
automatically cycle their tapes via their "expiration" process.

_
William Mansfield
Senior Consultant
Solution Technology, Inc




"Joshua S.
Bassi"   To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
 Subject: Re: Lifespan of media
Sent by:
"ADSM: Dist
Stor Manager"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]
RIST.EDU>


10/22/2001
04:16 PM
Please
respond to
"ADSM: Dist
Stor Manager"






DLT is 3 years
3590 is 10 years
WORM is 100 years
CD - don't know, but a lot I would guess


--
Joshua S. Bassi
Independent IT Consultant
IBM Certified - AIX/HACMP, SAN, Shark
Tivoli Certified Consultant- ADSM/TSM
Cell (408)&(831) 332-4006
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

-Original Message-
From: ADSM: Dist Stor Manager [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] On Behalf Of
Rupp Thomas (Illwerke)
Sent: Monday, October 22, 2001 2:08 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Lifespan of media

Hi TSM-ers,

how long can I safely store data on different kind of media?
For longterm archiving I need to know the lifespan of DLT, 3590,
CD, WORM ...
Is there a source on the internet for such information?

Kind regards
Thomas Rupp
UIS - Informatik Services
Vorarlberger Illwerke AG
MAIL:   [EMAIL PROTECTED]
TEL:++43/5574/4991-251
FAX:++43/5574/4991-820-8251





--
Dieses eMail wurde auf Viren geprueft.

Vorarlberger Illwerke AG

--

Re: Policy and expiration

[Steve Harris]

Patrick,

Since TSM only backs up changed files, some of your older offsite tapes will still 
contain data that is a current backup (i.e. files that haven't changed since they were 
first backed up).

You really have to go to volume-based cycle system, ie you send tapes offsite and 
retrieve them only when they are empty.  If your offsite vendor can't handle this, you 
may have to ship tapes back out again repeatedly.

I assume that you are not using an offsite copypool.  If not, then you should be,  
because this allows offsite tapes to be reclaimed as they expire, by recreating them 
from the primary copypool.

Tivoli's DRM component is good for handling offsite storage, or alternatively look at 
AutoVault from Coderelief.

In the short term, you can check in your tapes and use a move data command  to 
consolidate them before checking out the next set.

Hope this helps

Steve Harris
AIX and TSM Admin 
Queensland Health, Brisbane Australia

>>> Patrick Sheehan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 23/10/2001 0:56:49 >>>
TSM'rs

I have a tape library with one drive and 4 weeks of tapes. I
rotate the tapes every week and thought I had set the policy correctly but
whenever I use the oldest tapes I'm unable to checkin some of the tapes
because there's still "good" data on them. What should I change in order
for the tapes to expire every three weeks automatically?

TIA

Patrick



**
This e-mail, including any attachments sent with it, is confidential 
and for the sole use of the intended recipient(s). This confidentiality 
is not waived or lost if you receive it and you are not the intended 
recipient(s), or if it is transmitted/ received in error.  

Any unauthorised use, alteration, disclosure, distribution or review 
of this e-mail is prohibited.  It may be subject to a statutory duty of 
confidentiality if it relates to health service matters.

If you are not the intended recipient(s), or if you have received this 
e-mail in error, you are asked to immediately notify the sender by 
telephone or by return e-mail.  You should also delete this e-mail 
message and destroy any hard copies produced.
**

Re: Netware restores and backup sets

[Mark Stapleton]

On Mon, 22 Oct 2001 10:29:41 -5, it was written:
>My take is that a backup set creation is the equivalent of a full
>restore.  If the backup set can be created in 3 hours, then a full
>server restore is possible in 3 hours - if you can get the data to
>the server (network throughput) and the netware server can accept the
>data (netware server write throughput).
>
>Is this sound reasoning? 

No.

>Thoughts?

Use some logic. A restore reads a file off of a tape and sends it
along the SCSI/fiber connection to the TSM server, which in turn pipes
it through the I/O bus (getting it from SCSI to ethernet/token ring),
sends it out a network connection, through an indeterminate number of
pieces of network hardware, gets it to its intended target. The target
box then sends the file through *its* I/O bus to IDE/SCSI, and finally
onto disk.

A backupset take a file that is stored on tape, sends it through a
SCSI connection to a SCSI adapter, goes through the I/O bus to another
SCSI adapter on the same bus, sends it back out through another SCSI
connection to a tape drive, which writes the file.

Do the math on the distance, the number of hops through separate
machines, and the translations. There's *lots* more overhead on a
restore; I didn't even discuss the disk operations necessary to
recreate volumes and directories.

--
Mark Stapleton ([EMAIL PROTECTED])

Re: Client and AIX mirrored disks...

[Greatbanks, Stephen P]

Steve,
   Thanks for that. We do indeed tend to backup a number of small files. I
don't think there
will be that much data (on a nightly basis), so depending on what I can get
in terms of network
bandwidth, I might be alright with a small backup window.
The only problem with using TSM to backup the broken mirrors is that
sbom_backup (used for breaking/fixing
the mirrors) is part of sysback, so we can't be sure we will have the
scripts around if TSM works for us.
No point paying for a licence we aren't using...
My strong preference is for the simple option, and just locking the clients
out whilst the backup is in progress.

Cheers,

Steve Greatbanks

-Original Message-
From: Steve Harris [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Tuesday, 23 October 2001 11:12 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Client and AIX mirrored disks...


Stephen,

It depends on what it is you are backing up.

As you know TSM only normally does incrementals, so if your data is a number
of small files,  the time taken to traverse your directory tree is
reasonable and only a reasonable  subset need to be backed up, then the TSM
backup process may be fast enough for your needs, replacing steps (ii) to
(vii)

If any of those conditions are not met, so that the TSM backup time becomes
too large to bear, then TSM can replace just step (vi) to good effect.

Regards

Steve Harris
AIX and TSM Admin
Queensland Health, Brisbane Australia

>>> "Greatbanks, Stephen P" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 23/10/2001 10:11:44
>>>
Zlatko,
Thanks for the information. I do realise that the AIX mirroring is
totally transparent from the user (and TSM) point of view. That is not
really my question though. The current backup procedure is (roughly)

(i) Stop all clients using the filesystems
(ii)Do a mksysb
(iii)   Break off one of the mirror copies
(iv)Re-mount the broken mirror copies as phantoms that we backup
(v) Allow clients to access disks
(vi)Backup the broken mirrors
(vii)   Re-sync the mirrors

The reason we do this is to minimise the downtime for the machine
and to allow a backup to continue whilst clients can use the filesystems.
Effectively we are taking a point-in-time snapshot of the filesystems.
I guess that what I was asking is whether there is anything in the TSM
client (in terms of smarts) to allow it to do something similar.
Am I right in thinking that the client will rely on the filesystem not
changing underneath it?


If we cannot, then we will just have to wear the downtime.

Thanks for that,

Steve Greatbanks

ps - You are of course right about varyon/varyoff working at the VG, rather
than the LV level.

-Original Message-
From: Zlatko Krastev/ACIT [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Tuesday, 23 October 2001 12:28 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Client and AIX mirrored disks...


Stephen,

there is no any need to vary off the logical volumes. Moreover you cannot
vary off the LVs but only the whole VG. And you have no access to logical
volumes in varied off VG, only to the physical disks.
TSM itself does not care is you LV mirrored or not. The B/A client accesses
files on the filesystem created on top of the LV or makes a backup of whole
LV as a single raw data file using image backup. The TDP products access
the data through application APIs and again do not care about mirroring
done by the application or operating system.
The only products which do use something similar to this "split mirror and
backup" procedure are TDP products for ESS and EMC Symmetrix.

Zlatko Krastev
IT Consultant





"Greatbanks, Stephen P" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> on 22.10.2001 07:18:04
Please respond to "ADSM: Dist Stor Manager" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
cc:

Subject:Client and AIX mirrored disks...

Hi,
I am something of a TSM beginner, and this is my first post here
too, so please excuse
any obvious mistakes on my part.
I am in the position of having to implement a TSM backup solution
for our client. This is (in the first instance at least) an all AIX shop.
I've read all the redbooks, and am pretty confident that I know (more or
less!) what needs to be done. However, I would appreciate some feedback
regarding AIX disk mirroring and how this affects the client-side of the
set-up.
Without going into too much detail about our current config, are
there any special considerations regarding the client if you are using AIX
LVM-level mirroring? Our current backups use sysback/sbom which jumps
through a number of hoops to break a copy off the (triple) mirror, which is
then backed up whilst work continues. For simplicity, as much as anything
else, I would far prefer to not have to do this kind of thing as part of
the backup procedure. Is there anything in the TSM client which assists in
the backup of mirrored volumes? Do the logical volumes have to be varied on
(just wondering if varying them off is an option) for TSM to back them up?
Does anybody have any experience with this kind of thing?

T

Re: Client and AIX mirrored disks...

[Steve Harris]

Stephen,

It depends on what it is you are backing up.

As you know TSM only normally does incrementals, so if your data is a number of small 
files,  the time taken to traverse your directory tree is reasonable and only a 
reasonable  subset need to be backed up, then the TSM backup process may be fast 
enough for your needs, replacing steps (ii) to (vii)

If any of those conditions are not met, so that the TSM backup time becomes too large 
to bear, then TSM can replace just step (vi) to good effect. 

Regards

Steve Harris
AIX and TSM Admin
Queensland Health, Brisbane Australia 

>>> "Greatbanks, Stephen P" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 23/10/2001 10:11:44 >>>
Zlatko,
Thanks for the information. I do realise that the AIX mirroring is
totally transparent from the user (and TSM) point of view. That is not
really my question though. The current backup procedure is (roughly)

(i) Stop all clients using the filesystems
(ii)Do a mksysb
(iii)   Break off one of the mirror copies
(iv)Re-mount the broken mirror copies as phantoms that we backup
(v) Allow clients to access disks
(vi)Backup the broken mirrors
(vii)   Re-sync the mirrors

The reason we do this is to minimise the downtime for the machine
and to allow a backup to continue whilst clients can use the filesystems.
Effectively we are taking a point-in-time snapshot of the filesystems.
I guess that what I was asking is whether there is anything in the TSM
client (in terms of smarts) to allow it to do something similar.
Am I right in thinking that the client will rely on the filesystem not
changing underneath it?


If we cannot, then we will just have to wear the downtime.

Thanks for that,

Steve Greatbanks

ps - You are of course right about varyon/varyoff working at the VG, rather
than the LV level.

-Original Message-
From: Zlatko Krastev/ACIT [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] 
Sent: Tuesday, 23 October 2001 12:28 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
Subject: Re: Client and AIX mirrored disks...


Stephen,

there is no any need to vary off the logical volumes. Moreover you cannot
vary off the LVs but only the whole VG. And you have no access to logical
volumes in varied off VG, only to the physical disks.
TSM itself does not care is you LV mirrored or not. The B/A client accesses
files on the filesystem created on top of the LV or makes a backup of whole
LV as a single raw data file using image backup. The TDP products access
the data through application APIs and again do not care about mirroring
done by the application or operating system.
The only products which do use something similar to this "split mirror and
backup" procedure are TDP products for ESS and EMC Symmetrix.

Zlatko Krastev
IT Consultant





"Greatbanks, Stephen P" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> on 22.10.2001 07:18:04
Please respond to "ADSM: Dist Stor Manager" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
cc:

Subject:Client and AIX mirrored disks...

Hi,
I am something of a TSM beginner, and this is my first post here
too, so please excuse
any obvious mistakes on my part.
I am in the position of having to implement a TSM backup solution
for our client. This is (in the first instance at least) an all AIX shop.
I've read all the redbooks, and am pretty confident that I know (more or
less!) what needs to be done. However, I would appreciate some feedback
regarding AIX disk mirroring and how this affects the client-side of the
set-up.
Without going into too much detail about our current config, are
there any special considerations regarding the client if you are using AIX
LVM-level mirroring? Our current backups use sysback/sbom which jumps
through a number of hoops to break a copy off the (triple) mirror, which is
then backed up whilst work continues. For simplicity, as much as anything
else, I would far prefer to not have to do this kind of thing as part of
the backup procedure. Is there anything in the TSM client which assists in
the backup of mirrored volumes? Do the logical volumes have to be varied on
(just wondering if varying them off is an option) for TSM to back them up?
Does anybody have any experience with this kind of thing?

Thanks in advance,

Steve Greatbanks
--


**
This e-mail, including any attachments sent with it, is confidential 
and for the sole use of the intended recipient(s). This confidentiality 
is not waived or lost if you receive it and you are not the intended 
recipient(s), or if it is transmitted/ received in error.  

Any unauthorised use, alteration, disclosure, distribution or review 
of this e-mail is prohibited.  It may be subject to a statutory duty of 
confidentiality if it relates to health service matters.

If you are not the intended recipient(s), or if you have received this 
e-mail in error, you are asked to immediately notify the sender by 
telephone or by return e-mail.  You should also delete this e-mail 
message and destroy any hard copies p

Re: Lifespan of media

[Kelly Lipp]

I like to take a different approach:

If you put your archive data on a tape and then take that tape to the
offsite for long term storage, media life is an issue.

If, however, you let the archive data mix with the backup data, that data is
reclaimed occasionally which provides a refresh of the data.  Make a copy of
the data in a copy storage pool so it is offsite as well.  In this fashion,
you can show the auditors that media retention is not an issue.

In general, the media manufactures will provide info on the life of media so
you should be able to find it there.

The larger issue with respect to archive is data format.  Keeping binary
data does not make much sense, especially if it's a database.  You would be
better off exporting to some more generic format.  I've written a paper on
the issue of archive:

http://www.storsol.com/cfusion/template.cfm?page1=wp_whyaisa&page2=blank_men
u

Kelly J. Lipp
Storage Solutions Specialists, Inc.
PO Box 51313
Colorado Springs, CO 80949
[EMAIL PROTECTED] or [EMAIL PROTECTED]
www.storsol.com or www.storserver.com
(719)531-5926
Fax: (240)539-7175


-Original Message-
From: ADSM: Dist Stor Manager [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of
Rupp Thomas (Illwerke)
Sent: Monday, October 22, 2001 2:08 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Lifespan of media


Hi TSM-ers,

how long can I safely store data on different kind of media?
For longterm archiving I need to know the lifespan of DLT, 3590,
CD, WORM ...
Is there a source on the internet for such information?

Kind regards
Thomas Rupp
UIS - Informatik Services
Vorarlberger Illwerke AG
MAIL:   [EMAIL PROTECTED]
TEL:++43/5574/4991-251
FAX:++43/5574/4991-820-8251





--
Dieses eMail wurde auf Viren geprueft.

Vorarlberger Illwerke AG

--

Re: Client and AIX mirrored disks...

[Greatbanks, Stephen P]

Zlatko,
Thanks for the information. I do realise that the AIX mirroring is
totally transparent from the user (and TSM) point of view. That is not
really my question though. The current backup procedure is (roughly)

(i) Stop all clients using the filesystems
(ii)Do a mksysb
(iii)   Break off one of the mirror copies
(iv)Re-mount the broken mirror copies as phantoms that we backup
(v) Allow clients to access disks
(vi)Backup the broken mirrors
(vii)   Re-sync the mirrors

The reason we do this is to minimise the downtime for the machine
and to allow a backup to continue whilst clients can use the filesystems.
Effectively we are taking a point-in-time snapshot of the filesystems.
I guess that what I was asking is whether there is anything in the TSM
client (in terms of smarts) to allow it to do something similar.
Am I right in thinking that the client will rely on the filesystem not
changing underneath it?


If we cannot, then we will just have to wear the downtime.

Thanks for that,

Steve Greatbanks

ps - You are of course right about varyon/varyoff working at the VG, rather
than the LV level.

-Original Message-
From: Zlatko Krastev/ACIT [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Tuesday, 23 October 2001 12:28 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Client and AIX mirrored disks...


Stephen,

there is no any need to vary off the logical volumes. Moreover you cannot
vary off the LVs but only the whole VG. And you have no access to logical
volumes in varied off VG, only to the physical disks.
TSM itself does not care is you LV mirrored or not. The B/A client accesses
files on the filesystem created on top of the LV or makes a backup of whole
LV as a single raw data file using image backup. The TDP products access
the data through application APIs and again do not care about mirroring
done by the application or operating system.
The only products which do use something similar to this "split mirror and
backup" procedure are TDP products for ESS and EMC Symmetrix.

Zlatko Krastev
IT Consultant





"Greatbanks, Stephen P" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> on 22.10.2001 07:18:04
Please respond to "ADSM: Dist Stor Manager" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
cc:

Subject:Client and AIX mirrored disks...

Hi,
I am something of a TSM beginner, and this is my first post here
too, so please excuse
any obvious mistakes on my part.
I am in the position of having to implement a TSM backup solution
for our client. This is (in the first instance at least) an all AIX shop.
I've read all the redbooks, and am pretty confident that I know (more or
less!) what needs to be done. However, I would appreciate some feedback
regarding AIX disk mirroring and how this affects the client-side of the
set-up.
Without going into too much detail about our current config, are
there any special considerations regarding the client if you are using AIX
LVM-level mirroring? Our current backups use sysback/sbom which jumps
through a number of hoops to break a copy off the (triple) mirror, which is
then backed up whilst work continues. For simplicity, as much as anything
else, I would far prefer to not have to do this kind of thing as part of
the backup procedure. Is there anything in the TSM client which assists in
the backup of mirrored volumes? Do the logical volumes have to be varied on
(just wondering if varying them off is an option) for TSM to back them up?
Does anybody have any experience with this kind of thing?

Thanks in advance,

Steve Greatbanks
--

Re: Client and AIX mirrored disks...

[Greatbanks, Stephen P]

Miles,
   Thanks for your input. Just to make things a little clearer, the reason
why we jump
through all the hoops to break off a mirror with our current backup
procedure is to
allow clients to carry on using the disks whilst we back up the broken
mirror. Effectively
we are getting a snapshot of the disk at that point in time. In this way, we
have a minimum
of downtime (basically just the time needed for breaking the mirror copies
off).

MP>So if you are backing up filesystems there is no need to break the
mirroring

I realise this is true in general, but not in the situation where the
contents of the
disks are still changing. Breaking off the mirrors is the way you accomplish
this when
using sysback; I was wondering whether TSM provides anything similar. I
guess I am asking
whether there is any easy way to use the client to get a point-in-time
snapshot of a filesystem
and back that up. We really want to minimise the downtime for the client
machine.
It might prove to be the case that we can ship the data off the client to
the TSM server
fast enough that we can get all the data off in the time it used to take to
break the mirrors,
which would certainly help. I don't really have a feel for how much data we
are likely
to be changing on these servers in a day, or how much network bandwidth I
can steal to
do this just yet.
I know that from the OS point of view, you just see the filesystem
within the LVM, and
that the multiple PP copies of the LP are handled transparently at a lower
level.

MP>However I think you want to back up filesystems, right?

Yep. That isn't the hard bit. The tricky bit is getting a snapshot whilst
keeping the
machine up...

I hope that is a little clearer!

Cheers,

Steve Greatbanks

-Original Message-
From: Miles Purdy [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Monday, 22 October 2001 11:22 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Client and AIX mirrored disks...


Hi,

Let me try and clarify things and that should answer your question

First, are you backing up filesystems or raw logical volumes? (hmm, it might
not matter).

Remember filesystems are built on logical volumes, logical volumes point to
one ore more physical volumes. So if you are backing up filesystems there is
no need to break the mirroring. Now even if you want to back up raw logical
volumes, I don't think you should have to break the mirrors.

>Without going into too much detail about our current config, are
>there any special considerations
>regarding the client if you are using AIX LVM-level mirroring?
NO!

>Is there anything in the TSM client which assists in the backup of mirrored
volumes?
No, because TSM clients look at filesystems, which don't know about
mirroring. The logical volumes manager handles the mirroring. ie. the answer
is no because you have to worry about it!

>Do the logical volumes have to be varied on (just wondering if varying them
off is an option) for TSM to back them up?
If they contain a filesystem YES, if you want to back up raw logical volumes
then I would think NO. However I think you want to back up filesystems,
right?

