systemstate error
Hi to all During backup of systemstate on a server windows 2008 with TSM client version 6.1.0.2 ( Tsm server version 5.5.1.0 ) I got this error: 09/25/2009 00:15:18 ANS5279E Error processing '\\mossql01\c$\Windows\System32\vnetinst.dll': file not found. 09/25/2009 00:15:21 ANS1999E Incremental processing of 'MOSSQL01\SystemState\NULL\System State\SystemState' stopped. Tried some research without any success , need help …. Regards Robert
TSM 6.1.2 DB Archivelog handling
We just started our new TSM 6 environment and are having problems controlling amount of archived log files. I could not find any parameter for setting retention or number of logfiles in first and/or second archlog directory. Also full dbbackups do not remove any of that files. What do I miss? Kind regards Stefan Holzwarth
Re: TSM 6.1.2 DB Archivelog handling
You need to run at least 2 full backups to clean the both log and arc Grigori G. Solonovitch Senior Technical Architect Information Technology Bank of Kuwait and Middle East http://www.bkme.com Phone: (+965) 2231-2274 Mobile: (+965) 99798073 E-Mail: g.solonovi...@bkme.com Please consider the environment before printing this Email -Original Message- From: ADSM: Dist Stor Manager [mailto:ads...@vm.marist.edu] On Behalf Of Stefan Holzwarth Sent: Tuesday, September 29, 2009 11:30 AM To: ADSM-L@VM.MARIST.EDU Subject: [ADSM-L] TSM 6.1.2 DB Archivelog handling We just started our new TSM 6 environment and are having problems controlling amount of archived log files. I could not find any parameter for setting retention or number of logfiles in first and/or second archlog directory. Also full dbbackups do not remove any of that files. What do I miss? Kind regards Stefan Holzwarth Please consider the environment before printing this Email. This email message and any attachments transmitted with it may contain confidential and proprietary information, intended only for the named recipient(s). If you have received this message in error, or if you are not the named recipient(s), please delete this email after notifying the sender immediately. BKME cannot guarantee the integrity of this communication and accepts no liability for any damage caused by this email or its attachments due to viruses, any other defects, interception or unauthorized modification. The information, views, opinions and comments of this message are those of the individual and not necessarily endorsed by BKME.
IBM Integration Solutions Console - authentication performance problem
Hi to all, We are running TSM 5.5 and the IBM Integration Solutions Console 6.0.1, just recently we have started experiencing slow authentication via the IBM Integration Solutions Console. The initial authentication pages loads without issue but as soon as you try to login it hangs for ages and sometime times out. Once authenticated we can navigate within the IBM Integration Solutions Console without issues. The issue appears to be with the authentication. Has anyone come across this before? Many thanks. Kind regards, William ** The Miller Group Limited Registered in Scotland - SC018135 Miller Homes Limited Registered in Scotland - SC255429 Miller Construction (UK) Limited Registered in Scotland - SC209666 Miller Developments Limited Registered in Scotland - SC178108 2 Lochside View Edinburgh Park Edinburgh EH12 9DH Disclaimer: The Information in this e-mail is confidential and for use by the addressee(s) only. It may also be privileged. If you are not the intended recipient please notify us immediately on +44 (0) 870 336 5060 and delete the message from your computer: you may not copy or forward it, or use or disclose its contents to any other person. We do not accept any liability or responsibility for: (1) changes made to this email after it was sent, or (2) viruses transmitted through this email or any attachment.
