Re: OS/390 server memory dumps
Tom, the command you are looking for is 'slip'. You can code the command, described in painful detail in the system commands, and enter it on the console, or you can add it to sys1.parmlib(ieaslp00) and issue the 'set slip=00' command. I see that the requester is OAM, not adsm even though adsm took the dump. Maybe there is something in OAM to fix. Sorry, I can't code the slip command for you, it is usually an iterative process to get it right. But as a sample, here is my slip command the make tsm take a dump when it abends, the reverse of what you want - SLIP SET,ERRTYP=ABEND,JOBNAME=ADSM3SRV,ID=TSM1,A=SVCD,END Hope this helps, Bill Colwell At 11:45 AM 1/2/2004, you wrote: >We have a TSM 5.1.7.2 server running under OS/390 2.9 at the moment, >and expected to be running under OS/390 2.10 within the next few days. >We occasionally have a process or session cancelled while waiting for >a tape mount. This triggers a completely useless memory dump from TSM. >The OS/390 console message describing the dump is as follows: > >IEA794I SVC DUMP HAS CAPTURED: 463 >DUMPID=002 REQUESTED BY JOB (ADSM) >DUMP TITLE=COMPON=OAM LIBRARY AUTO COMM SERVICE,COMPID=5695-DF1 > 80,ISSUER=CBRLLACS > >Is there any way to suppress these dumps, either by changing TSM >settings or by using OS/390 PARMLIB members or user exits? -- Bill Colwell C. S. Draper Lab Cambridge Ma.
OS/390 server memory dumps
We have a TSM 5.1.7.2 server running under OS/390 2.9 at the moment, and expected to be running under OS/390 2.10 within the next few days. We occasionally have a process or session cancelled while waiting for a tape mount. This triggers a completely useless memory dump from TSM. The OS/390 console message describing the dump is as follows: IEA794I SVC DUMP HAS CAPTURED: 463 DUMPID=002 REQUESTED BY JOB (ADSM) DUMP TITLE=COMPON=OAM LIBRARY AUTO COMM SERVICE,COMPID=5695-DF1 80,ISSUER=CBRLLACS Is there any way to suppress these dumps, either by changing TSM settings or by using OS/390 PARMLIB members or user exits?
Re: Operational Reporting error
>I am getting the following error in the Daily Report >ERROR -- Administrative Schedules ... >It does look like the SQL command is getting cut off. Is there a limitation as to >how long the command can be? The Admin Ref manual, for Define Schedule (administrative) specifies that CMD is limited to 512 chars. Long, complex commands are better off in a server script, which you can invoke via the schedule. Richard Sims, BU
Unsubscribe
Holly L. Peppers Coca Cola Enterprises [EMAIL PROTECTED] (770) 370-8542
Operational Reporting error
I am getting the following error in the Daily Report
ERROR -- Administrative Schedules
ANS8000I Server command: 'select domain_name, schedule_name,
node_name,substr(char(scheduled_start), 1, 16) as
"SCHEDULED_START",substr(char(actual_start), 1, 16) as "ACTUAL_START",status, result
from events where (scheduled_start between '2004-01-01 10:30' and '2004-01-02 10:30')
and LENGTH(domain_name) IS NULL and ( (status = 'Future') or (status = 'Started') or
(status = 'Completed') or (status = 'Pending') or (status = 'Failed') or (status =
'Missed')) and (node_name in ('
ANR2903E The SQL statement is incomplete; additional tokens are required.
ANS8001I Return code 3.
ANS8000I Server command: ')) order by scheduled_start,status,result'
ANR2000E Unknown command - )).
ANS8001I Return code 2.
ANS8002I Highest return code was 3.
It does look like the SQL command is getting cut off. Is there a limitation as to how
long the command can be?