To answer your question generally, just install the client though smitty,
set the options and run dsmc inc. That's all you need to do to get started.

Miles



---
Miles Purdy
System Manager
Farm Income Programs Directorate
Winnipeg, MB, CA
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
ph: (204) 984-1602 fax: (204) 983-7557

---

>>> [EMAIL PROTECTED] 21-Oct-01 11:18:04 PM >>>
Hi,
I am something of a TSM beginner, and this is my first post here
too, so please excuse
any obvious mistakes on my part.
I am in the position of having to implement a TSM backup solution
for our client. This is
(in the first instance at least) an all AIX shop. I've read all the
redbooks, and am pretty confident
that I know (more or less!) what needs to be done. However, I would
appreciate some feedback
regarding AIX disk mirroring and how this affects the client-side of the
set-up.
Without going into too much detail about our current config, are
there any special considerations
regarding the client if you are using AIX LVM-level mirroring? Our current
backups use sysback/sbom
which jumps through a number of hoops to break a copy off the (triple)
mirror, which is then backed
up whilst work continues. For simplicity, as much as anything else, I would
far prefer to not have
to do this kind of thing as part of the backup procedure. Is there anything
in the TSM client which
assists in the backup of mirrored volumes? Do the logical volumes have to be
varied on (just wondering
if varying them off is an option) for TSM to back them up? Does anybody have
any experience with this
kind of thing?

Thanks in advance,

Steve Greatbanks
--

Re: Tape problems v4.2.1

[Suad Musovich]

On Mon, Oct 22, 2001 at 01:46:22PM -0700, Joshua S. Bassi wrote:
> I am in the middle of a W2K 4.2 install.  After seeing all the problems,
> I am backing down to 4.2 - can't go to 4.1 because my customer didn't
> buy 4.1!
Most of the problems seem to be from AIX systems, unless someone can say
otherwise?

Suad
--

Re: TSM 4.2.1

[Tom Tann{s]

After syncronizing the tsm-db with the 3494-inventory, I still get errors
like these:

10/23/2001 00:04:16  ANR8341I End-of-volume reached for 3590 volume BU0164.
10/23/2001 00:04:20  ANR8336I Verifying label of 3590 volume BU0164 in drive
  3590_2 (/dev/rmt2).
10/23/2001 00:04:39  ANR8447E No drives are currently available in library
  3494.
10/23/2001 00:04:39  ANR1404W Scratch volume mount request denied - mount
  failed.

All drives were busy, but the reclamation-process  should just sit and
wait..



q mount..

q mount should show information about mounted volumes.
help q mount states that this is still the case.

In 4.2.1 it seems that information on the mountpoints are included also.
Earlier, this information was available only though the show mp
unsupported command.

I prefer the q mount as documented..
Why not a q mountpoint or q mount -detail/f=d or similar?




On Mon, 22 Oct 2001, Tom Tann{s wrote:

>
> Thanks..
> I did have look at the 4.2.1.2-fix, but it didn't describe anything but
> the 3583-problem.
> Has anyone with 3494 installed the fix, and dit it solve the problem here
> as well?
>
> Btw.. I was also hoping that the fix for IC30965 (registering of miltiple
> license-files) had made it to 4.2.1.
> My actlogs are filled width some 1000-1800 ANR2841W's each day.
>
> IC30965 is closed. When can we expect to see a fix?
>
>
>
>

ITO alarms and TSM error messages

[Glass, Peter]

We would like to setup an error message monitoring process that sends alarms
to the Helpdesk for a select group of error messages, as they occur, in the
Solaris TSM Server Activity Log. We normally use ITO for this kind of thing.
How can we get a non-TSM error message monitor to "listen in" on the TSM
Server for messages to report -- as they occur? Any ideas or advice would be
most welcome!
Thanks, in advance.

Peter Glass
Distributed Storage Management (DSM)
Wells Fargo Services Company
> * 612-667-0086   * 866-407-5362
> * [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>

TSM 4.2 on W2K

[Joshua S. Bassi]

All,

For some reason I lost my TSM Wizards interface when I upgraded to 4.2.1
and then uninstalled and reinstalled 4.2.0.0.  Now I am trying to
install the TSM Server as a Service and it's not working.

I ran the command the install command from the console directory:

install "TSM Server" "c:\program files\tivoli\tsm\server\dsmsvc.exe"
administrator password

and when I go into Services and try to start the server it says that an
unexpected error has occurred.  I also tried installing the service with
the system account which is how I want it to run but it wouldn't
install.  I tried changing the user who started the service to the
system account and it still failed.  I normally have installed the
server with the Wizard but it disappeared and now I can't find the
executable that starts it, and it's not coming up in the MMC.

My question is how do I get the TSM Server to install as a service or
how do I get the TSM Wizard to come back up?


--
Joshua S. Bassi
Independent IT Consultant
IBM Certified - AIX/HACMP, SAN, Shark
Tivoli Certified Consultant- ADSM/TSM
Cell (408)&(831) 332-4006
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: storage agent?

[Bill Mansfield]

In theory the 3rd party copy will allow the disk to send data directly to
the tape without going through the TSM server.   This is done using new
SCSI XCOPY commands.  All the work is done under the supervision of the
backup server (or perhaps a client via a storage agent), so TSM knows what
has happened.

The IBM 2108 SDG already has some 3rd party capability, and will probably
be the first device to control the 3rd party copy.  This capability IS NOT
in current TSM, and functionality for future versions has not been
announced, of course.

Think about how fast disk pool migration could be with 3rd party copy...

_
William Mansfield
Senior Consultant
Solution Technology, Inc
630 357 7744 x338



Zlatko
Krastev/ACIT To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
  Subject: Re: storage agent?
Sent by:
"ADSM: Dist
Stor Manager"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]
RIST.EDU>


10/22/2001
09:27 AM
Please
respond to
"ADSM: Dist
Stor Manager"






Sorry for being less informed but what this 3rd party copy functionality
does and again how this feature will help to let the server know what the
client have done?

Zlatko Krastev
IT Consultant





"Joshua S. Bassi" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> on 20.10.2001 00:27:36
Please respond to "ADSM: Dist Stor Manager" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
cc:

Subject:Re: storage agent?

> 4. What is this server-less operation? Is this an already implemented
feature in v4.2.1 (new feature in maintenance release ?!?) or just
something planned to be implemented in v5.1 (or later) ? How the
server-less backup will mark volumes if it does not have any path to
notify the server DB? Or this would be some kind of standalone solution,
i.e. server + local client (+TDP for Apps) with reduced
capabilities/features?

It is my understanding that Serverless backup will be release in 5.1.  I
believe it will only work with SAN Routers and Gateways which have the
SCSI 3rd Party copy functionality built-in.


--
Joshua S. Bassi
Independent IT Consultant
IBM Certified - AIX/HACMP, SAN, Shark
Tivoli Certified Consultant- ADSM/TSM
Cell (408)&(831) 332-4006
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

-Original Message-
From: ADSM: Dist Stor Manager [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] On Behalf Of
Zlatko Krastev/ACIT
Sent: Friday, October 19, 2001 2:39 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: storage agent?

Help me to understand and please correct if I am wrong:

1. As far as I know from v4.1 and what I read in v4.2 docs, the storage
agent allows LAN-free (-->) DATA (<--) movement. Meta-data goes through
LAN
from client to server and sits in the DB. The server mounts the tape
volume, (I do not know who exactly does tape positioning), and storage
agent (limited functionality server code) writes backup data through SAN
to
the tape. If needed server dismounts volume, mounts new one and the
operation continues.
So if we thing about the storage pool data it goes straight from
client/agent to volume - no server involvement except for tape
mount/dismount. It does not have to go through the server.

2. SAN library sharing through SAN Data Gateway (or SAN Data Gateway
Router) is available since v3.7 between servers, enhanced in v4.1 to
allow
storage agent (not server) also to access the tapes but only for Windows
Agent and in v4.2 is additionally enhanced providing storage agents on
AIX
and Solaris. So this was available long time ago (sorry I cannot say
when
v4.1 was announced and am too lazy to check).

3. There is a possibility to share sequential volumes which are not
tapes
but FILE devclass through SANergy.
Did anybody tested/used this? Is anybody on this list using SANergy?
Does this mean that a storage agent can backup to shared FILE volumes
(best
theoretical backup time - both disks and FC) and later TSM server can
perform storage pool backup and migration?

4. What is this server-less operation? Is this an already implemented
feature in v4.2.1 (new feature in maintenance release ?!?) or just
something planned to be implemented in v5.1 (or later) ? How the
server-less backup will mark volumes if it does not have any path to
notify
the server DB? Or this would be some kind of standalone solution, i.e.
server + local client (+TDP for Apps) with reduced
capabilities/features?


Zlatko Krastev
IT Consultant






Suad Musovich <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> on 18.10.2001 07:09:54
Please respond to "ADSM: Dist Stor Manager" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
cc:

Subject:Re: storage agent?

That will imply 3rd party SCSI copy functionality, which I haven't
seen any indication they have incorporated to TSM.

The physical data will still have to go through the TSM server, within
the
SAN environment, before it gets put in a storag

Re: Lifespan of media

[Joshua S. Bassi]

DLT is 3 years
3590 is 10 years
WORM is 100 years
CD - don't know, but a lot I would guess


--
Joshua S. Bassi
Independent IT Consultant
IBM Certified - AIX/HACMP, SAN, Shark
Tivoli Certified Consultant- ADSM/TSM
Cell (408)&(831) 332-4006
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

-Original Message-
From: ADSM: Dist Stor Manager [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] On Behalf Of
Rupp Thomas (Illwerke)
Sent: Monday, October 22, 2001 2:08 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Lifespan of media

Hi TSM-ers,

how long can I safely store data on different kind of media?
For longterm archiving I need to know the lifespan of DLT, 3590,
CD, WORM ...
Is there a source on the internet for such information?

Kind regards
Thomas Rupp
UIS - Informatik Services
Vorarlberger Illwerke AG
MAIL:   [EMAIL PROTECTED]
TEL:++43/5574/4991-251
FAX:++43/5574/4991-820-8251





--
Dieses eMail wurde auf Viren geprueft.

Vorarlberger Illwerke AG

--

Lifespan of media

[Rupp Thomas (Illwerke)]

Hi TSM-ers,

how long can I safely store data on different kind of media?
For longterm archiving I need to know the lifespan of DLT, 3590,
CD, WORM ...
Is there a source on the internet for such information?

Kind regards
Thomas Rupp
UIS - Informatik Services
Vorarlberger Illwerke AG
MAIL:   [EMAIL PROTECTED]
TEL:++43/5574/4991-251
FAX:++43/5574/4991-820-8251




--
Dieses eMail wurde auf Viren geprueft.

Vorarlberger Illwerke AG
--

Re: ADSM and AIX 5

[David N. Reiss]

Yes. I meanted TSM 4.2.1.

-dnr

-Original Message-
From: Pearson, Dave [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: October 22, 2001 4:22 PM
To: '[EMAIL PROTECTED]'; [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: RE: ADSM and AIX 5


ADSM Server?  Do you mean TSM?  I don't think ADSM will work with AIX 5

David C. Pearson
IS Production Support Analyst
System & Network Service
Snohomish County PUD # 1
 <<...>>
Phone: 425.347.4420
Pager:  425.290.0944
FAX: 425.267.6380
E-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 

-Original Message-
From:   David N. Reiss [SMTP:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent:   Monday, October 22, 2001 12:42 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject:ADSM and AIX 5

We will be setting up a new ADSM server soon.  Anybody set it up on AIX 5
yet?  Does it work there?

Thanks,
-dnr

Re: Setting up TSM on AIX

[Lloyd Dieter]

A couple of things...

I assume that by "partition", you mean "logical volume".  AIX's limit
for standard JFS filesystems is (I believe) around 2GB...are you
creating "large file enable" filesystems?

I would be a little concerned about using RAID5 storage for
TSM...depending on how big/active you expect your TSM environment to
grow, and what type of disk it is (SSA? Shark? SCSI?).

Lastly...do you really need to create those big LV's?  TSM volumes can
be create as lots of smaller files, and they can be distributed across
multiple file systems.  I usually try to stay away from creating those
big whopping files, as they limit flexibility, should you ever need to
make adjustments (reductions) in the size of a TSM DB/log/storage pool.

-Lloyd

"Klein, Robert (CIT)" wrote:
>
> We trying to set up a TSM server on AIX.  The person setting up the server
> is an experienced Unix sysadmin, but is running into a problem defining
> partitions on the AIX box.  The disk system is  350 GB RAID5.  When she
> tries to set up a partition larger than 5 GB, she gets an error message.
> Anyone have any idea of what she might be doing wrong?  Also, does anyone
> have suggestions on how best to set up the partitions  (one partition for
> both the db/recovery logs and the disk storage pools, separate partitions,
> etc.?)  I checked the ADSM-L archives for the last couple of years and did
> not see anything on this issue.
>
> > Thanks for any help you can provide.
> >

--
-
Lloyd Dieter-   Senior Technology Consultant
   Synergy, Inc.   http://www.synergyinc.cc   [EMAIL PROTECTED]
 Main:716-389-1260fax:716-389-1267
-

Re: FW: v4.2.1 TSM Clients

[Andrew Raibeck]

> When I signed onto this list there was a specific statement, which
> effectively said, the postings by IBM/Tivoli staff are *NOT* an
> official answer from IBM/Tivoli.  So as Zlatko Krastev wrote, they
> are a more skilled colleague.

My ADSM-L subscription info does not contain any such statement, although
it may have changed since the last time I subscribed. But your and
Zlatko's interpretation is a pretty rigid one that I don't think is quite
in the spirit of what any such statement was intended to convey. Yes, to
an extent we are all colleagues in the computer profession, specifically
in the area of storage management and TSM. On the other hand, our
relationship is also that of customer and vendor, and it is from this
latter view that I -- and I think I am safe in saying, my fellow TSM
developers -- participate. Notwithstanding the facts that our
participation is voluntary and ADSM-L is not an official IBM support
channel, when we do participate, it is as "IBM", just as my signature
information indicates.

FYI, the TSM client README contains a more elaborate version of the
statement that Zlatko quoted, and is more in keeping with the spirit of
the conditions of our participation:

  - To participate in user discussions of Tivoli Storage Manager you can
subscribe to the ADSM-L list server. This is user forum maintained by
Marist College and subscribed to by more than 1,500 users (at the
time of this writing). While not officially supported by IBM, Tivoli
Storage Manager developers and other IBM support staff also
participate
on an informal, best-effort basis. Because this is not an official IBM
support channel, you should contact IBM Technical Support if you
require
a response specifically from IBM.  Otherwise there is no guarantee
that
IBM will respond to your question on the list server.

I hopes this helps to clarify things.

Regards,

Andy

Andy Raibeck
IBM Software Group
Tivoli Storage Manager Client Development
Internal Notes e-mail: Andrew Raibeck/Tucson/IBM@IBMUS
Internet e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

The only dumb question is the one that goes unasked.
The command line is your friend.
"Good enough" is the enemy of excellence.

When I signed onto this list there was a specific statement, which
 effectively said, the postings by IBM/Tivoli staff are *NOT* an official
 answer from IBM/Tivoli.  So as Zlatko Krastev wrote, they are a more
skilled
 colleague.

 For official answers call the 800 number or search the web.

 On Mon, 22 Oct 2001, Loon, E.J. van - SPLXM wrote:

 > Hi Zlatko!
 > Andrew Raibeck is a person from TSM Development at Tivoli. So his
statements
 > are in fact Tivoli statements, unless otherwise specified, that is.
 > Kindest regards,
 > Eric van Loon
 > KLM Royal Dutch Airlines
 >
 >
 > -Original Message-
 > From: Zlatko Krastev/ACIT [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
 > Sent: Monday, October 22, 2001 16:29
 > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
 > Subject: Re: FW: v4.2.1 TSM Clients
 >
 >
 > First of all I do not know Andy's position at Tivoli.
 > And read what is written in the README:
 > "This is not officially supported by IBM, but IBM support people
 > do participate in the discussions, along with other  users."
 > So IMHO here Andy is just a colleague. More skilled in ADSM/TSM, closer
to
 > the developers, but just a colleague.
 > If something shows up on the web-site or in docs on media that would be
 > official.
 >
 > Zlatko Krastev
 > IT Consultant
 >
 >
 >
 >
 >
 > "Loon, E.J. van - SPLXM" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> on 19.10.2001 17:57:48
 > Please respond to "ADSM: Dist Stor Manager" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
 > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
 > cc:
 >
 > Subject:Re: FW: v4.2.1 TSM Clients
 >
 > Andrew Raibeck answered "I am almost certain that this change in
behavior
 > is
 > not deliberate. The APAR is going to be handled as a code defect"
 > Isn't that you'r Tivoli official answer?
 > Kindest regards,
 > Eric van Loon
 > KLM Royal Dutch Airlines
 >
 > -Original Message-
 > From: Zlatko Krastev/ACIT [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
 > Sent: Friday, October 19, 2001 12:29
 > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
 > Subject: Re: FW: v4.2.1 TSM Clients
 >
 >
 > This was already discussed in the list. Look for the thread "Windows
client
 > behavior change at 4.2.1.0" and answer of Andrew Raibeck from
9.10.2001.
 > But it is possible that Andy and this Bob are just having different
 > PERSONAL opinions. We still do not have answer from any Tivoli
official, do
 > we?
 >
 > Zlatko Krastev
 > IT Consultant
 >
 >
 >
 >
 >
 > "Subash, Chandra" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> on 18.10.2001 07:41:31
 > Please respond to "ADSM: Dist Stor Manager" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
 > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
 > cc:
 >
 > Subject:FW: v4.2.1 TSM Clients
 >
 > i HAVE GOT THIS EMAIL FROM ONE OF MY FRIENDS. GUYS WHAT DO YOU THINK IS
IT
 > TRUE ?
 >
 > Hi Guys
 >
 > According to Tivoli Support they have made an alteration to way client
 > v4.2.1 reports Result code 4 to the server. Earlier version clients
wou

Re: Tape problems v4.2.1

[Joshua S. Bassi]

I am in the middle of a W2K 4.2 install.  After seeing all the problems,
I am backing down to 4.2 - can't go to 4.1 because my customer didn't
buy 4.1!


--
Joshua S. Bassi
Independent IT Consultant
IBM Certified - AIX/HACMP, SAN, Shark
Tivoli Certified Consultant- ADSM/TSM
Cell (408)&(831) 332-4006
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

-Original Message-
From: ADSM: Dist Stor Manager [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] On Behalf Of
Gill, Geoffrey L.
Sent: Monday, October 22, 2001 1:40 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Tape problems v4.2.1

Tivoli tells me they're working on the tape problem we all, or most of
us,
seem to be having with 4.2.1. It seems to rear it's ugly head each time
the
TSM server restarts. So in other words don't stop and restart the
server.
Oh, wait, it has it's own built in crash mechanism just so we'll all get
the
chance to deal with the tape problem too.

If we're lucky we might have it by early next week they say. As for the
crash problem...

Geoff Gill
TSM Administrator
NT Systems Support Engineer
SAIC
E-Mail:   [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Phone:  (858) 826-4062
Pager:   (888) 997-9614

Tape problems v4.2.1

[Gill, Geoffrey L.]

Tivoli tells me they're working on the tape problem we all, or most of us,
seem to be having with 4.2.1. It seems to rear it's ugly head each time the
TSM server restarts. So in other words don't stop and restart the server.
Oh, wait, it has it's own built in crash mechanism just so we'll all get the
chance to deal with the tape problem too.

If we're lucky we might have it by early next week they say. As for the
crash problem...

Geoff Gill
TSM Administrator
NT Systems Support Engineer
SAIC
E-Mail:   [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Phone:  (858) 826-4062
Pager:   (888) 997-9614

Re: ADSM and AIX 5

[Joshua S. Bassi]

Yes, it will definitely work with AIX 5.1 with the required AIX patches.
These patches are listed in the TSM installation README.


