Re: MacOS client failing with rc 12 troubleshooting
Yep, it is the ANS4047E that is setting the RC to 12. The other messages related to skipped files are normal reasons for files to be skipped, so by themselves, they would trigger only an RC 4. The ANS4047E is with regard to a file I/O error encountered while reading the file, and is indicative of a potential file system or disk problem that should be investigated. Thus the RC 12. Regards, andy Andy Raibeck IBM Software Group Tivoli Storage Manager Client Product Development Level 3 Team Lead Internal Notes e-mail: Andrew Raibeck/Tucson/[EMAIL PROTECTED] Internet e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] IBM Tivoli Storage Manager support web page: http://www.ibm.com/software/sysmgmt/products/support/IBMTivoliStorageManager.html The only dumb question is the one that goes unasked. The command line is your friend. Good enough is the enemy of excellence. ADSM: Dist Stor Manager ADSM-L@VM.MARIST.EDU wrote on 2007-06-07 13:30:58: Hello gurus, I have an Intel MacOS client running 5.4.0.0 that's failing it's scheduled noon-window backup with an RC 12 message, and I'm not sure why. I'm not sure what's a cause of what. From the dsmerror.log: 06/07/2007 12:44:47 ANS1228E Sending of object '/Library/Logs/tivoli/tsm/dsmsched.log' failed 06/07/2007 12:44:47 ANS4037E Object '/Library/Logs/tivoli/tsm/dsmsched.log' changed during processing. Object skipped. 06/07/2007 12:52:06 ANS1228E Sending of object '/private/var/tmp/folders.501/TemporaryItems/Acr1614669.tmp' failed 06/07/2007 12:52:06 ANS4005E Error processing '/private/var/tmp/folders.501/TemporaryItems/Acr1614669.tmp': file not found 06/07/2007 12:52:07 ANS1228E Sending of object '/private/var/tmp/folders.501/TemporaryItems/Acr1616363.tmp' failed 06/07/2007 12:52:07 ANS4005E Error processing '/private/var/tmp/folders.501/TemporaryItems/Acr1616363.tmp': file not found 06/07/2007 13:27:38 ANS1228E Sending of object '/Users/bob/Documents/Microsoft User Data/Office 2004 Identities/Main Identity/Database' failed 06/07/2007 13:27:38 ANS4037E Object '/Users/bob/Documents/Microsoft User Data/Office 2004 Identities/Main Identity/Database' changed during processing. Object skipped. 06/07/2007 13:39:41 ANS1228E Sending of object '/Users/bob/Library/Application Support/Firefox/Profiles/ap5cuske.default/cookies.txt' failed 06/07/2007 13:39:41 ANS4047E There is a read error on '/Users/bob/Library/Application Support/Firefox/Profiles/ap5cuske.default/cookies.txt'. The file is skipped. 06/07/2007 13:46:14 ANS1802E Incremental backup of '/' finished with 5 failure 06/07/2007 13:46:14 ANS1512E Scheduled event '1215PM' failed. Return code = 12. 06/07/2007 13:46:16 TCP/IP received rc 4 trying to accept connection from server. 06/07/2007 13:46:16 Error -50 accepting inbound connection Questions: Other than the five file failing, did the backup finished correctly? Is the ANS1512E error occurring because there were individual file failures, or because of the networking errors that follow the message? I couldn't find those errors on the TSM site or listserv archives. I'm not sure if those are a cause or effect of the ANS1512E or unrelated. The QuickFacts seem to imply it is just the failed files. The serialization for the class is shared-static, so I expect ANS4037E errors -- and other clients in that schedule/domain are probably getting them too, but aren't failing their backups. Is it the ANS4047E error that's tripping the ANS1512E? Dave
Re: How to Incorporate a CDL into TSM environment?
I'd love to have a couple vtl's . . . . ADSM: Dist Stor Manager ADSM-L@VM.MARIST.EDU wrote on 06/08/2007 05:34:03 PM: Yes, tape is still cheaper, but if you compare the price of a large VTL with de-dupe to an equivalently sized tape library, they'll be a lot closer than you think I'd love to have a couple vtl's. When we've priced them out they come out to be much more costly (several times) that of tape for our environment. We keep lots of old/stale data around which drives seems to drive the cost of the VTL way up. I was hoping possibly use a vtl for only primary data with the new feature of TSM v5.4, but that's not going to work out. The second thing VTLs bring to the table is hardware compression. Then, of course, there's de-dupe, which most surveys are showing to be the got-to-have technology of this year. It's here. It's real. And it really does shrink the amount of disk you need to use by a factor of 10-20:1, and even more depending on how you do your backups. Agreed. I'm convinced that compression and de-dupe is what you're purchasing in a vtl as opposed to just straight disk. It would be a lot cleaper to just purchase disk, but then no compression and no de-dupe. I personal opinion is that VTL's are a stop-gap solution. I think compression and de-dupe have much wider application within a normal disk subsystem where it could apply to a much wider range of situations. A long time ago a company we purchased had a old STK Iceberg disk subsystem . . .yea, the one with with log based writes like NetApp except with hardware compression. The guys who used it have nothing but praise for it (although it had it's problems!!!). NetApp is adding de-dupe to their disk systems . . . .now if they would only add hdwr compression . . . The reason that VTL/disk can outperform tape is that disk can go whatever speed your backup is going and tape cannot. This is the bit problem I see with Tape. It seems to me that the latest generations of tape drives have rated speeds that almost defy the any ability to supply them with data. I almost which I could purchase a modern tape drive that actually was slower. Most environments never get anywhere near their tape's capabilities and about half or so are getting a small fraction of their tape drive's capabilities. Exactly . . . . Just my $.02. --- W. Curtis Preston Add my $.02 Rick - The information contained in this message is intended only for the personal and confidential use of the recipient(s) named above. If the reader of this message is not the intended recipient or an agent responsible for delivering it to the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that you have received this document in error and that any review, dissemination, distribution, or copying of this message is strictly prohibited. If you have received this communication in error, please notify us immediately, and delete the original message.