> Kathie
> Kathie Foresti
> Lockheed Martin Corporation
> Enterprise Information Systems
> Phone (315)456-1941
> E-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
Re: More mount points thru space reclamation
I found the problem my self! I had to increase the "Maximum Scratch Volumes Allowed" from 100 that I had as a maximum of volumes, to more! Cryptic error message but now it´s solved!! /Larsa -Original Message- From: Richard Sims [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: den 2 januari 2004 12:52 To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: More mount points thru space reclamation ... >ANR1082W Space reclamation terminated for volume CARNSWETSM2.BFS.071830391 > - insufficient number of mount points available for removable media. ... Larsa - See entry "Drives, not all in library being used" in http://people.bu.edu/rbs/ADSM.QuickFacts for the most common causes. If necessary, re-post with Query Drive and Query Path information, etc., to show us more of the config. Richard Sims, BU This communication is from a Carnegie company within the Carnegie Group. The information contained in it, including any attachment or enclosure, is intended only for the person or entity to which it is addressed and may contain confidential and/or privileged material. Any unauthorised use, review, retransmissions, dissemination, copying or other use of, or taking of any action in reliance upon, this information by persons or entities other than the intended recipient is prohibited. If you received this in error, please contact the sender and delete or shred the material immediately. Thank you. Opinions, conclusions and other information expressed in this message are not given or endorsed by my firm or employer unless otherwise indicated by an authorised representative independent of this message. This communication is from a Carnegie company within the Carnegie Group. The information contained in it, including any attachment or enclosure, is intended only for the person or entity to which it is addressed and may contain confidential and/or privileged material. Any unauthorised use, review, retransmissions, dissemination, copying or other use of, or taking of any action in reliance upon, this information by persons or entities other than the intended recipient is prohibited. If you received this in error, please contact the sender and delete or shred the material immediately. Thank you. Opinions, conclusions and other information expressed in this message are not given or endorsed by my firm or employer unless otherwise indicated by an authorised representative independent of this message.
Re: TSM vs Netbackup
I do not understand the blanket assertion that TSM does not have an online snapshot technology. TSM does in fact have such technology, which is used to perform online image backup (full and incremental) as well as open file support during regular incremental backups. Some salient points: - TSM's image backup function provides full and incremental backup capability at the file system level. It does not yet support file-level backup and restore. - TSM 5.2.0's online image backup is supported on Windows 2003 on an "as is" basis only; but it does exist. The 5.2.2 client now officially supports snapshot technology on Windows 2003. While the test clearly states that it uses TSM's default client settings, in so doing, it is really making an apples-to-oranges comparison. While TSM does not have snapshot technology for file-level backup, at the very least the journal-based backup feature would substantially reduce incremental backup run times once you're past the first backup. Regards, Andy Andy Raibeck IBM Software Group Tivoli Storage Manager Client Development Internal Notes e-mail: Andrew Raibeck/Tucson/[EMAIL PROTECTED] 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. Richard Sims <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent by: "ADSM: Dist Stor Manager" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 01/02/2004 06:32 Please respond to "ADSM: Dist Stor Manager" To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] cc: Subject:Re: TSM vs Netbackup >Veritas recently commishioned a "study" of performance between >Netbackup, Networker, and TSM to compare results of snapshot backups. >Apparently the new Netbackup 5.0 has a new "advanced client". >For TSM, they threw it in stating that there is no comprable feature, >but they wanted include it anyway. I have never done any investigating >into doing snapshot backups of data with TSM, do any of you do anything >similar at your site and if so, what? > >Link to the marketing trash: >http://veritest.com/clients/reports/veritas/veritas_backup_w_add.pdf > >Michael French >Savvis Communications Good morning, Michael - Many of us don't much look at competing vendor offerings, so it was interesting to learn of the new Veritas FlashBackup approach. I read through the test report, and searched out the basal information at http://www.veritas.com/van/products/nbuflashbackup.jsp to get more information. Some observations... The VeriTest report is troublingly vague on just what Veritas