--
Joshua S. Bassi
Independent IT Consultant
IBM Certified - AIX/HACMP, SAN, Shark
Tivoli Certified Consultant- ADSM/TSM
Cell (408)&(831) 332-4006
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

-Original Message-
From: ADSM: Dist Stor Manager [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] On Behalf Of
Pearson, Dave
Sent: Monday, October 22, 2001 1:22 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: ADSM and AIX 5

ADSM Server?  Do you mean TSM?  I don't think ADSM will work with AIX 5

David C. Pearson
IS Production Support Analyst
System & Network Service
Snohomish County PUD # 1
 <<...>>
Phone: 425.347.4420
Pager:  425.290.0944
FAX: 425.267.6380
E-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 

-Original Message-
From:   David N. Reiss [SMTP:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent:   Monday, October 22, 2001 12:42 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject:ADSM and AIX 5

We will be setting up a new ADSM server soon.  Anybody set it up on AIX
5
yet?  Does it work there?

Thanks,
-dnr

Re: ADSM and AIX 5

[Pearson, Dave]

ADSM Server?  Do you mean TSM?  I don't think ADSM will work with AIX 5

David C. Pearson
IS Production Support Analyst
System & Network Service
Snohomish County PUD # 1
 <<...>>
Phone: 425.347.4420
Pager:  425.290.0944
FAX: 425.267.6380
E-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 

-Original Message-
From:   David N. Reiss [SMTP:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent:   Monday, October 22, 2001 12:42 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject:ADSM and AIX 5

We will be setting up a new ADSM server soon.  Anybody set it up on AIX 5
yet?  Does it work there?

Thanks,
-dnr

Re: Setting up TSM on AIX

[PINNI, BALANAND (SBCSI)]

U mean more than 5gb of lv?
see that she choses pp size acurately.
The parameters u choose to create lv!
Also go to /usr/security/limits and set file size to -1.

-Original Message-
From: Klein, Robert (CIT) [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Monday, October 22, 2001 8:48 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Setting up TSM on AIX


We trying to set up a TSM server on AIX.  The person setting up the server
is an experienced Unix sysadmin, but is running into a problem defining
partitions on the AIX box.  The disk system is  350 GB RAID5.  When she
tries to set up a partition larger than 5 GB, she gets an error message.
Anyone have any idea of what she might be doing wrong?  Also, does anyone
have suggestions on how best to set up the partitions  (one partition for
both the db/recovery logs and the disk storage pools, separate partitions,
etc.?)  I checked the ADSM-L archives for the last couple of years and did
not see anything on this issue.

> Thanks for any help you can provide.
>

Re: DRM (Disaster Recovery Manager)

[Seay, Paul]

Correct.

-Original Message-
From: Prather, Wanda [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Monday, October 22, 2001 3:48 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: DRM (Disaster Recovery Manager)


But it IS included on the 4.1 media.
You don't have to order any separate install media, you just have to pay for
the license.

-Original Message-
From: Seay, Paul [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Monday, October 22, 2001 3:33 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: DRM (Disaster Recovery Manager)


DRM is a separately licensed product.

-Original Message-
From: Nazir [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Monday, October 22, 2001 3:09 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: DRM (Disaster Recovery Manager)


Hi,

What do I need to work with DRM (Disaster Recovery Manager) ?
Is It including on TSM 4.1 for Win NT ?
And How Can I work with DRM and How does it work ?

Thank you
Nazir

Re: DRM (Disaster Recovery Manager)

[Prather, Wanda]

But it IS included on the 4.1 media.
You don't have to order any separate install media, you just have to pay for
the license.

-Original Message-
From: Seay, Paul [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Monday, October 22, 2001 3:33 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: DRM (Disaster Recovery Manager)


DRM is a separately licensed product.

-Original Message-
From: Nazir [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Monday, October 22, 2001 3:09 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: DRM (Disaster Recovery Manager)


Hi,

What do I need to work with DRM (Disaster Recovery Manager) ?
Is It including on TSM 4.1 for Win NT ?
And How Can I work with DRM and How does it work ?

Thank you
Nazir

Re: TSM 4.2.x on AIX 4.3.3

[Davidson, Becky]

It takes you over 5 hours to backup a 1.8 GB database?  Are you doing a cold
backup or using a TDP to do a hot backup?  We are backing up 1.2 TB hot in
5:30 or cold in 5:00.  Are you going to a disk pool or a tape pool?
Becky Davidson
Data Manager/AIX Administrator
EDS/Sara Lee Bakery Group
voice: 314-259-7589
fax: 314-877-8589
email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]



-Original Message-
From: Rosa Leung/Toronto/IBM [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Monday, October 22, 2001 2:29 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: TSM 4.2.x on AIX 4.3.3


We have a client that just upgrade one of the AIX server from 4.2.1 ro
4.3.3. and on this box, TSM 4.2.x client code was installed to backup
Oracle database (1.8 to 1.9 GB).  After upgrade this backup requires over 5
hours time.  Does anyone have similar situatiation?   Is this AIX or TSM
problem? Can we tune either TSM or AIX to make backup running much quick to
properly 1-2 hours time?

Thanks.


Rosa Leung
Distributed Storage Services
Tel: (416) 490-5151  Fax: (416) 490-5283
[EMAIL PROTECTED]   BK02/245/TOR
_
IBM Global Services

Re: TSM 4.2.x on AIX 4.3.3

[Seay, Paul]

I would bet that the Network configuration changed during this install or
something else is causing this problem.

-Original Message-
From: Rosa Leung/Toronto/IBM [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Monday, October 22, 2001 3:29 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: TSM 4.2.x on AIX 4.3.3


We have a client that just upgrade one of the AIX server from 4.2.1 ro
4.3.3. and on this box, TSM 4.2.x client code was installed to backup
Oracle database (1.8 to 1.9 GB).  After upgrade this backup requires over 5
hours time.  Does anyone have similar situatiation?   Is this AIX or TSM
problem? Can we tune either TSM or AIX to make backup running much quick to
properly 1-2 hours time?

Thanks.


Rosa Leung
Distributed Storage Services
Tel: (416) 490-5151  Fax: (416) 490-5283
[EMAIL PROTECTED]   BK02/245/TOR
_
IBM Global Services

ADSM and AIX 5

[David N. Reiss]

We will be setting up a new ADSM server soon.  Anybody set it up on AIX 5
yet?  Does it work there?

Thanks,
-dnr

Re: TSM 4.2.x on AIX 4.3.3

[Rosa Leung/Toronto/IBM]

We have a client that just upgrade one of the AIX server from 4.2.1 ro
4.3.3. and on this box, TSM 4.2.x client code was installed to backup
Oracle database (1.8 to 1.9 GB).  After upgrade this backup requires over 5
hours time.  Does anyone have similar situatiation?   Is this AIX or TSM
problem? Can we tune either TSM or AIX to make backup running much quick to
properly 1-2 hours time?

Thanks.


Rosa Leung
Distributed Storage Services
Tel: (416) 490-5151  Fax: (416) 490-5283
[EMAIL PROTECTED]   BK02/245/TOR
_
IBM Global Services

Re: DRM (Disaster Recovery Manager)

[Seay, Paul]

DRM is a separately licensed product.

-Original Message-
From: Nazir [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Monday, October 22, 2001 3:09 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: DRM (Disaster Recovery Manager)


Hi,

What do I need to work with DRM (Disaster Recovery Manager) ?
Is It including on TSM 4.1 for Win NT ?
And How Can I work with DRM and How does it work ?

Thank you
Nazir

DRM (Disaster Recovery Manager)

[Nazir]

Hi,

What do I need to work with DRM (Disaster Recovery Manager) ?
Is It including on TSM 4.1 for Win NT ?
And How Can I work with DRM and How does it work ?

Thank you
Nazir

Re: Expiration in 4.1.3

[Miles Purdy]

In going from 3.1 to 4.1 my expiration went from minutes to over 1 hour
(AIX 4.3.3; ML8 - at the time)
miles


---
Miles Purdy 
System Manager
Farm Income Programs Directorate
Winnipeg, MB, CA
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
ph: (204) 984-1602 fax: (204) 983-7557
---

>>> [EMAIL PROTECTED] 22-Oct-01 11:36:56 AM >>>
I upgraded TSM 4.1.2 to 4.1.3.2 about 3 months ago on AIX 4.3.3 ML8 & I did
not have this happen to me.

-Original Message-
From: Prather, Wanda [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] 
Sent: Monday, October 22, 2001 11:34 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
Subject: Re: Expiration in 4.1.3


We upgraded form 3.7.4 to AIX 4.1.3 on AIX 4.3, and did NOT see anything
like this.
What platform are you on?



-Original Message-
From: Andy Carlson [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] 
Sent: Monday, October 22, 2001 10:22 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
Subject: Expiration in 4.1.3


I have noticed a great extension in the time it takes to do expiration
in 4.1.3.  I upgraded from 3.7.4, where expiration took 12-16
hours.  Now it is taking 72 or more hours.  Has anyone else seen
this?  Thanks.

Andy Carlson |\  _,,,---,,_
[EMAIL PROTECTED]ZZZzz /,`.-'`'-.  ;-;;,_
BJC Health System   |,4-  ) )-,_. ,\ (  `'-'
St. Louis, Missouri'---''(_/--'  `-'\_)
Cat Pics: http://andyc.dyndns.org/animal.html

Re: Expiration in 4.1.3

[Andy Carlson]

Cache hit ratio is fine, but I did not realize the default changed.  I
will change that and try it.  We are also upgrading to 4.1.4.4 today per
Support for another problem.  Thanks.

Andy Carlson |\  _,,,---,,_
[EMAIL PROTECTED]ZZZzz /,`.-'`'-.  ;-;;,_
BJC Health System   |,4-  ) )-,_. ,\ (  `'-'
St. Louis, Missouri'---''(_/--'  `-'\_)
Cat Pics: http://andyc.dyndns.org/animal.html

On Mon, 22 Oct 2001, Prather, Wanda wrote:

> What we did find is that the default for "quiet" had changed.  I had to
> change my script that starts expiration to explicitly include QUIET=YES.  If
> you are expiring hundreds of thousands of files I supposed having "quiet=NO"
> could make it take a bit longer if your db is huge and busy, since that
> would add bunches of messages to your log, but I doubt that's the
> problem
>
> Have you done a Q DB F=D to see if your DB cache hit ratio is still >=98% ?
>
>
> -Original Message-
> From: Andy Carlson [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Monday, October 22, 2001 12:11 PM
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: Re: Expiration in 4.1.3
>
>
> AIX 4.3.3 ML08 on an S7A.
>
> Andy Carlson |\  _,,,---,,_
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]ZZZzz /,`.-'`'-.  ;-;;,_
> BJC Health System   |,4-  ) )-,_. ,\ (  `'-'
> St. Louis, Missouri'---''(_/--'  `-'\_)
> Cat Pics: http://andyc.dyndns.org/animal.html
>
> On Mon, 22 Oct 2001, Prather, Wanda wrote:
>
> > We upgraded form 3.7.4 to AIX 4.1.3 on AIX 4.3, and did NOT see anything
> > like this.
> > What platform are you on?
> >
> >
> >
> > -Original Message-
> > From: Andy Carlson [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> > Sent: Monday, October 22, 2001 10:22 AM
> > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > Subject: Expiration in 4.1.3
> >
> >
> > I have noticed a great extension in the time it takes to do expiration
> > in 4.1.3.  I upgraded from 3.7.4, where expiration took 12-16
> > hours.  Now it is taking 72 or more hours.  Has anyone else seen
> > this?  Thanks.
> >
> > Andy Carlson |\  _,,,---,,_
> > [EMAIL PROTECTED]ZZZzz /,`.-'`'-.  ;-;;,_
> > BJC Health System   |,4-  ) )-,_. ,\ (  `'-'
> > St. Louis, Missouri'---''(_/--'  `-'\_)
> > Cat Pics: http://andyc.dyndns.org/animal.html
> >
>

Re: FW: v4.2.1 TSM Clients

[Joel Fuhrman]

When I signed onto this list there was a specific statement, which
effectively said, the postings by IBM/Tivoli staff are *NOT* an official
answer from IBM/Tivoli.  So as Zlatko Krastev wrote, they are a more skilled
colleague.

For official answers call the 800 number or search the web.

On Mon, 22 Oct 2001, Loon, E.J. van - SPLXM wrote:

> Hi Zlatko!
> Andrew Raibeck is a person from TSM Development at Tivoli. So his statements
> are in fact Tivoli statements, unless otherwise specified, that is.
> Kindest regards,
> Eric van Loon
> KLM Royal Dutch Airlines
>
>
> -Original Message-
> From: Zlatko Krastev/ACIT [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Monday, October 22, 2001 16:29
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: Re: FW: v4.2.1 TSM Clients
>
>
> First of all I do not know Andy's position at Tivoli.
> And read what is written in the README:
> "This is not officially supported by IBM, but IBM support people
> do participate in the discussions, along with other  users."
> So IMHO here Andy is just a colleague. More skilled in ADSM/TSM, closer to
> the developers, but just a colleague.
> If something shows up on the web-site or in docs on media that would be
> official.
>
> Zlatko Krastev
> IT Consultant
>
>
>
>
>
> "Loon, E.J. van - SPLXM" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> on 19.10.2001 17:57:48
> Please respond to "ADSM: Dist Stor Manager" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> cc:
>
> Subject:Re: FW: v4.2.1 TSM Clients
>
> Andrew Raibeck answered "I am almost certain that this change in behavior
> is
> not deliberate. The APAR is going to be handled as a code defect"
> Isn't that you'r Tivoli official answer?
> Kindest regards,
> Eric van Loon
> KLM Royal Dutch Airlines
>
> -Original Message-
> From: Zlatko Krastev/ACIT [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Friday, October 19, 2001 12:29
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: Re: FW: v4.2.1 TSM Clients
>
>
> This was already discussed in the list. Look for the thread "Windows client
> behavior change at 4.2.1.0" and answer of Andrew Raibeck from 9.10.2001.
> But it is possible that Andy and this Bob are just having different
> PERSONAL opinions. We still do not have answer from any Tivoli official, do
> we?
>
> Zlatko Krastev
> IT Consultant
>
>
>
>
>
> "Subash, Chandra" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> on 18.10.2001 07:41:31
> Please respond to "ADSM: Dist Stor Manager" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> cc:
>
> Subject:FW: v4.2.1 TSM Clients
>
> i HAVE GOT THIS EMAIL FROM ONE OF MY FRIENDS. GUYS WHAT DO YOU THINK IS IT
> TRUE ?
>
> Hi Guys
>
> According to Tivoli Support they have made an alteration to way client
> v4.2.1 reports Result code 4 to the server. Earlier version clients would
> allow for a certain number of files to fail during the backup and still
> report to the server that the Schedule was successful. However version
> 4.2.1
> has been altered so that a result code of failed will be reported to the
> server even if 1 file fails during a backup.
> ntcmachine had been failing on some WINNT system files which I have added
> exceptions for under direction of Tivoli support and now backups of this
> machine seem to be successful.
> Bob from Tivoli suggested that if we are worried about seeing failed result
> codes on the daily report that there may be a way to generate a report
> listing statistics of how many files or how much data had been backed up
> from each machine to provide a more accurate picture as to whether the
> backups were successful.
>
>
> **
> This e-mail and any attachment may contain confidential and privileged
> material intended for the addressee only. If you are not the addressee, you
> are notified that no part of the e-mail or any attachment may be disclosed,
> copied or distributed, and that any other action related to this e-mail or
> attachment is strictly prohibited, and may be unlawful. If you have
> received this e-mail by error, please notify the sender immediately by
> return e-mail, and delete this message. Koninklijke Luchtvaart Maatschappij
> NV (KLM), its subsidiaries and/or its employees shall not be liable for the
> incorrect or incomplete transmission of this e-mail or any attachments, nor
> responsible for any delay in receipt.
> **
>

"TSM .jar" files

[Wayne T. Smith]

I've installed enough *SM versions and levels (including V4.2.1.0) on my desktop 
Win2000
machine that I don't know which *SM client caused the problem, but ..

Whenever I try to start a Java application now (run a .jar file), I get a message that 
this is a TSM
thing ... go away (more or less).  If I open File Manager and select "Tools", "Folder 
options...",
"File Types", and scroll to the "jar" file type ... I see "TSM Jar file".

Reinstalling Sun's Java Runtime Environment returns JAR to "Executable jar file".

Anyone else see this?  Under what circumstance?

cheers, wayne
Wayne T. Smith  [EMAIL PROTECTED]
ADSM Technical Coordinator - UNET   University of Maine System

Re: Expiration in 4.1.3

[Prather, Wanda]

What we did find is that the default for "quiet" had changed.  I had to
change my script that starts expiration to explicitly include QUIET=YES.  If
you are expiring hundreds of thousands of files I supposed having "quiet=NO"
could make it take a bit longer if your db is huge and busy, since that
would add bunches of messages to your log, but I doubt that's the
problem

Have you done a Q DB F=D to see if your DB cache hit ratio is still >=98% ?


-Original Message-
From: Andy Carlson [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Monday, October 22, 2001 12:11 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Expiration in 4.1.3


AIX 4.3.3 ML08 on an S7A.

Andy Carlson |\  _,,,---,,_
[EMAIL PROTECTED]ZZZzz /,`.-'`'-.  ;-;;,_
BJC Health System   |,4-  ) )-,_. ,\ (  `'-'
St. Louis, Missouri'---''(_/--'  `-'\_)
Cat Pics: http://andyc.dyndns.org/animal.html

On Mon, 22 Oct 2001, Prather, Wanda wrote:

> We upgraded form 3.7.4 to AIX 4.1.3 on AIX 4.3, and did NOT see anything
> like this.
> What platform are you on?
>
>
>
> -Original Message-
> From: Andy Carlson [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Monday, October 22, 2001 10:22 AM
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: Expiration in 4.1.3
>
>
> I have noticed a great extension in the time it takes to do expiration
> in 4.1.3.  I upgraded from 3.7.4, where expiration took 12-16
> hours.  Now it is taking 72 or more hours.  Has anyone else seen
> this?  Thanks.
>
> Andy Carlson |\  _,,,---,,_
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]ZZZzz /,`.-'`'-.  ;-;;,_
> BJC Health System   |,4-  ) )-,_. ,\ (  `'-'
> St. Louis, Missouri'---''(_/--'  `-'\_)
> Cat Pics: http://andyc.dyndns.org/animal.html
>

Re: kernel extension problem???

[Jeff Bach]

If you are not using HSM, remove the filesets and reboot.

To check if they need to be removed  lslpp -l | grep -I hsm

Swlist -l fileset | grep -I hsm

If they do not show, reboot.
Jeff Bach
Home Office Open Systems Engineering
Wal-Mart Stores, Inc.

WAL-MART CONFIDENTIAL


-Original Message-
From:   Cook, Dwight E (SAIC) [SMTP:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent:   Monday, October 22, 2001 11:17 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject:Re: kernel extension  problem???

did you shut down HSM & unmount the file system(s) which HSM runs
against ?

sounds like the HSM code didn't install because it was running.

Dwight

-Original Message-
From: Jason Jackson [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Monday, October 22, 2001 11:02 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: kernel extension problem???


has anyone encountered this message after upgrading client/server
from
3.1 to 3.7.2
on AIX 4.3.3 maint level 6???

ANS9281E Space management kernel extension is downlevel from the
user program.


**
This email and any files transmitted with it are confidential
and intended solely for the individual or entity to
whom they are addressed.  If you have received this email
in error destroy it immediately.
**

Re: TSM Certification Exam

[Kelly Lipp]

Consider also taking the TSM Level 2 course.  Tivoli offers this course and
we offer this course.  Check our website for details.  Our class is held
bi-monthly.  That said, the next course will probably be offered in January.

Our Level 2 class is being taught in the Netherlands next week.  If you are
interested in attending contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]  I believe there
may still be room in the class.

Both courses, ours and Tivoli's have the same basis.  We wrote the 3.7
Advanced class for IBM a couple of years ago.  The goal of that course was
and is to prepare attendees for the certification test.  Another large
aspect of the test is TSM design and planning.  That is covered in great
detail in the course and not covered particularly well anyplace else.