Re: TSM 6.1.2 DB Archivelog handling
Hi, See also this technote : http://www-01.ibm.com/support/docview.wss?uid=swg21399352 It's been said that TSM also needs to sucessefully write its volhist?out (volhist.dat now !) file in order to allow deletion of archived logs, even if the DB backup was sucessfull. The volhist.dat file is now required for restoring the TSM DB. -- Best regards / Cordialement / مع تحياتي Erwann SIMON Grigori Solonovitch a écrit : You need to run at least 2 full backups to clean the both log and arc Grigori G. Solonovitch Senior Technical Architect Information Technology Bank of Kuwait and Middle East http://www.bkme.com Phone: (+965) 2231-2274 Mobile: (+965) 99798073 E-Mail: g.solonovi...@bkme.com Please consider the environment before printing this Email -Original Message- From: ADSM: Dist Stor Manager [mailto:ads...@vm.marist.edu] On Behalf Of Stefan Holzwarth Sent: Tuesday, September 29, 2009 11:30 AM To: ADSM-L@VM.MARIST.EDU Subject: [ADSM-L] TSM 6.1.2 DB Archivelog handling We just started our new TSM 6 environment and are having problems controlling amount of archived log files. I could not find any parameter for setting retention or number of logfiles in first and/or second archlog directory. Also full dbbackups do not remove any of that files. What do I miss? Kind regards Stefan Holzwarth Please consider the environment before printing this Email. This email message and any attachments transmitted with it may contain confidential and proprietary information, intended only for the named recipient(s). If you have received this message in error, or if you are not the named recipient(s), please delete this email after notifying the sender immediately. BKME cannot guarantee the integrity of this communication and accepts no liability for any damage caused by this email or its attachments due to viruses, any other defects, interception or unauthorized modification. The information, views, opinions and comments of this message are those of the individual and not necessarily endorsed by BKME.
AW: TSM 6.1.2 DB Archivelog handling
Thanks for that document - its a missing part in the log handling puzzle. What do you think triggers the deleting of the archive logs - backup db or backup volhist? I would guess backup volhist and sort the admin schedules accordingly. Kind regards Stefan Holzwarth -Ursprüngliche Nachricht- Von: ADSM: Dist Stor Manager [mailto:ads...@vm.marist.edu] Im Auftrag von Erwann Simon Gesendet: Dienstag, 29. September 2009 11:30 An: ADSM-L@VM.MARIST.EDU Betreff: Re: TSM 6.1.2 DB Archivelog handling Hi, See also this technote : http://www-01.ibm.com/support/docview.wss?uid=swg21399352 It's been said that TSM also needs to sucessefully write its volhist?out (volhist.dat now !) file in order to allow deletion of archived logs, even if the DB backup was sucessfull. The volhist.dat file is now required for restoring the TSM DB. -- Best regards / Cordialement / مع تحياتي Erwann SIMON Grigori Solonovitch a écrit : You need to run at least 2 full backups to clean the both log and arc Grigori G. Solonovitch Senior Technical Architect Information Technology Bank of Kuwait and Middle East http://www.bkme.com Phone: (+965) 2231-2274 Mobile: (+965) 99798073 E-Mail: g.solonovi...@bkme.com Please consider the environment before printing this Email -Original Message- From: ADSM: Dist Stor Manager [mailto:ads...@vm.marist.edu] On Behalf Of Stefan Holzwarth Sent: Tuesday, September 29, 2009 11:30 AM To: ADSM-L@VM.MARIST.EDU Subject: [ADSM-L] TSM 6.1.2 DB Archivelog handling We just started our new TSM 6 environment and are having problems controlling amount of archived log files. I could not find any parameter for setting retention or number of logfiles in first and/or second archlog directory. Also full dbbackups do not remove any of that files. What do I miss? Kind regards Stefan Holzwarth Please consider the environment before printing this Email. This email message and any attachments transmitted with it may contain confidential and proprietary information, intended only for the named recipient(s). If you have received this message in error, or if you are not the named recipient(s), please delete this email after notifying the sender immediately. BKME cannot guarantee the integrity of this communication and accepts no liability for any damage caused by this email or its attachments due to viruses, any other defects, interception or unauthorized modification. The information, views, opinions and comments of this message are those of the individual and not necessarily endorsed by BKME.