contracted them to test. The impression is left that VeriTest themselves determined just what would constitute the test environment. We are given no information as to what their "large data set" is supposed to represent (active web server HTML and programs file system; user home directory file system; mixed database environment; mail spools?). Reading all the material, however, it is apparent that the test is to show the advantages of only FlashBackup within the narrow focus of backing up a large number of modest files (representative of user home directories, with their frequent file changes). One thing that jumped out at me was that the test chose to use DLT tape technology. While DLT or LTO may be a relatively common deployment choice, it's well known that as principally streaming media that their performance drawbacks will prolong the backup of more than a million small files. This will inherently make any conventional file-oriented backup approach look bad in the test. Almost comically absent from the test was the real reason that one performs backups: restoral. We've all seen vendor literature touting one aspect of a product without presenting the overall whole view. The FlashBackup whitepaper (unreferenced in the testing document) suggests that restoral time is comparable to the product's historical norm, but certainly one would like to see that included in such a test. I laud the innovative approach that Veritas has taken with FlashBackup: it's always good to see imagineering occurring in product development. I'm concerned about the durability of this approach to file backups, though. FlashBackup operates by first capturing a file system map (it has to run through the file system like other conventional products, and so can get somewhat bogged down in directories). Then it separately writes disk blocks to tape, bypassing file system I/O overhead, whence it gains its speed. This amounts to a kind of file system emulation. Is this foolproof, particularly in highly volatile file systems? Will this work under all circumstances and all kinds of file system objects? This is what we would have liked substantive, thorough testing to tell us. We aren't getting that information from the vendor or their contracted testing company, so it will apparently have to be proved out in the field. Some of the information surrounding FlashBackup can mislead. The testing paper states that IBM's TSM "...does
Re: TSM vs Netbackup
>Veritas recently commishioned a "study" of performance between >Netbackup, Networker, and TSM to compare results of snapshot backups. >Apparently the new Netbackup 5.0 has a new "advanced client". >For TSM, they threw it in stating that there is no comprable feature, >but they wanted include it anyway. I have never done any investigating >into doing snapshot backups of data with TSM, do any of you do anything >similar at your site and if so, what? > >Link to the marketing trash: >http://veritest.com/clients/reports/veritas/veritas_backup_w_add.pdf > >Michael French >Savvis Communications Good morning, Michael - Many of us don't much look at competing vendor offerings, so it was interesting to learn of the new Veritas FlashBackup approach. I read through the test report, and searched out the basal information at http://www.veritas.com/van/products/nbuflashbackup.jsp to get more information. Some observations... The VeriTest report is troublingly vague on just what Veritas contracted them to test. The impression is left that VeriTest themselves determined just what would constitute the test environment. We are given no information as to what their "large data set" is supposed to represent (active web server HTML and programs file system; user home directory file system; mixed database environment; mail spools?). Reading all the material, however, it is apparent that the test is to show the advantages of only FlashBackup within the narrow focus of backing up a large number of modest files (representative of user home directories, with their frequent file changes). One thing that jumped out at me was that the test chose to use DLT tape technology. While DLT or LTO may be a relatively common deployment choice, it's well known that as principally streaming media that their performance drawbacks will prolong the backup of more than a million small files. This will inherently make any conventional file-oriented backup approach look bad in the test. Almost comically absent from the test was the real reason that one performs backups: restoral. We've all seen vendor literature touting one aspect of a product without presenting the overall whole view. The FlashBackup whitepaper (unreferenced in the testing document) suggests that restoral time is comparable to the product's historical norm, but certainly one would like to see that included in such a test. I laud the innovative approach that Veritas has taken with FlashBackup: it's always good to see imagineering occurring in product development. I'm concerned about the durability of this approach to file backups, though. FlashBackup operates by first capturing a file system map (it has to run through the file