The intent of the certification test is to ensure that folks that pass have
a very broadbased knowledge of the product.  It was designed to make it very
difficult to pass by simply reading books and taking courses but rather to
require about a year of daily TSM administration.  In that way your are
likely to see most every scenario possible with respect to TSM.

Kelly J. Lipp
Storage Solutions Specialists, Inc.
PO Box 51313
Colorado Springs, CO 80949
[EMAIL PROTECTED] or [EMAIL PROTECTED]
www.storsol.com or www.storserver.com
(719)531-5926
Fax: (240)539-7175


-Original Message-
From: ADSM: Dist Stor Manager [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of
Pitur Ey~srsson
Sent: Sunday, October 21, 2001 8:22 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: TSM Certification Exam


My advice to you Tom

Bee ready for a fast exam, this thest has 70 questions and you have only
90 minutes to take it.
When i took my MCSE i had 30-40 questions and i had 90 minutes for it.
So what stands up in my mind is how fast this test is.

Learn everything there is to know about Server to Server, and Include
Exclude lists, I got alot of questions regarding it.
Bee sure to know everything about the options you can put in the
dsmserv.opt and dsm.opt (dsm.sys UNIX).
Read the "Getting Started with Tivoli Storage Manager Implementation
Guide" and know it well.

You don4t need to read the "Tivoli Storage Management Reporting" book,
they won4t ask mutch about the reporting in TSM. only simple questions witch
can be learnd form the other books.

If you know this you should be able to pass.



   Kvedja/Regards
   Petur Eythorsson
   Taeknimadur/Technician
   IBM Certified Specialist - AIX
   Tivoli Storage Manager Certified Professional
   Microsoft Certified System Engineer

 Nyherji HfSimi TEL: +354-569-7700
 Borgartun 37   105 Iceland
 URL:http://www.nyherji.is

- Original Message -
From: "Berning, Tom" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Tuesday, October 16, 2001 7:19 PM
Subject: TSM Certification Exam


> Does anyone have a good sample exam that can be used to see how close I
can
> get to taking the TSM Certification exam?
>
> Also, does anyone have some good information on what to read to be able to
> pass the exam.
>
> Any help would be appreciated.
>
> Thanks in advance
>
> Thomas R. Berning
> 8485 Broadwell Road
> Cincinnati, OH 45244
> Phone: 513-388-2857
> Fax: 513-388-

Re: kernel extension problem???

[PINNI, BALANAND (SBCSI)]

I would suggest  to upgrade bos.rte of AIX to latest level using fixdist
tool.

-Original Message-
From: Jason Jackson [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Monday, October 22, 2001 11:02 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: kernel extension problem???


has anyone encountered this message after upgrading client/server from
3.1 to 3.7.2
on AIX 4.3.3 maint level 6???

ANS9281E Space management kernel extension is downlevel from the
user program.

TSM.PWD

[Douglas Currell]

How is a TSM.PWD file created? I am (trying) to run
TDP for Domino on a partitioned Notes server. When I
log in as notes1 and run, for example, domdsmc sel
events4.nsf - no problem. When I'm logged in a Notes2
on the other partition I get a message saying thgat
the password file is unavailable. Password=generate is
specified for both servers but only one has the
TSM.PWD file. Any ideas? THank you.

___
Do You Yahoo!?
Get your free @yahoo.ca address at http://mail.yahoo.ca

Re: Setting up TSM on AIX

[Alexandre Tchikalov]

the standard AIX jfs has 2G limit (just to remind you :-) so you have to use
"large file enabled jfs".
as concerning to adsm db/rec and stg pools - it is not necessary but at the
same time it looks good to put them on separate lv's - it depends on stg
pool size, if it's big I'd do that. I'd also consider another idea - to have
db/rec copy volumes on separate lv or better disk
- Original Message -
From: "Klein, Robert (CIT)" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Monday, October 22, 2001 9:47 AM
Subject: Setting up TSM on AIX


> We trying to set up a TSM server on AIX.  The person setting up the server
> is an experienced Unix sysadmin, but is running into a problem defining
> partitions on the AIX box.  The disk system is  350 GB RAID5.  When she
> tries to set up a partition larger than 5 GB, she gets an error message.
> Anyone have any idea of what she might be doing wrong?  Also, does anyone
> have suggestions on how best to set up the partitions  (one partition for
> both the db/recovery logs and the disk storage pools, separate partitions,
> etc.?)  I checked the ADSM-L archives for the last couple of years and did
> not see anything on this issue.
>
> > Thanks for any help you can provide.
> >
>

Re: kernel extension problem???

[Cook, Dwight E (SAIC)]

did you shut down HSM & unmount the file system(s) which HSM runs against ?

sounds like the HSM code didn't install because it was running.

Dwight

-Original Message-
From: Jason Jackson [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Monday, October 22, 2001 11:02 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: kernel extension problem???


has anyone encountered this message after upgrading client/server from
3.1 to 3.7.2
on AIX 4.3.3 maint level 6???

ANS9281E Space management kernel extension is downlevel from the
user program.

Re: Expiration in 4.1.3

[Andy Carlson]

AIX 4.3.3 ML08 on an S7A.

Andy Carlson |\  _,,,---,,_
[EMAIL PROTECTED]ZZZzz /,`.-'`'-.  ;-;;,_
BJC Health System   |,4-  ) )-,_. ,\ (  `'-'
St. Louis, Missouri'---''(_/--'  `-'\_)
Cat Pics: http://andyc.dyndns.org/animal.html

On Mon, 22 Oct 2001, Prather, Wanda wrote:

> We upgraded form 3.7.4 to AIX 4.1.3 on AIX 4.3, and did NOT see anything
> like this.
> What platform are you on?
>
>
>
> -Original Message-
> From: Andy Carlson [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Monday, October 22, 2001 10:22 AM
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: Expiration in 4.1.3
>
>
> I have noticed a great extension in the time it takes to do expiration
> in 4.1.3.  I upgraded from 3.7.4, where expiration took 12-16
> hours.  Now it is taking 72 or more hours.  Has anyone else seen
> this?  Thanks.
>
> Andy Carlson |\  _,,,---,,_
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]ZZZzz /,`.-'`'-.  ;-;;,_
> BJC Health System   |,4-  ) )-,_. ,\ (  `'-'
> St. Louis, Missouri'---''(_/--'  `-'\_)
> Cat Pics: http://andyc.dyndns.org/animal.html
>

Re: ANR8808E - could not write label

[Jack McKinney]

Big Brother tells me that Shawn Bierman wrote:
> Would anyone have an idea as to what has happened here?
>
> Received this message four times today:
>
> AND8808E Could not write label 012591 on the volume n
> drive 3494DRVJ (/dev/rmt9) of library 3494A because that
> volume is already labeled with 012413 which is still
> defined in a storage pool or volume history
>
> We are running tsm 4.1.3.0 on AIX 4.3.2.0
>
> thanks for any help.

If you _really_ aren't using the volume 012413 anymore, you can remove
it from your volhist.  Do a 'q volhist' to see what is there.
I never use scratch volumes, and instead label tape volumes appropriately.  For 
example,
I have two copy pools: COPYA and COPYB.  COPYA has tape volumes COPYA000,
COPYA001, etc, and I always keep a DB snapshot on COPYADB.  Thus, if I have
a disaster, I don't need my volhist to recover.  I _know_ that COPYADB is
the database, and can thus restore it to the new server, and then restore
to the new stgpools from the copy pool.
Thus, I can safely do:

DELETE VOLHIST TODATE=TODAY+1 TYPE=STGNEW
DELETE VOLHIST TODATE=TODAY+1 TYPE=STGDELETE

If uncertain, do something like this, first:

BACKUP VOLHIST FILE=/tmp/volhist.20011022

--
"Master knows everthing exceptJack McKinney
  combination to safe"[EMAIL PROTECTED]
1024D/D68F2C07 4096g/38AEF076 http://www.lorentz.com
2002 Chicago Cubs magic number: 163

kernel extension problem???

[Jason Jackson]

has anyone encountered this message after upgrading client/server from
3.1 to 3.7.2
on AIX 4.3.3 maint level 6???

ANS9281E Space management kernel extension is downlevel from the
user program.

Re: Policy and expiration

[Daniel Sparrman]

Hi PatrickTSM doesn't work that way. It works with expiration of data, but not tapes. What you could try is one of three things:1.) Use only selective backups. This is not a good way to do it, because you will be transporting a lot of data at every backup occasion.2.) Deleting the volume you wish to use as scratch, with the flag discard=yes.3.) Setting the backup copygroup policysettings so that no file will be kept for  more than 20 days(you need to discard the data before checkin in the tapes.I guess what you are trying to do is to check in the tapes with status scratch. Before doing this, one of the above has to been done.Best RegardsDaniel Sparrman---Daniel SparrmanExist i Stockholm ABBergkällavägen 31D192 79 SOLLENTUNAVäxel: 08 - 754 98 00Mobil: 070 - 399 27 51 Patrick Sheehan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>Sent by: "ADSM: Dist Stor Manager" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>2001-10-22 10:56 ASTPlease respond to "ADSM: Dist Stor Manager" To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] cc:  bcc:  Subject: Policy and expiration TSM'rs         I have a tape library with one drive and 4 weeks of tapes. I rotate the tapes every week and thought I had set the policy correctly but whenever I use the oldest tapes I'm unable to checkin some of the tapes because there's still "good" data on them. What should I change in order for the tapes to expire every three weeks automatically? TIA Patrick[IMAGE]

Re: TSM 4.2.1

[Prather, Wanda]

Andy, why do we still see C:\ADSM.sys\...\* in that list of files not to
back up?


-Original Message-
From: Andrew Raibeck [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Monday, October 22, 2001 11:45 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: TSM 4.2.1


These are files that, according to Microsoft, do not need to be backed up
(for example, pagefile.sys). The "Operating System" file list you see
comes from a registry key that Microsoft has implemented for Windows 2000:

HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE
   \System
  \CurrentControlSet
 \Control
\BackupRestore
   \FilesNotToBackup

Regards,

Andy

Andy Raibeck
IBM Software Group
Tivoli Storage Manager Client Development
Internal Notes e-mail: Andrew Raibeck/Tucson/IBM@IBMUS
Internet e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

The only dumb question is the one that goes unasked.
The command line is your friend.
"Good enough" is the enemy of excellence.




"Short, Anne" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent by: "ADSM: Dist Stor Manager" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
10/22/2001 07:59
Please respond to "ADSM: Dist Stor Manager"


To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
cc:
Subject:Re: TSM 4.2.1



One thing I noticed with the new 4.2.0 client code, is that for the W2K
clients only (not NT and not UNIX), when I do a "q inclexcl", the list now
includes "Operating System" excludes.  Can't find this new feature
documented anywhere...at least not in the places I've looked.  Can anyone
shed some light on this?

TIA

Anne Short
Lockheed Martin Enterprise Information Systems
Gaithersburg, Maryland
301-240-6184
CODA/I Storage Management

-Original Message-
From: Henk ten Have [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Monday, October 22, 2001 10:29 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: TSM 4.2.1


On 22-Oct-01 Gill, Geoffrey L. wrote:

> For all those who are thinking of upgrading to 4.2.1, my opinion is
> don't. I have been up on it for 10 days and have already experienced 3
> crashes. I also have a tape problem that I'm told was supposed to have
> been fixed. I have 2 PMR's open, both at level 2. I'm on AIX 4.3.3 and
> not sure if other platforms have had similar problems.

Re: Expiration in 4.1.3

[Bruce Kamp]

I upgraded TSM 4.1.2 to 4.1.3.2 about 3 months ago on AIX 4.3.3 ML8 & I did
not have this happen to me.

-Original Message-
From: Prather, Wanda [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Monday, October 22, 2001 11:34 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Expiration in 4.1.3


We upgraded form 3.7.4 to AIX 4.1.3 on AIX 4.3, and did NOT see anything
like this.
What platform are you on?



-Original Message-
From: Andy Carlson [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Monday, October 22, 2001 10:22 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Expiration in 4.1.3


I have noticed a great extension in the time it takes to do expiration
in 4.1.3.  I upgraded from 3.7.4, where expiration took 12-16
hours.  Now it is taking 72 or more hours.  Has anyone else seen
this?  Thanks.

Andy Carlson |\  _,,,---,,_
[EMAIL PROTECTED]ZZZzz /,`.-'`'-.  ;-;;,_
BJC Health System   |,4-  ) )-,_. ,\ (  `'-'
St. Louis, Missouri'---''(_/--'  `-'\_)
Cat Pics: http://andyc.dyndns.org/animal.html

Re: TSM 4.2.1

[Andrew Raibeck]

These are files that, according to Microsoft, do not need to be backed up
(for example, pagefile.sys). The "Operating System" file list you see
comes from a registry key that Microsoft has implemented for Windows 2000:

HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE
   \System
  \CurrentControlSet
 \Control
\BackupRestore
   \FilesNotToBackup

Regards,

Andy

Andy Raibeck
IBM Software Group
Tivoli Storage Manager Client Development
Internal Notes e-mail: Andrew Raibeck/Tucson/IBM@IBMUS
Internet e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

The only dumb question is the one that goes unasked.
The command line is your friend.
"Good enough" is the enemy of excellence.




"Short, Anne" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent by: "ADSM: Dist Stor Manager" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
10/22/2001 07:59
Please respond to "ADSM: Dist Stor Manager"


To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
cc:
Subject:Re: TSM 4.2.1



One thing I noticed with the new 4.2.0 client code, is that for the W2K
clients only (not NT and not UNIX), when I do a "q inclexcl", the list now
includes "Operating System" excludes.  Can't find this new feature
documented anywhere...at least not in the places I've looked.  Can anyone
shed some light on this?

TIA

Anne Short
Lockheed Martin Enterprise Information Systems
Gaithersburg, Maryland
301-240-6184
CODA/I Storage Management

-Original Message-
From: Henk ten Have [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Monday, October 22, 2001 10:29 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: TSM 4.2.1


On 22-Oct-01 Gill, Geoffrey L. wrote:

> For all those who are thinking of upgrading to 4.2.1, my opinion is
> don't. I have been up on it for 10 days and have already experienced 3
> crashes. I also have a tape problem that I'm told was supposed to have
> been fixed. I have 2 PMR's open, both at level 2. I'm on AIX 4.3.3 and
> not sure if other platforms have had similar problems.

Re: TSM v4.2.1

[Neil Schofield]

I can only endorse Geoff, Henk and Tom's views.

I upgraded two servers from TSM v3.7.5 to TSM v4.2.1 last week - both on
NT. I too discovered processes and sessions failing with ANR4887E. On one
server, I also saw the TSM server process frequently drop out with a Dr
Watson error.

I logged a priority 1 PMR but after two days bit the bullet and sacraficed
48 hours worth of backups by restoring the system back to its state prior
to the upgrade. You can guess what the business thought about that.

Other than the major failings above, I also saw a few other things that
concerned me:
- RECONCILE VOLUMES processing again reports spurious ANR4358W errors on
multiple virtual volumes. This was a problem in 3.7.4 but had been fixed in
3.7.5.
- The output of QUERY PROCESS during a MOVE DATA for a virtual volumes
showed a massive number of unreadable bytes. This was even though the
unreadable file count was zero. Funnily enough all such concurrent
processes showed the same value for unreadable bytes.
- The performance of the MOVE DATA process for virtual volumes was less
than 10% of the performance of all previous versions I've seen.

The problem we all have is that 3.7 is unsupported next week. However I
would now be very reluctant to go through the upgrade again without some
very strong assurances for fear of how things might look if I have to
regress again.

The fact that others are experiencing identical problems at least gives me
some hope of a resolution.

Neil Schofield



The information in this e-mail is confidential and may also be legally
privileged. The contents are intended for recipient only and are subject
to the legal notice available at http://www.keldagroup.com/email.htm
Yorkshire Water Services Limited
Registered Office Western House Halifax Road Bradford BD6 2SZ
Registered in England and Wales No 2366682

Re: TSM 4.2.1

[Jeremy Greven]

ftp://service.boulder.ibm.com/storage/tivoli-storage-management/patches/storage-agent

for the windows versions.

jeremy



Petur
Eythorsson   To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]cc:
>Subject: Re: TSM 4.2.1
Sent by:
"ADSM: Dist
Stor Manager"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]
RIST.EDU>


10/22/2001
11:32 AM
Please
respond to
"ADSM: Dist
Stor Manager"






> Geoff.
>
> I had similar problems with the upgrade.  My 3583 just stopped working.
> period.  I was getting the no mount points available while there was
> nothing mounted and all seemed well.
>
> There was a fix issued - both for AIX and NT to resolve this problem.
> 4.2.1.3 resolved the issue for NT and I believe that 4.2.1.2 resolves
these
> issues for AIX as some have described.  Both versions are available for
> download off of the boulder website.  (service.boulder.ibm.com)

Jeremy

I can4t see no patch awalible for NT in serivce.boulder.ibm.com





>
> Hope this helps.
>
> Jeremy Greven
> Senior Network Analyst
> Chubb Insurance Company of Canada
>
>
>
>
> "Gill, Geoffrey
> L." To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>  @SAIC.COM>  Subject: TSM 4.2.1
> Sent by: "ADSM:
> Dist Stor
> Manager"
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> T.EDU>
>
>
> 10/22/2001 09:26
> AM
> Please respond
> to "ADSM: Dist
> Stor Manager"
>
>
>
>
>
>
> To all,
>
> For all those who are thinking of upgrading to 4.2.1, my opinion is
don't.
> I
> have been up on it for 10 days and have already experienced 3 crashes. I
> also have a tape problem that I'm told was supposed to have been fixed. I
> have 2 PMR's open, both at level 2. I'm on AIX 4.3.3 and not sure if
other
> platforms have had similar problems.
>
> I would like to hear from anyone else experiencing these or any other
> problems.
>
> Geoff Gill
> TSM Administrator
> NT Systems Support Engineer
> SAIC
> E-Mail:   [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Phone:  (858) 826-4062
> Pager:   (888) 997-9614


---
^essi skilabop voru send mep vefpssti Fjarskiptafilagsins Tmtan.
 Slspin er: http://postur.itn.is/

Re: Netware restores and backup sets

[Richard L. Rhodes]

On 22 Oct 2001, at 15:48, John Naylor wrote:
> Because you produced your backupset in 3 hours does not mean you will
> get it back in 3 hours. The backupset speed is determined by how fast your host
> server
> can pull the entries from the database and write to its tapes  These speeds are
> likely to be different from how fast your netware server can pull the data in
> and write to its drives.

Exactly what I was thinking when we created the backup set.  I was
looking for a way to take the netware server out of the picture and
get some idea of how fast the TSM server can serve up the files.  The
backup set writes (restores) to a very fast tape (3590E in my case).
In doing so it copies all current versions for of the client, just
like a full restore to the client system itself (our netware server).

If the TSM server can create a backup set in 3 hours, then that's how
fast the tsm server can serve up the files.  It in no way implies how
fast a client can get the file or write the files to disk.  So, if an
actual restore takes 8 hours and a backup set creation takes only 3
hours, then the difference is outside the TSM server - the network or
the client netware server.

In other words, I want to tell our netware admins that the bottleneck
is on their side or in the network.

What would be neat would be the ability to create a backup set to
/dev/null, and truly see how fast TSM can serve up the files.

Thanks

Rick

Re: TSM 4.2.1

[Prather, Wanda]

I have done much testing with the 4.2.0 client on WIn2K, and we are very
happy with it.
Running about 300 Win2K, AIX 4.1.3 server.

Haven't tested 4.2 for AIX clients yet.


Wanda Prather
The Johns Hopkins Applied Physics Lab
443-778-8769
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

"Intelligence has much less practical application than you'd think" -
Scott Adams/Dilbert





-Original Message-
From: Lambelet,Rene,VEVEY,GL-IS/CIS [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Monday, October 22, 2001 10:11 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: TSM 4.2.1


thanks for the advice, but

which version/level would you recommend for the clients ? (we run TSM server
4.1.4)

René Lambelet
Nestec S.A. / Informatique du Centre 
55, av. Nestlé  CH-1800 Vevey (Switzerland) 
*+41'21'924'35'43  7+41'21'924'28'88  * K4-117
email [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Visit our site: http://www.nestle.com

This message is intended only for the use of the addressee and 
may contain information that is privileged and confidential.