Re: TSM ANR1163W question
Charles, You haven't given us enough out of the activity log to spot the problem. The unfiltered log will show you which stgpool tapes it was trying to access during the failure. Frequently this is caused when a tape or group of tapes from a primary stgpool gets marked unavailable even though they are still in the library. Have you had any library or tape drive problems that would have caused that? Do a 'q vol stg=x acc=unavail' on each stgpool that should be in the library at all times, and see if there are any like this. If so, and if the tape drive problem has been resolved, you can just 'update vol stg=x whereacc=unavail acc=readwrite' to put them right. The other cause of this would be if you checked tapes from a primary stgpool out of the library, and later offsite reclamation needed them. The activity log will show you which tapes it needed in this case, too. Take a look and let us know what you see. Best Regards, John D. Schneider Sr. System Administrator - Storage Sisters of Mercy Health System 3637 South Geyer Road St. Louis, MO. 63127 Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Office: 314-364-3150, Cell: 314-486-2359 -Original Message- From: ADSM: Dist Stor Manager [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Lamb, Charles P. Sent: Friday, June 08, 2007 10:54 PM To: ADSM-L@VM.MARIST.EDU Subject: [ADSM-L] TSM ANR1163W question Importance: High Hi.. Has anybody started to experience more ANR1163W messages after upgrading to TSM V5.3.4.2 from V5.2.7.3?? __ From: Lamb, Charles P. Sent: Friday, June 08, 2007 10:50 PM To: Hartman, Thomas J. Cc: 'Brian C Nguyen' Subject: FW: TSM ANR1163W question Importance: High Tom.. I ran q ac begind=-90 s=anr1163w. It has gotten bad after May 22, 2007 which is the TSM upgrade date. ANR1163W is we have off-site data without on-site data for space reclamation. tsm06082007A.txt __ From: Lamb, Charles P. Sent: Friday, June 08, 2007 10:35 PM To: Hartman, Thomas J. Cc: 'Brian C Nguyen' Subject: TSM ANR1163W question Importance: High Tom I am seeing more and more of these ANR1163W messages in the TSM activity log. Thoughts?? tsm06082007.txt
Question on filespace type
Hi to all A little question after changing a computer to a faster one (OS Windows) , keep the same data on it . The only thing changed is the Filespace Name (for inventor purpose part of the computer name is the inventor serial number). Before doing an incremental backup I renamed my old filespace to the new one ( \\x-2 file:///\\x-2 777\d$ to \\y-2 file:///\\y-2 777\d$ ) and run the backup , everything run O.K . 06/10/2007 08:15:36 ANE4952I (Session: 29959, Node: ENBAL) Total number of objects inspected:6,263 (SESSION: 29959) 06/10/2007 08:15:36 ANE4954I (Session: 29959, Node: ENBAL) Total number of objects backed up: 758 (SESSION: 29959) 06/10/2007 08:15:36 ANE4958I (Session: 29959, Node: ENBAL) Total number of objects updated: 0 (SESSION: 29959) 06/10/2007 08:15:36 ANE4960I (Session: 29959, Node: ENBAL) Total number of objects rebound: 0 (SESSION: 29959) 06/10/2007 08:15:36 ANE4957I (Session: 29959, Node: ENBAL) Total number of objects deleted: 0 (SESSION: 29959) 06/10/2007 08:15:36 ANE4970I (Session: 29959, Node: ENBAL) Total number of objects expired:943 (SESSION: 29959) 06/10/2007 08:15:36 ANE4959I (Session: 29959, Node: ENBAL) Total number of objects failed: 0 (SESSION: 29959) 06/10/2007 08:15:36 ANE4965I (Session: 29959, Node: ENBAL) Total number of subfile objects: 0 (SESSION: 29959) 06/10/2007 08:15:36 ANE4961I (Session: 29959, Node: ENBAL) Total number of bytes transferred: 228.04 MB (SESSION: 29959) 06/10/2007 08:15:36 ANE4963I (Session: 29959, Node: ENBAL) Data transfer time: 19.76 sec (SESSION: 29959) 06/10/2007 08:15:36 ANE4966I (Session: 29959, Node: ENBAL) Network data transfer rate:11,814.20 KB/sec (SESSION: 29959) 06/10/2007 08:15:36 ANE4967I (Session: 29959, Node: ENBAL) Aggregate data transfer rate: 4,595.66 KB/sec (SESSION: 29959) 06/10/2007 08:15:36 ANE4968I (Session: 29959, Node: ENBAL) Objects compressed by:0% (SESSION: 29959) 06/10/2007 08:15:36 ANE4969I (Session: 29959, Node: ENBAL) Subfile objects reduced by: 0% (SESSION: 29959) 06/10/2007 08:15:36 ANE4964I (Session: 29959, Node: ENBAL) Elapsed processing time:00:00:50 (SESSION: 29959) My question is why when I do a query fi after the backup I still see on the Filespace Type FAT32 (my old type) instead NTFS (my new one) Node NameFilespaceFSID Platform Filespace Is Files- CapacityPct Name Type pace (MB) Util Unicode? --- --- -- - ENBAL\\y-2777\d$ 1WinNT FAT32 Yes 27,760.7 14.4 My TSM Client Windows version is 5.4.04 Regards Robert Ouzen