system like other conventional products, and so can get somewhat bogged down in directories). Then it separately writes disk blocks to tape, bypassing file system I/O overhead, whence it gains its speed. This amounts to a kind of file system emulation. Is this foolproof, particularly in highly volatile file systems? Will this work under all circumstances and all kinds of file system objects? This is what we would have liked substantive, thorough testing to tell us. We aren't getting that information from the vendor or their contracted testing company, so it will apparently have to be proved out in the field. Some of the information surrounding FlashBackup can mislead. The testing paper states that IBM's TSM "...does not have an online snapshot capability..." Strictly speaking, that is true. TSM does, however, provide image copy backup and restoral. And there is the Tivoli Storage Manager for Hardware product, which takes advantage of the IBM ESS's Copy Services to facilitate DB2 and Oracle backups. This leads to the question of whether you want "flash" type backup capability in your backup product, or native to the file system infrastructure. Some file systems, such as AFS and DFS, are specifically architected to support backups through a flash mechanism. More hardware is now accommodating this need, particularly in 24x7 operations. I would strongly advised reading FlashBackup's whitepaper, which gives a much more balanced sense of where FlashBackup offers advantages, and where it does not. In particular, note that, in contrast to more generalized backup products, FlashBackup works only with certain file system types. It would be most helpful to get some feedback from its beta testers. Richard Sims
Re: Upgrading to 5.2.2
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, David Benigni <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> says: > >I currently run a TSM 5.1.7. And anyone had any problems going from >5.1.x server to 5.2.2 server? > >Also, the current 5.1.x clients shouldn't have problems connecting to >the 5.2.2 server correct? Good Morning David We did not go from 5.1 to 5.2, but we did go from 4.x to 5.2 without problems. Before we did this upgrade, using info from itsm tech support, we upgraded the level of 4.x to pick up a fix for the handling of group objects such as the windows 2000 system-objects. I believe that there is a matching magic level for 5.1. And we have 5.1 clients connecting to the 5.2 server. In fact I just had to add a client to an older nt4 system and discovered that the lastest 5.2 client will not installon a windows nt4 system, you have to use the 5.1 client. Let us know how you make out. len
Re: More mount points thru space reclamation
Forgot the versions of the servers: TSM1: W2K SP4 and TSM version 5.1.7.0 TSM2: W2K SP4 and TSM version 5.1.5.0 The way it works is between TSM2 to TSM1 with space reclamation. /Larsa -Original Message- From: Richard Sims [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: den 2 januari 2004 12:52 To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: More mount points thru space reclamation ... >ANR1082W Space reclamation terminated for volume CARNSWETSM2.BFS.071830391 > - insufficient number of mount points available for removable media. ... Larsa - See entry "Drives, not all in library being used" in http://people.bu.edu/rbs/ADSM.QuickFacts for the most common causes. If necessary, re-post with Query Drive and Query Path information, etc., to show us more of the config. Richard Sims, BU This communication is from a Carnegie company within the Carnegie Group. The information contained in it, including any attachment or enclosure, is intended only for the person or entity to which it is addressed and may contain confidential and/or privileged material. Any unauthorised use, review, retransmissions, dissemination, copying or other use of, or taking of any action in reliance upon, this information by persons or entities other than the intended recipient is prohibited. If you received this in error, please contact the sender and delete or shred the material immediately. Thank you. Opinions, conclusions and other information expressed in this message are not given or endorsed by my firm or employer unless otherwise indicated by an authorised representative independent of this message. This communication is from a Carnegie company within the Carnegie Group. The information contained in it, including any attachment or enclosure, is intended only for the person or entity to which it is addressed and may contain confidential and/or privileged material. Any unauthorised use, review, retransmissions, dissemination, copying or other use of, or taking of any action in reliance upon, this information by persons or entities other than the intended recipient is prohibited. If you received this in error, please contact the sender and delete or shred the material immediately. Thank you. Opinions, conclusions and other information expressed in this message are not given or endorsed by my firm or employer unless otherwise indicated by an authorised representative independent of this message.