> -Original Message-
> From: Gill, Geoffrey L. [SMTP:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Monday, October 22, 2001 3:26 PM
> To:   [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject:  TSM 4.2.1
> 
> To all,
> 
> For all those who are thinking of upgrading to 4.2.1, my opinion is don't.
> I
> have been up on it for 10 days and have already experienced 3 crashes. I
> also have a tape problem that I'm told was supposed to have been fixed. I
> have 2 PMR's open, both at level 2. I'm on AIX 4.3.3 and not sure if other
> platforms have had similar problems.
> 
> I would like to hear from anyone else experiencing these or any other
> problems.
> 
> Geoff Gill
> TSM Administrator
> NT Systems Support Engineer
> SAIC
> E-Mail:   [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Phone:  (858) 826-4062
> Pager:   (888) 997-9614

Re: TSM v4.2.1

[Stephen A. Cochran]

--- Neil Schofield wrote:
The problem we all have is that 3.7 is unsupported next week
--- end of quote ---


As someone who's still runnings ADSM 3.1 but with a new TSM AIX server on order
and no choice but to run a newer version, is the general feeling that 4.1 is
stable, or is 4.1 still buggy? If 4.2.x is unusuable, what's the safe fallback,
4.1 or 3.7?

And if you're wondering, I'm still using 3.1 because it never crashes and never
has any problems.

Steve Cochran
Dartmouth College

Re: TSM 4.2.1

[Tom Tann{s]

Thanks..
I did have look at the 4.2.1.2-fix, but it didn't describe anything but
the 3583-problem.
Has anyone with 3494 installed the fix, and dit it solve the problem here
as well?

Btw.. I was also hoping that the fix for IC30965 (registering of miltiple
license-files) had made it to 4.2.1.
My actlogs are filled width some 1000-1800 ANR2841W's each day.

IC30965 is closed. When can we expect to see a fix?




On Mon, 22 Oct 2001, Jeremy Greven wrote:

> Geoff.
>
> I had similar problems with the upgrade.  My 3583 just stopped working.
> period.  I was getting the no mount points available while there was
> nothing mounted and all seemed well.
>
> There was a fix issued - both for AIX and NT to resolve this problem.
> 4.2.1.3 resolved the issue for NT and I believe that 4.2.1.2 resolves these
> issues for AIX as some have described.  Both versions are available for
> download off of the boulder website.  (service.boulder.ibm.com)
>
> Hope this helps.
>
> Jeremy Greven
> Senior Network Analyst
> Chubb Insurance Company of Canada
>
>
>
>
> "Gill, Geoffrey
> L." To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>  @SAIC.COM>  Subject: TSM 4.2.1
> Sent by: "ADSM:
> Dist Stor
> Manager"
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> T.EDU>
>
>
> 10/22/2001 09:26
> AM
> Please respond
> to "ADSM: Dist
> Stor Manager"
>
>
>
>
>
>
> To all,
>
> For all those who are thinking of upgrading to 4.2.1, my opinion is don't.
> I
> have been up on it for 10 days and have already experienced 3 crashes. I
> also have a tape problem that I'm told was supposed to have been fixed. I
> have 2 PMR's open, both at level 2. I'm on AIX 4.3.3 and not sure if other
> platforms have had similar problems.
>
> I would like to hear from anyone else experiencing these or any other
> problems.
>
> Geoff Gill
> TSM Administrator
> NT Systems Support Engineer
> SAIC
> E-Mail:   [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Phone:  (858) 826-4062
> Pager:   (888) 997-9614
>

Re: TSM 4.2.1

[Prather, Wanda]

Hi Anne,

Look on P. 95 of the TSM V4.2 Technical Guide, new draft Redbook SG24-6277.
as of Aug 10.

It says those are "excludes that are either listed by the registry hive as
files that should be excluded or by the TSM backup-archive client as files
that should not be backed up."

P. 94 gives the name of the registry key in Win2K that has the list of files
not to back up.

What bothers me about this, is that C:\adsm.sys\...\* is EXCLUDED
automatically.

I thought that was supposed to be fixed by 4.2.


Wanda Prather
The Johns Hopkins Applied Physics Lab
443-778-8769
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

"Intelligence has much less practical application than you'd think" -
Scott Adams/Dilbert





-Original Message-
From: Short, Anne [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Monday, October 22, 2001 10:59 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: TSM 4.2.1


One thing I noticed with the new 4.2.0 client code, is that for the W2K
clients only (not NT and not UNIX), when I do a "q inclexcl", the list now
includes "Operating System" excludes.  Can't find this new feature
documented anywhere...at least not in the places I've looked.  Can anyone
shed some light on this?

TIA

Anne Short
Lockheed Martin Enterprise Information Systems
Gaithersburg, Maryland
301-240-6184
CODA/I Storage Management

-Original Message-
From: Henk ten Have [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Monday, October 22, 2001 10:29 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: TSM 4.2.1


On 22-Oct-01 Gill, Geoffrey L. wrote:

> For all those who are thinking of upgrading to 4.2.1, my opinion is
> don't. I have been up on it for 10 days and have already experienced 3
> crashes. I also have a tape problem that I'm told was supposed to have
> been fixed. I have 2 PMR's open, both at level 2. I'm on AIX 4.3.3 and
> not sure if other platforms have had similar problems.

Re: TSM v4.2.1

[Gill, Geoffrey L.]

More problems:
This morning I noticed TSM reporting this:

10/22/01 07:24:23 ANR8308I 001: 3590 volume U00834 is required for use
in library 3494LIB; CHECKIN LIBVOLUME required within 60 minutes.

Except here is a message in the log  on the 20th that shows the tape being
checked out:

10/20/01 02:59:03 ANR6697I MOVE DRMEDIA: CHECKOUT LIBVOLUME for volume
U00834 in library 3494LIB  completed successfully.
10/20/01 03:01:18 ANR6683I MOVE DRMEDIA: Volume U00834 was moved from
COURIER state to VAULT.

When I queried the vol this morning it was reported as mountable. I Changed
status to unavailable and TSM still sat there till the time the whole 60
minutes ran down waiting for that tape. Is this normal?

>I logged a priority 1 PMR but after two days bit the bullet
>and sacraficed
>48 hours worth of backups by restoring the system back to its
>state prior
>to the upgrade. You can guess what the business thought about that.

I honestly wish I could go back to the previous version and just update to
the current level. Unfortunately I cannot, it's too late. Don't you wish TSM
had a tool that would convert the database to a down level version so we
could all get on a "SAFE" version/level? In fact how about build it into
TSM? Before it mounted the database it could look at the level and convert
it, just like it does when you upgrade. Why not be able to convert back?

Geoff Gill
TSM Administrator
NT Systems Support Engineer
SAIC
E-Mail:   [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Phone:  (858) 826-4062
Pager:   (888) 997-9614

Re: TSM 4.2.1

[Wayne T. Smith]

Reni wrote, in part..
> which version/level would you recommend for the clients ? (we run TSM
> server 4.1.4)

My personal favorite was 3.1.0.8, but that might not fit your requirements.  :-(

You might search the archives of this list (at http://www.adsm.org/ for example) for 
previous
discussions around this topic.  Several levels
have been suggested, but all have some sort of substantial problem.

Fwiw, I am moving many of our Linux and WinNT/2000 machines to the latest available 
for a
number of reasons (that may not be important to you).  I'm hopeful that Tivoli will 
really get kinks
worked out at V5. On the other hand, retirement an finding other solutions seem just 
as likely at
this point!  :-)

cheers, wayne

Wayne T. Smith  [EMAIL PROTECTED]
ADSM Technical Coordinator - UNET   University of Maine System

Re: ANR8808E - could not write label

[Kelly Lipp]

Seems reasonably self explanatory to me.  Did you lose a volume somewhere
along the line?  Did you relabel a tape with a new barcode label ( I don't
think that could be it as 3590 cartridges require labels and they aren't
easily removed)?  Do you physically have a tape with label 012413 in the
library or on a shelf someplace?

TSM has looked at the internal label on the tape and determined that label
already exists on a tape it knows about.  It won't relabel that tape for
fear that data will be destroyed.  Could these tapes be refurbished perhaps?
3590 tapes can't be degaussed so any labeling from the previous owners would
still be on the tape.  You may have gotten very unlucky in that the new
tapes you have have internal labels that match your already existing tapes.

The only way around this would be to get the volume 012413 and move the data
off of it.  TSM should then let you label volume 012591 correctly.

Kelly J. Lipp
Storage Solutions Specialists, Inc.
PO Box 51313
Colorado Springs, CO 80949
[EMAIL PROTECTED] or [EMAIL PROTECTED]
www.storsol.com or www.storserver.com
(719)531-5926
Fax: (240)539-7175


-Original Message-
From: ADSM: Dist Stor Manager [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of
Shawn Bierman
Sent: Monday, October 22, 2001 8:03 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: ANR8808E - could not write label


Would anyone have an idea as to what has happened here?

Received this message four times today:

AND8808E Could not write label 012591 on the volume n
drive 3494DRVJ (/dev/rmt9) of library 3494A because that
volume is already labeled with 012413 which is still
defined in a storage pool or volume history

We are running tsm 4.1.3.0 on AIX 4.3.2.0

thanks for any help.

-shawn


Shawn L. Bierman
Unix Technical Support Analyst II
Methodist Healthcare
Information Systems
(901) 516-0143 (office)
(901) 516-0043 (fax)

Re: TSM server migration

[Kelly Lipp]

On the new box I would run dsmserv format to create new db and log volumes
as desired (ensure they are at least as large as the current volumes).  Then
run a dsmserv restore db of the most recent db backup of the old machine.
Before doing this, copy your volhist.out and devconfig.out from the old
system to the new to ease the restore.  Obviously, TSM is installed on the
new system.

This should be a very straightforward migration for you.

Kelly J. Lipp
Storage Solutions Specialists, Inc.
PO Box 51313
Colorado Springs, CO 80949
[EMAIL PROTECTED] or [EMAIL PROTECTED]
www.storsol.com or www.storserver.com
(719)531-5926
Fax: (240)539-7175


-Original Message-
From: ADSM: Dist Stor Manager [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Monday, October 22, 2001 8:04 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: TSM server migration


Hi,
please suggest me the safest and fastest way to migrate the TSM server from
an old AIX server (B50 model) to an new AIX server (B80 model).

My actual scenario is working on AIX server (B50 model):
1) TSM server v4.1.4 on AIX 4.3.3 (ML 08)
2) the db volumes are in the file system /tsmlocal (internal disks).
3) the log volumes are in the file system /tsmstore (external disks, EMC
symmetrix FCP raid1)
4) the data volumes are in the file systems /tsmstore and /tsmsymbk
(externel disks, EMC symmetrix FCP raid1)

The future scenario should work on AIX server (B80 model):
1) TSM server v4.1.4 (or 4.2) on AIX 4.3.3 (ML 08)
2) the db/log volumes in the internal disks
3) the data volumes are at the external disks (EMC symmetrix FCP raid1)

Thanks

Paolo Nasca
Cleis Technology srl
Via E. Raggio, 4
I-16124 Genoa - Italy
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Genoa switchboard: +39 010 24858.11
Milan switchboard: +39 02 66740.11

Re: TSM 4.2.1

[Magura, Curtis]

Maybe I should run out and but a lottery ticket!!

Looks okay -

[root@gassrv01]/tsm/macros$ mtlib -l /dev/lmcp0 -q C -s 0193| wc -l
 259

tsm: GASSRV01>select library_name, status,count(*) from libvolumes group by
libr
ary_name,status

LIBRARY_NAME   STATUS  Unnamed[3]
-- -- ---
GBG3494Private548
GBG3494Scratch259

Curt Magura
Lockheed Martin EIS
Gaithersburg, Md.
301-240-6305


-Original Message-
From: Henk ten Have [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Monday, October 22, 2001 10:51 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: TSM 4.2.1


On 22-Oct-01 Magura, Curtis wrote:
> Well Have to say we are running at 4.2.1.0 on AIX 4.3.3 and a
> smaller Win2K box. The AIX box has a 3494 and 3590 drives. We did not
> see any of the problems mentioned.

You are a lucky person;-)

But try a  "select volume_name from libvolumes where status='Scratch'" and
count your TSM-scratch volumes, and do a "mtlib -l /dev/lmcp0 -q C -s
012E|wc -l" and see if they are in sync (012E if you defined your library
with PRIVATECATegory 300 en SCRATCHCATegory 301, otherwise take a look with
"mtlib -l /dev/lmcp0 -q A" to find your categories).

Cheers,
Henk.

Re: TSM 4.2.1

[Petur Eythorsson]

Thanks Jeremy :)


> ftp://service.boulder.ibm.com/storage/tivoli-storage-
management/patches/storage-agent
>
> for the windows versions.
>
> jeremy
>
>
>
> Petur
> Eythorsson   To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]cc:
> >Subject: Re: TSM 4.2.1
> Sent by:
> "ADSM: Dist
> Stor Manager"
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> RIST.EDU>
>
>
> 10/22/2001
> 11:32 AM
> Please
> respond to
> "ADSM: Dist
> Stor Manager"
>
>
>
>
>
>
> > Geoff.
> >
> > I had similar problems with the upgrade.  My 3583 just stopped working.
> > period.  I was getting the no mount points available while there was
> > nothing mounted and all seemed well.
> >
> > There was a fix issued - both for AIX and NT to resolve this problem.
> > 4.2.1.3 resolved the issue for NT and I believe that 4.2.1.2 resolves
> these
> > issues for AIX as some have described.  Both versions are available for
> > download off of the boulder website.  (service.boulder.ibm.com)
>
> Jeremy
>
> I can4t see no patch awalible for NT in serivce.boulder.ibm.com
>
>
>
>
>
> >
> > Hope this helps.
> >
> > Jeremy Greven
> > Senior Network Analyst
> > Chubb Insurance Company of Canada
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > "Gill, Geoffrey
> > L." To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> >  > @SAIC.COM>  Subject: TSM 4.2.1
> > Sent by: "ADSM:
> > Dist Stor
> > Manager"
> > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > T.EDU>
> >
> >
> > 10/22/2001 09:26
> > AM
> > Please respond
> > to "ADSM: Dist
> > Stor Manager"
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > To all,
> >
> > For all those who are thinking of upgrading to 4.2.1, my opinion is
> don't.
> > I
> > have been up on it for 10 days and have already experienced 3 crashes. I
> > also have a tape problem that I'm told was supposed to have been fixed. I
> > have 2 PMR's open, both at level 2. I'm on AIX 4.3.3 and not sure if
> other
> > platforms have had similar problems.
> >
> > I would like to hear from anyone else experiencing these or any other
> > problems.
> >
> > Geoff Gill
> > TSM Administrator
> > NT Systems Support Engineer
> > SAIC
> > E-Mail:   [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > Phone:  (858) 826-4062
> > Pager:   (888) 997-9614
>
>
> ---
> ^essi skilabop voru send mep vefpssti Fjarskiptafilagsins Tmtan.
>  Slspin er: http://postur.itn.is/


---
^essi skilabop voru send mep vefpssti Fjarskiptafilagsins Tmtan.
 Slspin er: http://postur.itn.is/

Re: Expiration in 4.1.3

[Prather, Wanda]

We upgraded form 3.7.4 to AIX 4.1.3 on AIX 4.3, and did NOT see anything
like this.
What platform are you on?



-Original Message-
From: Andy Carlson [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Monday, October 22, 2001 10:22 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Expiration in 4.1.3


I have noticed a great extension in the time it takes to do expiration
in 4.1.3.  I upgraded from 3.7.4, where expiration took 12-16
hours.  Now it is taking 72 or more hours.  Has anyone else seen
this?  Thanks.

Andy Carlson |\  _,,,---,,_
[EMAIL PROTECTED]ZZZzz /,`.-'`'-.  ;-;;,_
BJC Health System   |,4-  ) )-,_. ,\ (  `'-'
St. Louis, Missouri'---''(_/--'  `-'\_)
Cat Pics: http://andyc.dyndns.org/animal.html

Re: FW: v4.2.1 TSM Clients

[Andrew Raibeck]

> First of all I do not know Andy's position at Tivoli.
> And read what is written in the README:
> "This is not officially supported by IBM, but IBM support people
> do participate in the discussions, along with other  users."
> So IMHO here Andy is just a colleague. More skilled in ADSM/TSM,
> closer to the developers, but just a colleague.

I am a developer who works on the TSM client (Windows B/A client
and ODBC driver).

The statements in the README file are there mainly to avoid confusion
as to what ADSM-L is and what it is not. Otherwise a user new to the
group might be led to believe that ADSM-L is the place to get support
from IBM. The README statement is intended to make it clear that this
is not the *official* support channel. Our participation, like that of
anyone else, is voluntary. But that does not absolve us of our
obligation to post in a responsible manner when we do participate.

With regard to the APAR in question, I intercepted the APAR when it
came to development and changed the description from a documentation
error (as it was originally opened) to a code error (which it properly
is). So I am fairly close enough to the problem to be able to speak to
it knowledgeably. The problem has since been fixed, and we are
planning a patch to include a fix for this problem. Currently we are
targeting the patch for sometime between now and the end of October,
although that is subject to change.

> If something shows up on the web-site or in docs on media that would
> be official.

The information stating that the problem is fixed will be in the
README file that accompanies the fixing client code. Until then, if
you require something more official, please open up a problem record
with IBM support (your official channel), and ask to be placed on the
"interested parties" list for APAR IC31844. The support folks will do
this for you, and notify you when a fix is available.

Regards,

Andy

Andy Raibeck
IBM Software Group
Tivoli Storage Manager Client Development
Internal Notes e-mail: Andrew Raibeck/Tucson/IBM@IBMUS
Internet e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

The only dumb question is the one that goes unasked.
The command line is your friend.
"Good enough" is the enemy of excellence.




Zlatko Krastev/ACIT <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent by: "ADSM: Dist Stor Manager" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
10/22/2001 07:28
Please respond to "ADSM: Dist Stor Manager"


To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
cc:
Subject:Re: FW: v4.2.1 TSM Clients



First of all I do not know Andy's position at Tivoli.
And read what is written in the README:
"This is not officially supported by IBM, but IBM support people
do participate in the discussions, along with other  users."
So IMHO here Andy is just a colleague. More skilled in ADSM/TSM, closer to
the developers, but just a colleague.
If something shows up on the web-site or in docs on media that would be
official.

Zlatko Krastev
IT Consultant





"Loon, E.J. van - SPLXM" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> on 19.10.2001 17:57:48
Please respond to "ADSM: Dist Stor Manager" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
cc:

Subject:Re: FW: v4.2.1 TSM Clients

Andrew Raibeck answered "I am almost certain that this change in behavior
is
not deliberate. The APAR is going to be handled as a code defect"
Isn't that you'r Tivoli official answer?
Kindest regards,
Eric van Loon
KLM Royal Dutch Airlines

-Original Message-
From: Zlatko Krastev/ACIT [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Friday, October 19, 2001 12:29
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: FW: v4.2.1 TSM Clients


This was already discussed in the list. Look for the thread "Windows
client
behavior change at 4.2.1.0" and answer of Andrew Raibeck from 9.10.2001.
But it is possible that Andy and this Bob are just having different
PERSONAL opinions. We still do not have answer from any Tivoli official,
do
we?

Zlatko Krastev
IT Consultant





"Subash, Chandra" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> on 18.10.2001 07:41:31
Please respond to "ADSM: Dist Stor Manager" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
cc:

Subject:FW: v4.2.1 TSM Clients

i HAVE GOT THIS EMAIL FROM ONE OF MY FRIENDS. GUYS WHAT DO YOU THINK IS IT
TRUE ?