Re: systemstate error
Robert, Microsoft defines system state as being a collection of several key operating system elements and their files. Microsoft does not support restoring a subset of system state. TSM has been implemented to follow Microsoft guidelines in this regard. Thus if a system state file cannot be found, it is not possible to make a good system state backup, and therefore the system state backup stops. Does the file named in the ANS5279E message, vnetinst.dll, exist? If not, that is why the system state backup stopped. You need to start with an investigation of why this file does not exist, yet the Windows system files writer seems to think it exists. This might be a question for Microsoft. If the file exists, but the backup continues to think it does not exist, then please open a PMR with IBM TSM support. Best regards, Andy Andy Raibeck IBM Software Group Tivoli Storage Manager Client Product Development Level 3 Team Lead Internal Notes e-mail: Andrew Raibeck/Hartford/i...@ibmus Internet e-mail: stor...@us.ibm.com 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 09/29/2009 02:47:17 AM: [image removed] systemstate error Robert Ouzen Ouzen to: ADSM-L 09/29/2009 02:48 AM Sent by: ADSM: Dist Stor Manager ADSM-L@VM.MARIST.EDU Please respond to ADSM: Dist Stor Manager Hi to all During backup of systemstate on a server windows 2008 with TSM client version 6.1.0.2 ( Tsm server version 5.5.1.0 ) I got this error: 09/25/2009 00:15:18 ANS5279E Error processing '\\mossql01\c$\Windows \System32\vnetinst.dll': file not found. 09/25/2009 00:15:21 ANS1999E Incremental processing of 'MOSSQL01 \SystemState\NULL\System State\SystemState' stopped. Tried some research without any success , need help …. Regards Robert
VSS Error
Hi,
I have a TSM v5.5 server running on a Windows 2003 and a TSM v6.1
client running Windows 2008. That has errors during the copy of SystemState
only, file copy is normal.
In dsmerror.log appears the following error message:
*09/29/2009 09:22:19 ANS1959W Removing previous incomplete group '\System
State\0\SystemState' Id:0-2609054
09/29/2009 09:22:21 VssRequestor::checkWriterStatus:
VssRequestor::checkWriterStatus() failed with
hr=VSS_E_WRITERERROR_NONRETRYABLE
09/29/2009 09:22:21 ANS5269E The Microsoft Volume Shadow Copy Services
writer 'NTDS' current state (VSS_WS_FAILED_AT_POST_SNAPSHOT) is not valid
for the current operation or cannot be determined. The last error reported
is '800423f4'.
09/29/2009 09:22:21 ANS5271E A Microsoft Volume Shadow Copy Services writer
is in an invalid state before snapshot initialization.
09/29/2009 09:22:21 ANS5250E An unexpected error was encountered.
TSM function name : baHandleSnapshot
TSM function : BaStartSnapshot() failed.
TSM return code : 4353
TSM file : backsnap.cpp (3745)
09/29/2009 09:22:21 ANS1327W The snapshot operation for
'PROBHSRV01\SystemState\NULL\System State\SystemState' failed with error
code: 4353.
09/29/2009 09:22:21 ANS5283E The operation was unsuccessful.
*
Searching the internet for codes spotted the following sites:
*
http://www-01.ibm.com/support/docview.wss?rs=663context=SSGSG7dc=DB560dc=DB520uid=swg21392932loc=en_UScs=UTF-8lang=enrss=ct663other
*http://www-01.ibm.com/support/docview.wss?rs=663context=SSGSG7dc=DB560dc=DB520uid=swg21392932loc=en_UScs=UTF-8lang=enrss=ct663other
*
http://publib.boulder.ibm.com/infocenter/tsminfo/v6/index.jsp?topic=/com.ibm.itsm.messages.doc/msgs6603.html
*http://publib.boulder.ibm.com/infocenter/tsminfo/v6/index.jsp?topic=/com.ibm.itsm.messages.doc/msgs6603.html
*http://www-01.ibm.com/support/docview.wss?uid=swg21295294*http://www-01.ibm.com/support/docview.wss?uid=swg21295294
None of the solutions proposed by IBM decided. I am having 12 GB available
on C: \ drive, I made a copy of the volume using the Windows and returned
the following output:
*vssadmin 1.1 - Ferramenta de linha de comando administrativa de c¢pias de
sombra de volume
(C) Copyright 2001-2005 Microsoft Corp.*
*Cópia de sombra para 'C:\' criada com êxito
Identificação da cópia de sombra: {82bfd321-5616-49ec-b01e-e77043d0a158}
Nome do volume da cópia de sombra: **
\\?\GLOBALROOT\Device\HarddiskVolumeShadowCopy68*file:///?\GLOBALROOT\Device\HarddiskVolumeShadowCopy68
Does anyone know why this error is happening on the copy of SystemState?