Re: More mount points thru space reclamation
Here is the config for the server: Q dr: Library Name Drive Name Device Type On-Line --- --- LB6 LB6DR0 LTO Yes LB6 LB6DR1 LTO Yes LB6 LB6DR2 LTO Yes Q path: Source Name Source Type Destination Destination On-Line NameType --- --- --- --- --- CARNSWETSM1 SERVER LB6 LIBRARY Yes CARNSWETSM1 SERVER LB6DR0 DRIVE Yes CARNSWETSM1 SERVER LB6DR1 DRIVE Yes CARNSWETSM1 SERVER LB6DR2 DRIVE Yes Q stg stdbktsm2c: Storage DeviceEstimated Pct Pct High Low Next Pool Name Class Name CapacityUtilMigrMig Mig Storage (MB)Pct Pct Pool --- -- -- - - --- --- STDBKTSM2CTSM2CLASS4,414,183.45.2 9 The copy storage pool config: Copy Storage Pools : STDBKTSM2C Storage Pool Name STDBKTSM2C Storage Pool Type COPY Device Class Name TSM2CLASS Estimated Capacity (MB) 4414183.8 Pct Util 45.2 Pct Migr - Pct Logical 99.3 High Mig Pct - Low Mig Pct - Migration Processes - Next Storage Pool - Maximum Size Threshold - Access READWRITE Description - Overflow Location - Cache Migrated Files? - Collocate? NO Reclamation Threshold 60 Maximum Scratch Volumes Allowed 100 Delay Period for Volume Reuse 0 Migration in Progress? - Amount Migrated (MB) - Elapsed Migration Time (seconds) - Reclamation in Progress? No Volume Being Migrated/Reclaimed - Last Update Date/Time 2003-07-11 12:58:48.00 Last Update by (administrator) LAROHM Reclaim Storage Pool - Migration Delay - Migration Continue - Storage Pool Data Format Native Copy Storage Pool(s) - Continue Copy on Error? - CRC Data NO The server device class: Server Device Classes : TSM2CLASS Device Class Name TSM2CLASS Device Access Strategy Sequential Storage Pool Count 1 Device Type SERVER Format - Est/Max Capacity 100G Mount Limit 2 Mount Wait (min) - Mount Retention (min) 2 Label Prefix ADSM Drive Letter - Library - Directory - Server Name CARNSWETSM2 Retry Period 10 Retry Interval 30 Twosided - Shared - Last Update by (administrator) LAROHM Last Update Date/Time 2004-01-02 10:49:54.00 All of this looks the same, but in the other direction :-), as far as I can se on the other site where it seems to work just fine!! Or is the problem on the destination server??? /Larsa -Original Message- From: Richard Sims [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: den 2 januari 2004 12:52 To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: More mount points thru space reclamation ... >ANR1082W Space reclamation terminated for volume CARNSWETSM2.BFS.071830391 > - insufficient number of mount points available for removable media. ... Larsa - See entry "Drives, not all in library being used" in http://people.bu.edu/rbs/ADSM.QuickFacts for the most common causes. If necessary, re-post with Query Drive and Query Path information, etc., to show us more of the config. Richard Sims, BU This communication is from a Carnegie company within the Carnegie Group. The information contained in it, including any attachment or enclosure, is intended only for the person or entity to which it is addressed and may contain confidential and/or privileged material. Any unauthorised use, review, retransmissions, dissemination, copying or other use of, or taking of any action in reliance upon, this information by persons or entities other than the intended recipient is prohibited. If you received this in error, please contact the sender and delete or shred the material immediately. Thank you. Opinions, conclusions and other information expressed in this message are not given or endorsed by my firm or employer unless otherwise indicated by an authorised representative independent of this message.
Re: More mount points thru space reclamation
... >ANR1082W Space reclamation terminated for volume CARNSWETSM2.BFS.071830391 > - insufficient number of mount points available for removable media. ... Larsa - See entry "Drives, not all in library being used" in http://people.bu.edu/rbs/ADSM.QuickFacts for the most common causes. If necessary, re-post with Query Drive and Query Path information, etc., to show us more of the config. Richard Sims, BU
More mount points thru space reclamation
I have set up copy pools between my backup sites a few weeks ago, and now during chistmas I have got this problem. 2004.01.02 08:25:53 ANR1163W Offsite volume CARNSWETSM2.BFS.071993625 still contains files which could not be moved. 2004.01.02 08:25:53 ANR1163W Offsite volume CARNSWETSM2.BFS.070013489 still contains files which could not be moved. 2004.01.02 08:25:53 ANR1082W Space reclamation terminated for volume CARNSWETSM2.BFS.071830391 - insufficient number of mount points available for removable media. I can´t find where I increase this value. Anyone out there that can give me a hint?? This problems only occurs only on one of my sites and there are not any more processes going on on at any site. Thanks in advance... /Larsa This communication is from a Carnegie company within the Carnegie Group. The information contained in it, including any attachment or enclosure, is intended only for the person or entity to which it is addressed and may contain confidential and/or privileged material. Any unauthorised use, review, retransmissions, dissemination, copying or other use of, or taking of any action in reliance upon, this information by persons or entities other than the intended recipient is prohibited. If you received this in error, please contact the sender and delete or shred the material immediately. Thank you. Opinions, conclusions and other information expressed in this message are not given or endorsed by my firm or employer unless otherwise indicated by an authorised representative independent of this message.