Hi Guys

According to Tivoli Support they have made an alteration to way client
v4.2.1 reports Result code 4 to the server. Earlier version clients would
allow for a certain number of files to fail during the backup and still
report to the server that the Schedule was successful. However version
4.2.1
has been altered so that a result code of failed will be reported to the
server even if 1 file fails during a backup.
ntcmachine had been failing on some WINNT system files which I have added
exceptions for under direction of Tivoli support and now backups of this
machine seem to be successful.
Bob from Tivoli suggested that if we are worried about seeing failed
result
codes on the daily report that there may be a way to generate a report
listing statistics of how many files or how much data had been backed up
from each 

Re: TSM 4.2.1

[Petur Eythorsson]

> Geoff.
>
> I had similar problems with the upgrade.  My 3583 just stopped working.
> period.  I was getting the no mount points available while there was
> nothing mounted and all seemed well.
>
> There was a fix issued - both for AIX and NT to resolve this problem.
> 4.2.1.3 resolved the issue for NT and I believe that 4.2.1.2 resolves these
> issues for AIX as some have described.  Both versions are available for
> download off of the boulder website.  (service.boulder.ibm.com)

Jeremy

I can4t see no patch awalible for NT in serivce.boulder.ibm.com





>
> Hope this helps.
>
> Jeremy Greven
> Senior Network Analyst
> Chubb Insurance Company of Canada
>
>
>
>
> "Gill, Geoffrey
> L." To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>  @SAIC.COM>  Subject: TSM 4.2.1
> Sent by: "ADSM:
> Dist Stor
> Manager"
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> T.EDU>
>
>
> 10/22/2001 09:26
> AM
> Please respond
> to "ADSM: Dist
> Stor Manager"
>
>
>
>
>
>
> To all,
>
> For all those who are thinking of upgrading to 4.2.1, my opinion is don't.
> I
> have been up on it for 10 days and have already experienced 3 crashes. I
> also have a tape problem that I'm told was supposed to have been fixed. I
> have 2 PMR's open, both at level 2. I'm on AIX 4.3.3 and not sure if other
> platforms have had similar problems.
>
> I would like to hear from anyone else experiencing these or any other
> problems.
>
> Geoff Gill
> TSM Administrator
> NT Systems Support Engineer
> SAIC
> E-Mail:   [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Phone:  (858) 826-4062
> Pager:   (888) 997-9614


---
^essi skilabop voru send mep vefpssti Fjarskiptafilagsins Tmtan.
 Slspin er: http://postur.itn.is/

Re: 3590E1A vs IBM LTO

[Prather, Wanda]

I think Paul gave an EXCELLENT answer, and I agree completely.

Remember that IBM is NOT marketing LTO as a replacement for 3590; but as a
competitor for DLT, so ask why your organization bought the 3590's in the
first place?

I have yet to see any statistics for mean time to failure on LTO media or
drives.  They may turn out to be as reliable as 3590's in the long run, but
LTO has a BIG job ahead to stand up to the record of the 3590 and it remains
to be seen if LTO can do that.  If you have a heavy load or many TB of data,
you should probably stick with 3590.  For a mid-size or small installation,
LTO should do fine.

TSM pushes the capability of drives and durability of media harder than any
other application I've ever seen.  Unlike other dump-restore products which
write large chunks of data once, then rewrites over the tapes completely
after 3-4 weeks in the dump cycle, TSM uses the tapes constantly due to
reclaims.  It uses a drive almost like a direct-access device; there is a
LOT of start-stop and back-hitch acvitity, lots and lots of appending small
amounts of data to existing tape files.

What I usually tell people: if your organization is accustomed to using 4mm
or 8mm tape or DLT, LTO should be a step up and you will probably be happy
with it.  If you are accustomed to the capability and reliability  (both
media and drives) of enterprise-class devices like 3490, 3590, or STK 9840,
you probably won't be happy with something less.

My opinions and nobody else's,

Wanda Prather

-Original Message-
From: Seay, Paul [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Sunday, October 21, 2001 11:37 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: 3590E1A vs IBM LTO


You are probably a smaller environment, what LTO was designed for.  However,
there are many differences in LTO and Magstar.  Magstar recovery from a
damaged tape is much greater because of the way the data is recorded.  LTO
drives are about $10K each and Magstar are still about $45K list.  Even with
significant discounts Magstar is still going to be more expensive.  The
upgrades from B1A to E1A are going to probably cost as much as LTO drives
already cost.

The ultimate question is will LTO's reliability and drive mean time to
failure ever equal that of a Magstar.  That remains to be seen.  If your
tapes are not more than 5 years old, they need to figure into the cost
equation especially if you have a lot of them.

LTO is a good product for what it is designed to do.  Provide an open
replacement to DLT.  You will have to assess whether it is the right time to
make a change.

I would do a Total Cost of Ownership over the next 3 years for both
scenarios.  Consider fabric in the picture if you think you are going to do
that.  That upgrade is another $7K for Magstar per drive.  I would get
quotes from your vendors for all the pieces.  Yes, this is a lot of work,
but money talks when the costs are significantly different.

-Original Message-
From: Zosimo Noriega [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Sunday, October 21, 2001 5:36 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: 3590E1A vs IBM LTO


We are planning to upgrade ADSM to TSM 4.1 and then currently we are using
3494 library with 4 3590B1A drives.
Then, we are looking to upgrade or replace the drives into 3590E1A or IBM
LTO.  Anybody can share from the experience using these drives.  and which
is the best in terms of performance, availability, cost, data transfer rate,
capacity, etc.  thanks a lot in advance.

reagrds,

Zosi Noriega
A D N O C
IST-ITD DMSS
Tel -  6024987

TSM server migration

[[EMAIL PROTECTED]]

Hi,
please suggest me the safest and fastest way to migrate the TSM server from an old AIX 
server (B50 model) to an new AIX server (B80 model).

My actual scenario is working on AIX server (B50 model):
1) TSM server v4.1.4 on AIX 4.3.3 (ML 08)
2) the db volumes are in the file system /tsmlocal (internal disks).
3) the log volumes are in the file system /tsmstore (external disks, EMC symmetrix FCP 
raid1)
4) the data volumes are in the file systems /tsmstore and /tsmsymbk (externel disks, 
EMC symmetrix FCP raid1)

The future scenario should work on AIX server (B80 model):
1) TSM server v4.1.4 (or 4.2) on AIX 4.3.3 (ML 08)
2) the db/log volumes in the internal disks
3) the data volumes are at the external disks (EMC symmetrix FCP raid1)

Thanks

Paolo Nasca
Cleis Technology srl
Via E. Raggio, 4
I-16124 Genoa - Italy
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Genoa switchboard: +39 010 24858.11
Milan switchboard: +39 02 66740.11

Re: TSM 4.2.1

[Magura, Curtis]

Well Have to say we are running at 4.2.1.0 on AIX 4.3.3 and a smaller
Win2K box. The AIX box has a 3494 and 3590 drives. We did not see any of the
problems mentioned. We have upgraded a bunch of clients and did see slower
performance on the overall system. Did see a flurry of comments on this a
week or so ago but not mentioned since. Any other comments on overall 4.2.x
client performance?

Not endorsing 4.2.1 just passing on what we have seen so far.

Curt Magura
Lockheed Martin EIS
Gaithersburg, Md.
301-240-6305


-Original Message-
From: Henk ten Have [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Monday, October 22, 2001 10:29 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: TSM 4.2.1


On 22-Oct-01 Gill, Geoffrey L. wrote:

> For all those who are thinking of upgrading to 4.2.1, my opinion is
> don't. I have been up on it for 10 days and have already experienced 3
> crashes. I also have a tape problem that I'm told was supposed to have
> been fixed. I have 2 PMR's open, both at level 2. I'm on AIX 4.3.3 and
> not sure if other platforms have had similar problems.

ANR8808E - could not write label

[Shawn Bierman]

Would anyone have an idea as to what has happened here?

Received this message four times today:

AND8808E Could not write label 012591 on the volume n
drive 3494DRVJ (/dev/rmt9) of library 3494A because that
volume is already labeled with 012413 which is still
defined in a storage pool or volume history

We are running tsm 4.1.3.0 on AIX 4.3.2.0

thanks for any help.

-shawn


Shawn L. Bierman
Unix Technical Support Analyst II
Methodist Healthcare
Information Systems
(901) 516-0143 (office)
(901) 516-0043 (fax)

Policy and expiration

[Patrick Sheehan]

TSM'rs

        I have a tape library with one drive and 4 weeks of tapes. I rotate the tapes every week and thought I had set the policy correctly but whenever I use the oldest tapes I'm unable to checkin some of the tapes because there's still "good" data on them. What should I change in order for the tapes to expire every three weeks automatically?

TIA

Patrick

Re: FW: v4.2.1 TSM Clients

[Loon, E.J. van - SPLXM]

Hi Zlatko!
Andrew Raibeck is a person from TSM Development at Tivoli. So his statements
are in fact Tivoli statements, unless otherwise specified, that is.
Kindest regards,
Eric van Loon
KLM Royal Dutch Airlines


-Original Message-
From: Zlatko Krastev/ACIT [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Monday, October 22, 2001 16:29
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: FW: v4.2.1 TSM Clients


First of all I do not know Andy's position at Tivoli.
And read what is written in the README:
"This is not officially supported by IBM, but IBM support people
do participate in the discussions, along with other  users."
So IMHO here Andy is just a colleague. More skilled in ADSM/TSM, closer to
the developers, but just a colleague.
If something shows up on the web-site or in docs on media that would be
official.

Zlatko Krastev
IT Consultant





"Loon, E.J. van - SPLXM" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> on 19.10.2001 17:57:48
Please respond to "ADSM: Dist Stor Manager" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
cc:

Subject:Re: FW: v4.2.1 TSM Clients

Andrew Raibeck answered "I am almost certain that this change in behavior
is
not deliberate. The APAR is going to be handled as a code defect"
Isn't that you'r Tivoli official answer?
Kindest regards,
Eric van Loon
KLM Royal Dutch Airlines

-Original Message-
From: Zlatko Krastev/ACIT [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Friday, October 19, 2001 12:29
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: FW: v4.2.1 TSM Clients


This was already discussed in the list. Look for the thread "Windows client
behavior change at 4.2.1.0" and answer of Andrew Raibeck from 9.10.2001.
But it is possible that Andy and this Bob are just having different
PERSONAL opinions. We still do not have answer from any Tivoli official, do
we?

Zlatko Krastev
IT Consultant





"Subash, Chandra" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> on 18.10.2001 07:41:31
Please respond to "ADSM: Dist Stor Manager" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
cc:

Subject:FW: v4.2.1 TSM Clients

i HAVE GOT THIS EMAIL FROM ONE OF MY FRIENDS. GUYS WHAT DO YOU THINK IS IT
TRUE ?

Hi Guys

According to Tivoli Support they have made an alteration to way client
v4.2.1 reports Result code 4 to the server. Earlier version clients would
allow for a certain number of files to fail during the backup and still
report to the server that the Schedule was successful. However version
4.2.1
has been altered so that a result code of failed will be reported to the
server even if 1 file fails during a backup.
ntcmachine had been failing on some WINNT system files which I have added
exceptions for under direction of Tivoli support and now backups of this
machine seem to be successful.
Bob from Tivoli suggested that if we are worried about seeing failed result
codes on the daily report that there may be a way to generate a report
listing statistics of how many files or how much data had been backed up
from each machine to provide a more accurate picture as to whether the
backups were successful.


**
This e-mail and any attachment may contain confidential and privileged
material intended for the addressee only. If you are not the addressee, you
are notified that no part of the e-mail or any attachment may be disclosed,
copied or distributed, and that any other action related to this e-mail or
attachment is strictly prohibited, and may be unlawful. If you have
received this e-mail by error, please notify the sender immediately by
return e-mail, and delete this message. Koninklijke Luchtvaart Maatschappij
NV (KLM), its subsidiaries and/or its employees shall not be liable for the
incorrect or incomplete transmission of this e-mail or any attachments, nor
responsible for any delay in receipt.
**

Re: TSM 4.2.1

[Henk ten Have]

On 22-Oct-01 Magura, Curtis wrote:
> Well Have to say we are running at 4.2.1.0 on AIX 4.3.3 and a smaller
> Win2K box. The AIX box has a 3494 and 3590 drives. We did not see any of the
> problems mentioned.

You are a lucky person;-)

But try a  "select volume_name from libvolumes where status='Scratch'" and
count your TSM-scratch volumes, and do a "mtlib -l /dev/lmcp0 -q C -s 012E|wc
-l" and see if they are in sync (012E if you defined your library with
PRIVATECATegory 300 en SCRATCHCATegory 301, otherwise take a look with
"mtlib -l /dev/lmcp0 -q A" to find your categories).

Cheers,
Henk.

Re: TSM 4.2.1

[Remco Post]

Henk told us:

> use), and last but not least, after a server restart, most of the private
> volumes in the tape library becomes scratch, and scratch volumes becomes
> private (APAR IC31691). So what happens is that if TSM asked for a scratch
> volume, the Library Manager gives 95% of the time a private volume, thank God
> TSM recognise this volume as one of his a private volumes, asked again for a
> scratch volume, and on and on and on. So sometimes mount takes for hours. We use
> now a script to get the Library manager in sync with the TSM server (i.e. change
> the categories with mtlib).

So, here are the scripts. Update at least correct_library.sh and the macro's
to match your environment...


--
Met vriendelijke groeten,

Remco Post

SARA - Stichting Academisch Rekencentrum Amsterdam
High Performance Computing  Tel. +31 20 592 8008Fax. +31 20 668 3167

"I really didn't foresee the Internet. But then, neither did the computer
industry. Not that that tells us very much of course - the computer industry
didn't even foresee that the century was going to end." -- Douglas Adams


 scripts.tar

Expiration in 4.1.3

[Andy Carlson]

I have noticed a great extension in the time it takes to do expiration
in 4.1.3.  I upgraded from 3.7.4, where expiration took 12-16
hours.  Now it is taking 72 or more hours.  Has anyone else seen
this?  Thanks.

Andy Carlson |\  _,,,---,,_
[EMAIL PROTECTED]ZZZzz /,`.-'`'-.  ;-;;,_
BJC Health System   |,4-  ) )-,_. ,\ (  `'-'
St. Louis, Missouri'---''(_/--'  `-'\_)
Cat Pics: http://andyc.dyndns.org/animal.html

Re: Setting up TSM on AIX

[Miles Purdy]

Hi,

We could help, but exact info is required. There are no 'partitions' in the AIX LVM. I 
assume you mean 'a logical volume greater than 5 GB?' or 'volume group' maybe? What is 
the error message? Is it an AIX error or TSM error? Provide:
lsvg 
lspv 
lspv -l 

Miles

---
Miles Purdy 
System Manager
Farm Income Programs Directorate
Winnipeg, MB, CA
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
ph: (204) 984-1602 fax: (204) 983-7557
---

>>> [EMAIL PROTECTED] 22-Oct-01 8:47:44 AM >>>
We trying to set up a TSM server on AIX.  The person setting up the server
is an experienced Unix sysadmin, but is running into a problem defining
partitions on the AIX box.  The disk system is  350 GB RAID5.  When she
tries to set up a partition larger than 5 GB, she gets an error message.
Anyone have any idea of what she might be doing wrong?  Also, does anyone
have suggestions on how best to set up the partitions  (one partition for
both the db/recovery logs and the disk storage pools, separate partitions,
etc.?)  I checked the ADSM-L archives for the last couple of years and did
not see anything on this issue.

> Thanks for any help you can provide.
>

Re: TSM 4.2.1

[Short, Anne]

One thing I noticed with the new 4.2.0 client code, is that for the W2K
clients only (not NT and not UNIX), when I do a "q inclexcl", the list now
includes "Operating System" excludes.  Can't find this new feature
documented anywhere...at least not in the places I've looked.  Can anyone
shed some light on this?

TIA

Anne Short
Lockheed Martin Enterprise Information Systems
Gaithersburg, Maryland
301-240-6184
CODA/I Storage Management

-Original Message-
From: Henk ten Have [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Monday, October 22, 2001 10:29 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: TSM 4.2.1


On 22-Oct-01 Gill, Geoffrey L. wrote:

> For all those who are thinking of upgrading to 4.2.1, my opinion is
> don't. I have been up on it for 10 days and have already experienced 3
> crashes. I also have a tape problem that I'm told was supposed to have
> been fixed. I have 2 PMR's open, both at level 2. I'm on AIX 4.3.3 and
> not sure if other platforms have had similar problems.

Re: TSM 4.2.1

[Remco Post]

Henk told us:

> use), and last but not least, after a server restart, most of the private
> volumes in the tape library becomes scratch, and scratch volumes becomes
> private (APAR IC31691). So what happens is that if TSM asked for a scratch
> volume, the Library Manager gives 95% of the time a private volume, thank God
> TSM recognise this volume as one of his a private volumes, asked again for a
> scratch volume, and on and on and on. So sometimes mount takes for hours. We use
> now a script to get the Library manager in sync with the TSM server (i.e. change
> the categories with mtlib).

So, here are the scripts. Update at least correct_library.sh and the macro's
to match your environment...

---scratch.macro---
select volume_name from libvolumes where status='Scratch' and
LIBRARY_NAME=='3494LIB'
---private.macro---
select volume_name from libvolumes where status='Private' and LIBRARY_NAME='3494LIB'
---findnames.awk---
BEGIN {
name_section = 0
}

{
if ( name_section == 1 && $0 !~ /^$/  )
{
print
next
}
if ( $0 ~ /^--$/ )
name_section = 1
}
---correct_library.sh---
#!/bin/sh
# (c) 2001 SARA, Remco Post
# set the following to whatever is appropriate for your env.
PASSWORD=password
MACDIR=/tsm/scripts
SCRIPTDIR=/tsm/scripts

# ask tsm what the scratch volumes are and tell that to the Library manager
for i in `dsmadmc -id=admin -pa=$PASSWORD 'macro ${MACDIR}/scratch.macro' 2>/dev/null 
| grep -v ANS | awk -f ${SCRIPTDIR}/findnames.awk`; do
mtlib -l /dev/lmcp0 -C -V ${i} -t 012E
done
# ask tsm what the private volumes are and tell that to the Library manager
for i in `dsmadmc -id=admin -pa=$PASSWORD 'macro ${MACDIR}/private.macro' 2>/dev/null 
| grep -v ANS | awk -f ${SCRIPTDIR}/findnames.awk`; do
mtlib -l /dev/lmcp0 -C -V ${i} -t 012C
done
---8<---

Met vriendelijke groeten,

Remco Post

SARA - Stichting Academisch Rekencentrum Amsterdam
High Performance Computing  Tel. +31 20 592 8008Fax. +31 20 668 3167

"I really didn't foresee the Internet. But then, neither did the computer
industry. Not that that tells us very much of course - the computer industry
didn't even foresee that the century was going to end." -- Douglas Adams

TSM 4.1.4.0 and tape drive solution (was TSM 4.2.1)

[Jack McKinney]

Big Brother tells me that Gill, Geoffrey L. wrote:
> To all,
>
> For all those who are thinking of upgrading to 4.2.1, my opinion is don't. I
> have been up on it for 10 days and have already experienced 3 crashes. I
> also have a tape problem that I'm told was supposed to have been fixed. I
> have 2 PMR's open, both at level 2. I'm on AIX 4.3.3 and not sure if other
> platforms have had similar problems.

I have had problems which I posted here that I recently solved.  Since
they have to do with upgrades, I thought I'd post it on this thread.

I have an AIX 4.3.3 box with a 4mm tape drive.  I installed TSM 4.1.0.0
and added the drive in TSM with:

DEFINE LIBRARY MANUALLIB LIBTYPE=MANUAL
DEFINE DEVCLASS 4MM2GCLASS DEVTYPE=GENERICTAPE LIBRARY=MANUALLIB MOUNTRETENTION= 
MOUNTWAIT=2880
DEFINE DRIVE MANUALLIB RMT0 DEVICE=/dev/rmt0

This box was a test machine for testing out TSM procedures before using
them on the production machine.  After a while, I decided to reinstall the
machine from scratch, so I installed AIX 4.3.3 and TSM 4.1.0.0.  The first
time through, I didn't bother to upgrade to 4.1.4.0.  This time I decided
to.  After installing TSM, I applied the patches.  Before I reinstalled the
machine, I exported all of my nodes to 4MM2GCLASS tapes.
I used the same three commands above to tell TSM about the tape drive,
but the third command gave an error:

ANR8420E DEFINE DRIVE: An I/O error occurred while accessing drive RMT0.
ANS8001I Return code 3.