--
abs,
Bruno Oliveira
Beagá - Minas Gerais - Brazil
55 31 9342 4111
TSM SAN Storage Agent on HP Blade - sharing disk and tape?
Hi Guys, A customer has just come up with a request to run the TSM SAN Storage Agent on a dedicated blade within an HP BladeSystem c7000 blade chassis. Is anyone running with a SAN Storage Agent (it'll be Linux x86 with TSM 5.5) in this kind of config? I'm concerned about shared HBA/fibre access that I believe these blade centres run with - the recommendation has always been to segregate disk and tape traffic, but with virtualised HBAs I'm a little unsure of where I stand. From what I have read of these systems, each blade has two HBA ports internally, but the HP Blade Chassis presents these as 8 (4 per fabric) outward facing 4Gbps ports (via some kind of passthrough mechanism). The storage team say that they are zoning each of the ports within the blade to disk (they run dual-fabric). This suggests to me that the only way we can get the SAN Storage Agent to work here would be to zone in the tape drives to these ports too, but that would result in sharing disk and tape which the recommendation is not to do. To clarify, the Linux servers each have their own blade, there's no OS virtualisation going on for them, so this IBM.com article doesn't seem to apply, or isn't particularly clear for me: http://www-01.ibm.com/support/docview.wss?rs=0 http://www-01.ibm.com/support/docview.wss?rs=0uid=swg21239546 uid=swg21239546 Can anyone offer any guidance or experiences...? Thanks, /David Mc London, UK
Re: VSS Error
Problems with VSS are common/constant. Did you apply all the recommended
M$ patches for VSS (no, they don't seem to come in with the regular
service).
Here is a M$ page with various VSS problems described and an update
rollup package for VSS:
http://support.microsoft.com/kb/940349
We backup hundreds of 2K3 servers and any time a TSM/VSS problem pops-up,
it usually goes away with them applying these VSS patches!
From:
Bruno Oliveira brnolv...@gmail.com
To:
ADSM-L@VM.MARIST.EDU
Date:
09/29/2009 08:44 AM
Subject:
[ADSM-L] VSS Error
Sent by:
ADSM: Dist Stor Manager ADSM-L@VM.MARIST.EDU
Hi,
I have a TSM v5.5 server running on a Windows 2003 and a TSM v6.1
client running Windows 2008. That has errors during the copy of
SystemState
only, file copy is normal.
In dsmerror.log appears the following error message:
*09/29/2009 09:22:19 ANS1959W Removing previous incomplete group '\System
State\0\SystemState' Id:0-2609054
09/29/2009 09:22:21 VssRequestor::checkWriterStatus:
VssRequestor::checkWriterStatus() failed with
hr=VSS_E_WRITERERROR_NONRETRYABLE
09/29/2009 09:22:21 ANS5269E The Microsoft Volume Shadow Copy Services
writer 'NTDS' current state (VSS_WS_FAILED_AT_POST_SNAPSHOT) is not valid
for the current operation or cannot be determined. The last error
reported
is '800423f4'.
09/29/2009 09:22:21 ANS5271E A Microsoft Volume Shadow Copy Services
writer
is in an invalid state before snapshot initialization.
09/29/2009 09:22:21 ANS5250E An unexpected error was encountered.
TSM function name : baHandleSnapshot
TSM function : BaStartSnapshot() failed.
TSM return code : 4353
TSM file : backsnap.cpp (3745)
09/29/2009 09:22:21 ANS1327W The snapshot operation for
'PROBHSRV01\SystemState\NULL\System State\SystemState' failed with error
code: 4353.
09/29/2009 09:22:21 ANS5283E The operation was unsuccessful.