I posted to the list, and was told that I was doing this wrong.  I needed
to rmdev rmt0, and then rediscover the tape drive as a TSM drive with smitty,
and then use mt0 instead.  This made no sense, in that every other machine
that I have a tape drive on (including this machine before the reinstall)
worked with rmt0.
I tried this, and the DEFINE DRIVE worked.  However, the IMPORT NODE
failed when I tried to reload the data.  It complained that there were
not enough mount points available.
I played with this for a while, and eventually I had an epiphany.  I
reinstalled 4.3.3 and TSM 4.1.0.0, and then defined the drive in TSM with
the commands above, _before_ applying the patch.  It worked.  I then
applied the patch and IMPORTed the nodes with no problem.
On my production server, I had recently added a tape drive, and the
server was at 4.1.2.0.  I had no problem adding the drive.  Some time
later, I upgraded to 4.1.4.0.  Had I done this in reverse, I probably
would never have gotten the tape drive working.  It would appears that
a bug crept in somewhere between 4.1.2.0 and 4.1.4.0 wherein DEFINE DRIVE
for a GENERICTAPE drive fails.  One has to define the drive before
upgrading...

--
John:By God, if I went up in flames,  Jack McKinney
 there's not a living soul who'd  [EMAIL PROTECTED]
 pee on me to put the fire outhttp://www.lorentz.com
Richard: Let's strike a flint and see...  -from "The Lion in Winter"
1024D/D68F2C07 4096g/38AEF076
2002 Chicago Cubs magic number: 163

Re: WIN2k dsmsvc.exe handle count problem

[Zlatko Krastev/ACIT]

What does mean ALL system resources - memory, GUI, swap space, ... ?
Give more details about the configuration of your server - processor(s),
memory size, # of disks, # of tape drives ...
Have you checked the versions of firmware, drivers (especially if you use
SAN), service pack?

Zlatko Krastev
IT Consultant





Jeremy Greven <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> on 19.10.2001 23:22:00
Please respond to "ADSM: Dist Stor Manager" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
cc:

Subject:Re: WIN2k dsmsvc.exe handle count problem

Hi Len.

MS told me that all of the system resources were occupied by this process.
(dsmsvc.exe).

100% of the CPU and nearly all of the system memory.  Unfortunately there
is no way of limiting the amount of CPU occupied by a process hence I have
no way of guarding against this.

I haven't heard back from IBM yet today - hopefully they'll have some
answers by Monday as my server froze again this morning. :(

Jeremy



Len Boyle
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
S.COM>   cc:
Sent by: Subject: Re: WIN2k dsmsvc.exe
handle count problem
"ADSM: Dist
Stor Manager"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]
RIST.EDU>


10/19/2001
03:32 PM
Please
respond to
"ADSM: Dist
Stor Manager"






In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Jeremy
Greven
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> says:
>
>Hi
>
>I am running TSM 4.2.1.3 on a Win2k box.  The server is freezing daily.
(i
>know i know.. put it on a different platform - I'm working on it)
>After investigation Microsoft they told me that the dsmsvc.exe process is
>taking 100% of system resources and that my system isn't actually frozen,
>but has no resources available to process any requests.  The only way to
>get it back is to physically power it down and reboot it.

Hello Jeremy

I have   tsm 4.1.4.2 running on windows nt 4.0 sp 5  and the current handle
count is 153,348 and I have seen it higher. The high  handle count, I
believe
went back to the 3.7 level of the software. This server normaly does not
get cycled  due to software problems, normaly only when we have to have th
stk  ce  work on the dlt7000 drives.

Did MS tell you which resources  were overrun and if you could increase
them.
len

-
Leonard Boyle   [EMAIL PROTECTED]
SAS Institute Inc.  ussas4hs@ibmmail
Room RB448  [EMAIL PROTECTED]
1 SAS Campus Drive  (919) 531-6241
Cary NC 27513

Re: storage agent?

[Zlatko Krastev/ACIT]

Sorry for being less informed but what this 3rd party copy functionality
does and again how this feature will help to let the server know what the
client have done?

Zlatko Krastev
IT Consultant





"Joshua S. Bassi" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> on 20.10.2001 00:27:36
Please respond to "ADSM: Dist Stor Manager" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
cc:

Subject:Re: storage agent?

> 4. What is this server-less operation? Is this an already implemented
feature in v4.2.1 (new feature in maintenance release ?!?) or just
something planned to be implemented in v5.1 (or later) ? How the
server-less backup will mark volumes if it does not have any path to
notify the server DB? Or this would be some kind of standalone solution,
i.e. server + local client (+TDP for Apps) with reduced
capabilities/features?

It is my understanding that Serverless backup will be release in 5.1.  I
believe it will only work with SAN Routers and Gateways which have the
SCSI 3rd Party copy functionality built-in.


--
Joshua S. Bassi
Independent IT Consultant
IBM Certified - AIX/HACMP, SAN, Shark
Tivoli Certified Consultant- ADSM/TSM
Cell (408)&(831) 332-4006
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

-Original Message-
From: ADSM: Dist Stor Manager [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] On Behalf Of
Zlatko Krastev/ACIT
Sent: Friday, October 19, 2001 2:39 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: storage agent?

Help me to understand and please correct if I am wrong:

1. As far as I know from v4.1 and what I read in v4.2 docs, the storage
agent allows LAN-free (-->) DATA (<--) movement. Meta-data goes through
LAN
from client to server and sits in the DB. The server mounts the tape
volume, (I do not know who exactly does tape positioning), and storage
agent (limited functionality server code) writes backup data through SAN
to
the tape. If needed server dismounts volume, mounts new one and the
operation continues.
So if we thing about the storage pool data it goes straight from
client/agent to volume - no server involvement except for tape
mount/dismount. It does not have to go through the server.

2. SAN library sharing through SAN Data Gateway (or SAN Data Gateway
Router) is available since v3.7 between servers, enhanced in v4.1 to
allow
storage agent (not server) also to access the tapes but only for Windows
Agent and in v4.2 is additionally enhanced providing storage agents on
AIX
and Solaris. So this was available long time ago (sorry I cannot say
when
v4.1 was announced and am too lazy to check).

3. There is a possibility to share sequential volumes which are not
tapes
but FILE devclass through SANergy.
Did anybody tested/used this? Is anybody on this list using SANergy?
Does this mean that a storage agent can backup to shared FILE volumes
(best
theoretical backup time - both disks and FC) and later TSM server can
perform storage pool backup and migration?

4. What is this server-less operation? Is this an already implemented
feature in v4.2.1 (new feature in maintenance release ?!?) or just
something planned to be implemented in v5.1 (or later) ? How the
server-less backup will mark volumes if it does not have any path to
notify
the server DB? Or this would be some kind of standalone solution, i.e.
server + local client (+TDP for Apps) with reduced
capabilities/features?


Zlatko Krastev
IT Consultant






Suad Musovich <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> on 18.10.2001 07:09:54
Please respond to "ADSM: Dist Stor Manager" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
cc:

Subject:Re: storage agent?

That will imply 3rd party SCSI copy functionality, which I haven't
seen any indication they have incorporated to TSM.

The physical data will still have to go through the TSM server, within
the
SAN environment, before it gets put in a storage pool.

Suad
--
On Wed, Oct 17, 2001 at 10:44:36PM -0400, Seay, Paul wrote:
> Yes
>
> -Original Message-
> From: Bern Ruelas [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Wednesday, October 17, 2001 6:32 PM
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: Re: storage agent?
>
>
> Thanks Alex,
>
> Now this is LAN-less backups, right? Just metadata going to the
server,
> all backups going direct from disk to tape over the SAN
network.right?
>
> -Bern
>
> At 10:30 AM 10/17/2001 -0700, you wrote:
> >Bern, Si se puede, and it's available right now
> >
> >Regards...Alex Osuna
> >IBM Principal Systems Engineer
> >Tivoli Certified Consultant
> >408-256-9952
> >Fax 408-904-5326
> >Pager 408-390-0813
> >"The price of Freedom is eternal vigilance"--Thomas Jefferson"
> >
> >
> >
> > Bern Ruelas
> >  > COM> cc:
> > Sent by: Subject: Re: storage
agent?
> > "ADSM: Dist
> > Stor Manager"
> > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > IST.EDU>
> >
> >
> > 10/17/01 09:24
> > AM
> > Please respond
> > to "ADSM: D

Re: HP/UX client not finding dsm.opt

[Zlatko Krastev/ACIT]

Kai,

You have set that includes/excludes would be specified in another file in 
dsm.sys but the path points to the directory. Look what is written in the 
"Using Backup-Archive Clients" manual about "inclexcl" option:
"The inclexcl option specifies the path and file name of your 
include-exclude options file, if you use one. Use an include-exclude 
options file to exclude files from backup and to assign different 
management classes to specific files or groups of files. 
..
For information about creating an include-exclude options file, see Chapter 
7, Creating an Include-Exclude File. "
You missed the file name and specified only the path. Thus after reading 
dsm.sys the client attempts to read the directory as additional file (like 
an #include file). Here the syntax parsing fails! You should add the 
include/exclude file name in the path

Zlatko Krastev
IT Consultant






Kai Hintze <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> on 19.10.2001 02:24:34
Please respond to "ADSM: Dist Stor Manager" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
cc: 

Subject:HP/UX client not finding dsm.opt

Have you ever seen a client try to use the DSM DIR directory for its opt
file?

Yesterday I downloaded the HP/UX 4.1.latest client from Tivoli's web site 
to
use with a Storage Management Server for MVS - Version 4, Release 1, Level
0.0. It seemed to install ok, but when I try to connect to the server it
claims that  is an invalid character in the opt file. A
(commented) session looks something like this:

# the client is a new HP 8xx series running HP/UX 11.0.
newhp:/#uname -a
HP-UX newhp B.11.00 U 9000/800 616339383 unlimited-user license

# I created a small script to export the environment. It seems to work.
newhp:/#. /opt/tivoli/tsm env
newhp:/#env | grep -i dsm
DSM DIR=/opt/tivoli/tsm/client/ba/bin
DSM CONFIG=/opt/tivoli/tsm/client/ba/bin/dsm.opt
newhp:/#cd $DSM DIR

# At this point I should be able to connect to the server, but
newhp:/opt/tivoli/tsm/client/ba/bin#dsmc
ANS1036S Invalid option '°' found in options file
'/opt/tivoli/tsm/client/ba/bin'
  at line number : 1
  Invalid entry : ''

# It does seem to be looking at the file it says--the directory!
# dsm.opt is pretty standard
newhp:/opt/tivoli/tsm/client/ba/bin#od -c dsm.opt
000   s   e   r   v   e   r   n   a   m   e
020   t   s   m  \n   t   a   p   e   p   r   o   m   p
040   t   n   o  \n
055
newhp:/opt/tivoli/tsm/client/ba/bin#cat dsm.opt
servername tsm
tapeprompt no

# but the bin dir does seem to start with the strange character
newhp:/opt/tivoli/tsm/client/ba/bin> dsmc | od -c
000  \n   A   N   S   0   1   1   0   E   L   o   g   M   s   g
020   :   U   n   a   b   l   e   t   o   o   p   e   n
040   e   r   r   o   r   l   o   g   f   i   l   e
060   '   d   s   m   e   r   r   o   r   .   l   o   g   '   f
100   o   r   o   u   t   p   u   t   .  \n   A   N   S   1   0
120   3   6   S   I   n   v   a   l   i   d   o   p   t   i
140   o   n   ' 001 260   '   f   o   u   n   d   i   n
^^^

160   o   p   t   i   o   n   s   f   i   l   e   '   /
200   o   p   t   /   t   i   v   o   l   i   /   t   s   m   /   c
220   l   i   e   n   t   /   b   a   /   b   i   n   '  \n  \t
240   a   t   l   i   n   e   n   u   m   b   e   r   :
260   1  \n  \t   I   n   v   a   l   i   d   e   n   t
300   r   y   :   '   '  \n  \n
311
newhp:/opt/tivoli/tsm/client/ba/bin> od -c . |head
000 001 260  \0  \0 364  \0  \0 001 340  \0 220 001   \ 002 020
^^^
020  \0  \0  \0 324  \0  \0 001 260  \0  \0  \0  \0 001 240  \0  \0
040  \0  \0 001 310  \0  \0  \0   D 002   <  \0 300  \0  \0  \0  \0
060 001   l  \0  \0  \0  \0  \0   X 001   <  \0  \0 001 034  \0  \0
100 002   $  \0  \0  \0  \0  \f 372  \0 024  \0 007  \0  \0   d   s
120   m   .   s   y   s   a   t   e  \0  \0 013 301  \0 024  \0  \t

# it seems like it may be using unicode since it is taking a 2 byte 
# character.

# for completeness sake, here is the dsm.sys
newhp:/opt/tivoli/tsm/client/ba/bin#cat dsm.sys
*ADSM CLIENT SYSTEM OPTIONS FILE FOR QUICKINSTALL
* to direct the schedule log to /var the /adsmlog
* directory must be created with the mkdir command
* before the dsmc sched daemon is run.

SERVERNAME tsm
  COMMMETHOD   TCPIP
  TCPSERVERADDRESS ibm2-1
  nodename newhp
  COMPRESSION  off
  changingretries  2
  inclexcl /opt/tivoli/tsm/client/ba/bin
  maxcmdretries8
  retryperiod  15
  schedlogname /var/adm/schedule.log
  queryschedperiod 2
  schedmodeprompted
  passwordaccess   generate
  schedlogretention5 d
  mailprog /usr/bin/mail root
  txnbytelimit 10240
  tcpbuffsize  32
  tcpw

Re: 3590E1A vs IBM LTO

[Jeff Bach]

Data Transfer:
Writing from LTO to LTO, LTO to 3590, 3590 to 3590 is all 12-13 megs/sec,
DISK to LTO, DISK to 3590 (client compression)

Measurements are taken on the Brocade switch (portperfshow) and all drives
are fiber.

Price:
3 LTO for 1 3590.
Tape prices are similar per Gig.
Robot cost lower for LTO, frame costs if figured per Terabyte much lower for
LTO.
Floor space and power costs per Terabyte much lower for LTO.
LTO drives are replaced  and 3590 are fixed.  LTO costs lower anyway.
LTO tape drives sold by many vendors.  Competition is good.

Capacity: client compression (with drive, LTO 2:1 and 3590 3:1)
LTO 1 storage cabinet 40 Terabytes (400 tapes *100 Gigs each)
3590 library 6 frames 40 Terabytes approximately.

Tapes are smaller and have more capacity for LTO

Performance:
LTO library robot, much faster, 2-3 times
IBM says LTO backhitches more and slower recovery than 3590 (I have not
seen)


Jeff Bach
Home Office Open Systems Engineering
Wal-Mart Stores, Inc.

WAL-MART CONFIDENTIAL


-Original Message-
From:   Bill Mansfield [SMTP:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent:   Sunday, October 21, 2001 12:56 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject:Re: 3590E1A vs IBM LTO

Another issue to be aware of is "backhitch time".  When your data
stream is
too slow, the drive has to stop, back up a bit, and continue
writing.
Magstar drives excel at this, which is why they are touted for HSM
and VTS
on the mainframe.  LTO drives are much poorer at this.  Most
applications
for LTO are "write mostly", like straight backup.

Also, Magstar drives are more versatile.  They can be upgraded from
one
tape density to another (B to E), you can change their interface
from SCSI
to FC, etc.  Then can also be used in mixed mainframe/open
environments.
LTO drives are generally locked into their original configuration
(remains
to be seen what happens when next generation density comes out).

There is a performance paper out there somewhere on Magstar vs. LTO
performance.

_
William Mansfield
Senior Consultant
Solution Technology, Inc
630 357 7744 x338



Zosimo
Noriega  To:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
  Subject: 3590E1A vs IBM
LTO
Sent by:
"ADSM: Dist
Stor Manager"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]
RIST.EDU>


10/21/2001
04:36 AM
Please
respond to
"ADSM: Dist
Stor Manager"






We are planning to upgrade ADSM to TSM 4.1 and then currently we are
using
3494 library with 4 3590B1A drives.
Then, we are looking to upgrade or replace the drives into 3590E1A
or IBM
LTO.  Anybody can share from the experience using these drives.  and
which
is the best in terms of performance, availability, cost, data
transfer
rate,
capacity, etc.  thanks a lot in advance.

reagrds,

Zosi Noriega
A D N O C
IST-ITD DMSS
Tel -  6024987


**
This email and any files transmitted with it are confidential
and intended solely for the individual or entity to
whom they are addressed.  If you have received this email
in error destroy it immediately.
**

Setting up TSM on AIX

[Klein, Robert (CIT)]

We trying to set up a TSM server on AIX.  The person setting up the server
is an experienced Unix sysadmin, but is running into a problem defining
partitions on the AIX box.  The disk system is  350 GB RAID5.  When she
tries to set up a partition larger than 5 GB, she gets an error message.
Anyone have any idea of what she might be doing wrong?  Also, does anyone
have suggestions on how best to set up the partitions  (one partition for
both the db/recovery logs and the disk storage pools, separate partitions,
etc.?)  I checked the ADSM-L archives for the last couple of years and did
not see anything on this issue.

> Thanks for any help you can provide.
>

TSM 4.2.1

[Gill, Geoffrey L.]

To all,

For all those who are thinking of upgrading to 4.2.1, my opinion is don't. I
have been up on it for 10 days and have already experienced 3 crashes. I
also have a tape problem that I'm told was supposed to have been fixed. I
have 2 PMR's open, both at level 2. I'm on AIX 4.3.3 and not sure if other
platforms have had similar problems.

I would like to hear from anyone else experiencing these or any other
problems.

Geoff Gill
TSM Administrator
NT Systems Support Engineer
SAIC
E-Mail:   [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Phone:  (858) 826-4062
Pager:   (888) 997-9614

Re: TSM 4.2.1

[Henk ten Have]

On 22-Oct-01 Gill, Geoffrey L. wrote:

> For all those who are thinking of upgrading to 4.2.1, my opinion is don't. I
> have been up on it for 10 days and have already experienced 3 crashes. I
> also have a tape problem that I'm told was supposed to have been fixed. I
> have 2 PMR's open, both at level 2. I'm on AIX 4.3.3 and not sure if other
> platforms have had similar problems.

I agree, this level sucks completely. Server crashes at least 3 times a week
with internal errors (APAR IC31884), mount failed problems (if all drives are in
use), and last but not least, after a server restart, most of the private
volumes in the tape library becomes scratch, and scratch volumes becomes
private (APAR IC31691). So what happens is that if TSM asked for a scratch
volume, the Library Manager gives 95% of the time a private volume, thank God
TSM recognise this volume as one of his a private volumes, asked again for a
scratch volume, and on and on and on. So sometimes mount takes for hours. We use
now a script to get the Library manager in sync with the TSM server (i.e. change
the categories with mtlib). And we have a crontab entry which checks if our
server is still running, if not, the server will started.

Btw, the reason we went 2 weeks ago to 4.2.1 was that the 4.1.1 server did hang
at least 5 times a week, so we had to halt the server and restart it everytime
(symtoms were simple queries like q proc never ended, and cancel proc didn't
work at all).
And btw2, we run our "TSM-server" on AIX 4.3.3.0.

Cheers,
Henk (waiting for lot's of fixes)

Re: TSM 4.2.1

[Lambelet,Rene,VEVEY,GL-IS/CIS]

thanks for the advice, but

which version/level would you recommend for the clients ? (we run TSM server
4.1.4)

René Lambelet
Nestec S.A. / Informatique du Centre 
55, av. Nestlé  CH-1800 Vevey (Switzerland) 
*+41'21'924'35'43  7+41'21'924'28'88  * K4-117
email [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Visit our site: http://www.nestle.com

This message is intended only for the use of the addressee and 
may contain information that is privileged and confidential.



> -Original Message-
> From: Gill, Geoffrey L. [SMTP:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Monday, October 22, 2001 3:26 PM
> To:   [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject:  TSM 4.2.1
> 
> To all,
> 
> For all those who are thinking of upgrading to 4.2.1, my opinion is don't.
> I
> have been up on it for 10 days and have already experienced 3 crashes. I
> also have a tape problem that I'm told was supposed to have been fixed. I
> have 2 PMR's open, both at level 2. I'm on AIX 4.3.3 and not sure if other
> platforms have had similar problems.
> 
> I would like to hear from anyone else experiencing these or any other
> problems.
> 
> Geoff Gill
> TSM Administrator
> NT Systems Support Engineer
> SAIC
> E-Mail:   [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Phone:  (858) 826-4062
> Pager:   (888) 997-9614

Re: FW: v4.2.1 TSM Clients

[Zlatko Krastev/ACIT]

First of all I do not know Andy's position at Tivoli.
And read what is written in the README:
"This is not officially supported by IBM, but IBM support people
do participate in the discussions, along with other  users."
So IMHO here Andy is just a colleague. More skilled in ADSM/TSM, closer to
the developers, but just a colleague.
If something shows up on the web-site or in docs on media that would be
official.

Zlatko Krastev
IT Consultant





"Loon, E.J. van - SPLXM" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> on 19.10.2001 17:57:48
Please respond to "ADSM: Dist Stor Manager" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
cc:

Subject:Re: FW: v4.2.1 TSM Clients

Andrew Raibeck answered "I am almost certain that this change in behavior
is
not deliberate. The APAR is going to be handled as a code defect"
Isn't that you'r Tivoli official answer?
Kindest regards,
Eric van Loon
KLM Royal Dutch Airlines

-Original Message-
From: Zlatko Krastev/ACIT [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Friday, October 19, 2001 12:29
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: FW: v4.2.1 TSM Clients


This was already discussed in the list. Look for the thread "Windows client
behavior change at 4.2.1.0" and answer of Andrew Raibeck from 9.10.2001.
But it is possible that Andy and this Bob are just having different
PERSONAL opinions. We still do not have answer from any Tivoli official, do
we?

Zlatko Krastev
IT Consultant





"Subash, Chandra" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> on 18.10.2001 07:41:31
Please respond to "ADSM: Dist Stor Manager" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
cc:

Subject:FW: v4.2.1 TSM Clients

i HAVE GOT THIS EMAIL FROM ONE OF MY FRIENDS. GUYS WHAT DO YOU THINK IS IT
TRUE ?

Hi Guys

According to Tivoli Support they have made an alteration to way client
v4.2.1 reports Result code 4 to the server. Earlier version clients would
allow for a certain number of files to fail during the backup and still
report to the server that the Schedule was successful. However version
4.2.1
has been altered so that a result code of failed will be reported to the
server even if 1 file fails during a backup.
ntcmachine had been failing on some WINNT system files which I have added
exceptions for under direction of Tivoli support and now backups of this
machine seem to be successful.
Bob from Tivoli suggested that if we are worried about seeing failed result
codes on the daily report that there may be a way to generate a report
listing statistics of how many files or how much data had been backed up
from each machine to provide a more accurate picture as to whether the
backups were successful.


**
This e-mail and any attachment may contain confidential and privileged
material intended for the addressee only. If you are not the addressee, you
are notified that no part of the e-mail or any attachment may be disclosed,
copied or distributed, and that any other action related to this e-mail or
attachment is strictly prohibited, and may be unlawful. If you have
received this e-mail by error, please notify the sender immediately by
return e-mail, and delete this message. Koninklijke Luchtvaart Maatschappij
NV (KLM), its subsidiaries and/or its employees shall not be liable for the
incorrect or incomplete transmission of this e-mail or any attachments, nor
responsible for any delay in receipt.
**

Netware restores and backup sets

[Richard L. Rhodes]

W did a test full restore of a netware server.  The restore was
around 40gb and took 8 hours.  The Netware admins were disappointed
with this time.

To try and compare this time with something else, we  created a
backup set for the same server - it took 3 hours.

My take is that a backup set creation is the equivalent of a full
restore.  If the backup set can be created in 3 hours, then a full
server restore is possible in 3 hours - if you can get the data to
the server (network throughput) and the netware server can accept the
data (netware server write throughput).

Is this sound reasoning?  Thoughts?

Thanks

Rick

Re: TSM Certification Exam - fast test

[Zlatko Krastev/ACIT]

If you have read the recommended books (mainly Concepts and Technical 
Guide) and installed at least a single server and client (reading sometimes 
Administration Guide) it is not so hard to take the exam. It took me about 
40-50 min with registration so you have twice more time than needed.

Zlatko Krastev
IT Consultant





Pétur Eyþórsson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> on 21.10.2001 18:21:56
Please respond to "ADSM: Dist Stor Manager" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
cc: 

Subject:Re: TSM Certification Exam

My advice to you Tom

Bee ready for a fast exam, this thest has 70 questions and you have 
only
90 minutes to take it.
When i took my MCSE i had 30-40 questions and i had 90 minutes for it.
So what stands up in my mind is how fast this test is.

Learn everything there is to know about Server to Server, and Include
Exclude lists, I got alot of questions regarding it.
Bee sure to know everything about the options you can put in the
dsmserv.opt and dsm.opt (dsm.sys UNIX).
Read the "Getting Started with Tivoli Storage Manager Implementation
Guide" and know it well.

You don´t need to read the "Tivoli Storage Management Reporting" book,
they won´t ask mutch about the reporting in TSM. only simple questions 
witch
can be learnd form the other books.

If you know this you should be able to pass.



   Kvedja/Regards
   Petur Eythorsson
   Taeknimadur/Technician
   IBM Certified Specialist - AIX
   Tivoli Storage Manager Certified Professional
   Microsoft Certified System Engineer

 Nyherji HfSimi TEL: +354-569-7700
 Borgartun 37   105 Iceland
 URL:http://www.nyherji.is

- Original Message -
From: "Berning, Tom" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Tuesday, October 16, 2001 7:19 PM
Subject: TSM Certification Exam


> Does anyone have a good sample exam that can be used to see how close I
can
> get to taking the TSM Certification exam?
>
> Also, does anyone have some good information on what to read to be able 
to
> pass the exam.
>
> Any help would be appreciated.
>
> Thanks in advance
>
> Thomas R. Berning
> 8485 Broadwell Road
> Cincinnati, OH 45244
> Phone: 513-388-2857
> Fax: 513-388-

Re: Client and AIX mirrored disks...

[Zlatko Krastev/ACIT]

Stephen,

there is no any need to vary off the logical volumes. Moreover you cannot
vary off the LVs but only the whole VG. And you have no access to logical
volumes in varied off VG, only to the physical disks.
TSM itself does not care is you LV mirrored or not. The B/A client accesses
files on the filesystem created on top of the LV or makes a backup of whole
LV as a single raw data file using image backup. The TDP products access
the data through application APIs and again do not care about mirroring
done by the application or operating system.
The only products which do use something similar to this "split mirror and
backup" procedure are TDP products for ESS and EMC Symmetrix.

Zlatko Krastev
IT Consultant





"Greatbanks, Stephen P" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> on 22.10.2001 07:18:04
Please respond to "ADSM: Dist Stor Manager" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
cc:

Subject:Client and AIX mirrored disks...

Hi,
I am something of a TSM beginner, and this is my first post here
too, so please excuse
any obvious mistakes on my part.
I am in the position of having to implement a TSM backup solution
for our client. This is (in the first instance at least) an all AIX shop.
I've read all the redbooks, and am pretty confident that I know (more or
less!) what needs to be done. However, I would appreciate some feedback
regarding AIX disk mirroring and how this affects the client-side of the
set-up.
Without going into too much detail about our current config, are
there any special considerations regarding the client if you are using AIX
LVM-level mirroring? Our current backups use sysback/sbom which jumps
through a number of hoops to break a copy off the (triple) mirror, which is
then backed up whilst work continues. For simplicity, as much as anything
else, I would far prefer to not have to do this kind of thing as part of
the backup procedure. Is there anything in the TSM client which assists in
the backup of mirrored volumes? Do the logical volumes have to be varied on
(just wondering if varying them off is an option) for TSM to back them up?
Does anybody have any experience with this kind of thing?

Thanks in advance,

Steve Greatbanks
--

Re: TSM 4.2.1

[Jeremy Greven]

Geoff.

I had similar problems with the upgrade.  My 3583 just stopped working.
period.  I was getting the no mount points available while there was
nothing mounted and all seemed well.

There was a fix issued - both for AIX and NT to resolve this problem.
4.2.1.3 resolved the issue for NT and I believe that 4.2.1.2 resolves these
issues for AIX as some have described.  Both versions are available for
download off of the boulder website.  (service.boulder.ibm.com)

Hope this helps.

Jeremy Greven
Senior Network Analyst
Chubb Insurance Company of Canada




"Gill, Geoffrey
L." To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
  Subject: TSM 4.2.1
Sent by: "ADSM:
Dist Stor
Manager"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]
T.EDU>


10/22/2001 09:26
AM
Please respond
to "ADSM: Dist
Stor Manager"






To all,

For all those who are thinking of upgrading to 4.2.1, my opinion is don't.
I
have been up on it for 10 days and have already experienced 3 crashes. I
also have a tape problem that I'm told was supposed to have been fixed. I
have 2 PMR's open, both at level 2. I'm on AIX 4.3.3 and not sure if other
platforms have had similar problems.

I would like to hear from anyone else experiencing these or any other
problems.

Geoff Gill
TSM Administrator
NT Systems Support Engineer
SAIC
E-Mail:   [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Phone:  (858) 826-4062
Pager:   (888) 997-9614

Re: How to INVOKE an Oracle Stored Proc from C code in an AIX env ironment?

[Selva, Perpetua]

Do anyone know how to invoke an Oracle Stored Procedure from C
code in an AIX environ? or have an example? or know of any
links I could use?

Re: TSM 4.2.1

[Remco Post]

This is the result of a know bug for tsm icm. a 3494 library. TSM messes up
the lib's knowledge of the scratch/private status of a tape. See apar IC31691.

> I agree. don't...
>
> I did the upgrade yesterday. (AIX 4.3.2)
>
> Only one problem discovered so far, but it's serius.
>
> Something is messed up with the allocation of mountpoins in the libraries.
> Clients or processes needing a mountpoint would earlier just sit and wait
> until one was available.
> In 4.2.1 it seems that if all mountpoints are in use or reserved, furter
> requests for mountpoints are cancelled.
> 10/22/2001 10:42:57  ANR8447E No drives are currently available in library
>   3494.
> 10/22/2001 10:42:57  ANR1401W Mount request denied for volume ORA168 -
>   mount failed.
>
> When this happened, I also noticed a new message from q mount:
> ANR8376I Mount point reserved in device class BCKTAPE, status: RESERVED.
> ANR8334I 1 matches found.
>
> The other 3 drives where busy.
>
> I've just started digging into this, so it could be that I have missed
> something...
>
>
>
> On Mon, 22 Oct 2001, Gill, Geoffrey L. wrote:
>
> > To all,
> >
> > For all those who are thinking of upgrading to 4.2.1, my opinion is don't. I
> > have been up on it for 10 days and have already experienced 3 crashes. I
> > also have a tape problem that I'm told was supposed to have been fixed. I
> > have 2 PMR's open, both at level 2. I'm on AIX 4.3.3 and not sure if other
> > platforms have had similar problems.
> >
> > I would like to hear from anyone else experiencing these or any other
> > problems.
> >
> > Geoff Gill
> > TSM Administrator
> > NT Systems Support Engineer
> > SAIC
> > E-Mail:   [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > Phone:  (858) 826-4062
> > Pager:   (888) 997-9614
> >
>

--
Met vriendelijke groeten,

Remco Post

SARA - Stichting Academisch Rekencentrum Amsterdam
High Performance Computing  Tel. +31 20 592 8008Fax. +31 20 668 3167

"I really didn't foresee the Internet. But then, neither did the computer
industry. Not that that tells us very much of course - the computer industry
didn't even foresee that the century was going to end." -- Douglas Adams

Re: Sybase with TSM

[Miles Purdy]

Hi,

we use Sybase on UNIX, so I don't know if this helps but...

First, SQL Backtrack, IMHO, is not production software.

We dump ALL the databases to a filesystem, then backup the filesystem and database 
dumps as regular files, it works very well. However I have the benefit of a high speed 
network (SP switch) and 32x18GB disks for the filesystem (RAID 0). The filesystem is 
NFS mounted.

I know on UNIX Sybase can only create 32 stripes and each stripe is limited to 2 GB - 
IF your using a 32-bit version, ie. v11. So won't help you, IF your on v11.

For performance I can dump 20MB/s to a local array, 10MB/s to NFS.

Let me know if you need more info.

Miles


---
Miles Purdy 
System Manager
Farm Income Programs Directorate
Winnipeg, MB, CA
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
ph: (204) 984-1602 fax: (204) 983-7557
---

>>> [EMAIL PROTECTED] 22-Oct-01 4:33:10 AM >>>
Hi TSMers,

Is there anyone has experience on TSM with Sybase?

We have a customer with 200GB data on Sybase (NT platform). As we have
checked, SQL Backtrack and OBSI module for ADSM couldn't work with the
LAN-free backup of TSM, so we want to propose online dump DB method, then
will use TSM's LAN-free backup with the intermediate file created. Does
anyone has this experience that can share as we concern with the
performance of dumping 200GB? Thanks.


Best Regards,

Molly Pui
I/T Specialist
Tivoli Systems, IBM China/Hong Kong Limited
Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: TSM 4.2.1

[Tom Tann{s]

I agree. don't...

I did the upgrade yesterday. (AIX 4.3.2)

Only one problem discovered so far, but it's serius.

Something is messed up with the allocation of mountpoins in the libraries.
Clients or processes needing a mountpoint would earlier just sit and wait
until one was available.
In 4.2.1 it seems that if all mountpoints are in use or reserved, furter
requests for mountpoints are cancelled.
10/22/2001 10:42:57  ANR8447E No drives are currently available in library
  3494.
10/22/2001 10:42:57  ANR1401W Mount request denied for volume ORA168 -
  mount failed.

When this happened, I also noticed a new message from q mount:
ANR8376I Mount point reserved in device class BCKTAPE, status: RESERVED.
ANR8334I 1 matches found.

The other 3 drives where busy.

I've just started digging into this, so it could be that I have missed
something...



On Mon, 22 Oct 2001, Gill, Geoffrey L. wrote:

> To all,
>
> For all those who are thinking of upgrading to 4.2.1, my opinion is don't. I
> have been up on it for 10 days and have already experienced 3 crashes. I
> also have a tape problem that I'm told was supposed to have been fixed. I
> have 2 PMR's open, both at level 2. I'm on AIX 4.3.3 and not sure if other
> platforms have had similar problems.
>
> I would like to hear from anyone else experiencing these or any other
> problems.
>
> Geoff Gill
> TSM Administrator
> NT Systems Support Engineer
> SAIC
> E-Mail:   [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Phone:  (858) 826-4062
> Pager:   (888) 997-9614
>

Re: Client and AIX mirrored disks...

[Miles Purdy]

Hi,

Let me try and clarify things and that should answer your question

First, are you backing up filesystems or raw logical volumes? (hmm, it might not 
matter).

Remember filesystems are built on logical volumes, logical volumes point to one ore 
more physical volumes. So if you are backing up filesystems there is no need to break 
the mirroring. Now even if you want to back up raw logical volumes, I don't think you 
should have to break the mirrors.

>Without going into too much detail about our current config, are
>there any special considerations
>regarding the client if you are using AIX LVM-level mirroring? 
NO!

>Is there anything in the TSM client which assists in the backup of mirrored volumes?
No, because TSM clients look at filesystems, which don't know about mirroring. The 
logical volumes manager handles the mirroring. ie. the answer is no because you have 
to worry about it!

>Do the logical volumes have to be varied on (just wondering if varying them off is an 
>option) for TSM to back them up?
If they contain a filesystem YES, if you want to back up raw logical volumes then I 
would think NO. However I think you want to back up filesystems, right?

To answer your question generally, just install the client though smitty, set the 
options and run dsmc inc. That's all you need to do to get started.

Miles


---
Miles Purdy 
System Manager
Farm Income Programs Directorate
Winnipeg, MB, CA
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
ph: (204) 984-1602 fax: (204) 983-7557
---

>>> [EMAIL PROTECTED] 21-Oct-01 11:18:04 PM >>>
Hi,
I am something of a TSM beginner, and this is my first post here
too, so please excuse
any obvious mistakes on my part.
I am in the position of having to implement a TSM backup solution
for our client. This is
(in the first instance at least) an all AIX shop. I've read all the
redbooks, and am pretty confident
that I know (more or less!) what needs to be done. However, I would
appreciate some feedback
regarding AIX disk mirroring and how this affects the client-side of the
set-up.
Without going into too much detail about our current config, are
there any special considerations
regarding the client if you are using AIX LVM-level mirroring? Our current
backups use sysback/sbom
which jumps through a number of hoops to break a copy off the (triple)
mirror, which is then backed
up whilst work continues. For simplicity, as much as anything else, I would
far prefer to not have
to do this kind of thing as part of the backup procedure. Is there anything
in the TSM client which
assists in the backup of mirrored volumes? Do the logical volumes have to be
varied on (just wondering
if varying them off is an option) for TSM to back them up? Does anybody have
any experience with this
kind of thing?

Thanks in advance,

Steve Greatbanks
--

Re: Netware 6 support ?

[Jim Kirkman]

and, in that same vein, when will there be Netware cluster aware nlms?

Winfried Heilmann wrote:

> Hi,
>
> does anybody know, when Netware 6 will be supported by tsm.
>
> Regards
> Winfried

--
Jim Kirkman
AIS - Systems
UNC-Chapel Hill
966-5884

message 2507

[[EMAIL PROTECTED]]

Hi,
the activity log of the TSM server has got lots of messages: << Message number 2507 
not available for language EN_US >>.

Any idea?

Thanks a lot

Paolo Nasca
Cleis Technology srl
I-16124 Genoa - Italy
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Genoa switchboard: +39 010 24858.11
Milan switchboard: +39 02 66740.11

Re: TSM Certification Exam

[Pétur Eyþórsson]

My advice to you Tom

Bee ready for a fast exam, this thest has 70 questions and you have only
90 minutes to take it.
When i took my MCSE i had 30-40 questions and i had 90 minutes for it.
So what stands up in my mind is how fast this test is.

Learn everything there is to know about Server to Server, and Include
Exclude lists, I got alot of questions regarding it.
Bee sure to know everything about the options you can put in the
dsmserv.opt and dsm.opt (dsm.sys UNIX).
Read the "Getting Started with Tivoli Storage Manager Implementation
Guide" and know it well.

You don´t need to read the "Tivoli Storage Management Reporting" book,
they won´t ask mutch about the reporting in TSM. only simple questions witch
can be learnd form the other books.

If you know this you should be able to pass.



   Kvedja/Regards
   Petur Eythorsson
   Taeknimadur/Technician
   IBM Certified Specialist - AIX
   Tivoli Storage Manager Certified Professional
   Microsoft Certified System Engineer

 Nyherji HfSimi TEL: +354-569-7700
 Borgartun 37   105 Iceland
 URL:http://www.nyherji.is

- Original Message -
From: "Berning, Tom" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Tuesday, October 16, 2001 7:19 PM
Subject: TSM Certification Exam


> Does anyone have a good sample exam that can be used to see how close I
can
> get to taking the TSM Certification exam?
>
> Also, does anyone have some good information on what to read to be able to
> pass the exam.
>
> Any help would be appreciated.
>
> Thanks in advance
>
> Thomas R. Berning
> 8485 Broadwell Road
> Cincinnati, OH 45244
> Phone: 513-388-2857
> Fax: 513-388-