*
Searching the internet for codes spotted the following sites:
*
http://www-01.ibm.com/support/docview.wss?rs=663context=SSGSG7dc=DB560dc=DB520uid=swg21392932loc=en_UScs=UTF-8lang=enrss=ct663other
*
http://www-01.ibm.com/support/docview.wss?rs=663context=SSGSG7dc=DB560dc=DB520uid=swg21392932loc=en_UScs=UTF-8lang=enrss=ct663other
*
http://publib.boulder.ibm.com/infocenter/tsminfo/v6/index.jsp?topic=/com.ibm.itsm.messages.doc/msgs6603.html
*
http://publib.boulder.ibm.com/infocenter/tsminfo/v6/index.jsp?topic=/com.ibm.itsm.messages.doc/msgs6603.html
*http://www-01.ibm.com/support/docview.wss?uid=swg21295294*
http://www-01.ibm.com/support/docview.wss?uid=swg21295294
None of the solutions proposed by IBM decided. I am having 12 GB available
on C: \ drive, I made a copy of the volume using the Windows and returned
the following output:
*vssadmin 1.1 - Ferramenta de linha de comando administrativa de c¢pias de
sombra de volume
(C) Copyright 2001-2005 Microsoft Corp.*
*Cópia de sombra para 'C:\' criada com êxito
Identificação da cópia de sombra:
{82bfd321-5616-49ec-b01e-e77043d0a158}
Nome do volume da cópia de sombra: **
\\?\GLOBALROOT\Device\HarddiskVolumeShadowCopy68*
file:///?\GLOBALROOT\Device\HarddiskVolumeShadowCopy68
Does anyone know why this error is happening on the copy of SystemState?
--
abs,
Bruno Oliveira
Beagá - Minas Gerais - Brazil
55 31 9342 4111
Re: VSS Error
I will not apply patches to Windows 2003 on a TSM client running on Windows
2008, even a critical server. How not spotted patches VSS for Windows 2008,
will not apply any correction.
And as posted by the copy of systemstate with vssadmin finish without any
problems which leads to believe that the problem is in the TSM. I tried also
to copy the systemstate with native backup of the Windows 2008 and it
worked.
2009/9/29 Zoltan Forray/AC/VCU zfor...@vcu.edu
Problems with VSS are common/constant. Did you apply all the recommended
M$ patches for VSS (no, they don't seem to come in with the regular
service).
Here is a M$ page with various VSS problems described and an update
rollup package for VSS:
http://support.microsoft.com/kb/940349
We backup hundreds of 2K3 servers and any time a TSM/VSS problem pops-up,
it usually goes away with them applying these VSS patches!
From:
Bruno Oliveira brnolv...@gmail.com
To:
ADSM-L@VM.MARIST.EDU
Date:
09/29/2009 08:44 AM
Subject:
[ADSM-L] VSS Error
Sent by:
ADSM: Dist Stor Manager ADSM-L@VM.MARIST.EDU
Hi,
I have a TSM v5.5 server running on a Windows 2003 and a TSM v6.1
client running Windows 2008. That has errors during the copy of
SystemState
only, file copy is normal.
In dsmerror.log appears the following error message:
*09/29/2009 09:22:19 ANS1959W Removing previous incomplete group '\System
State\0\SystemState' Id:0-2609054
09/29/2009 09:22:21 VssRequestor::checkWriterStatus:
VssRequestor::checkWriterStatus() failed with
hr=VSS_E_WRITERERROR_NONRETRYABLE
09/29/2009 09:22:21 ANS5269E The Microsoft Volume Shadow Copy Services
writer 'NTDS' current state (VSS_WS_FAILED_AT_POST_SNAPSHOT) is not valid
for the current operation or cannot be determined. The last error
reported
is '800423f4'.
09/29/2009 09:22:21 ANS5271E A Microsoft Volume Shadow Copy Services
writer
is in an invalid state before snapshot initialization.
09/29/2009 09:22:21 ANS5250E An unexpected error was encountered.
TSM function name : baHandleSnapshot
TSM function : BaStartSnapshot() failed.
TSM return code : 4353
TSM file : backsnap.cpp (3745)
09/29/2009 09:22:21 ANS1327W The snapshot operation for
'PROBHSRV01\SystemState\NULL\System State\SystemState' failed with error
code: 4353.
09/29/2009 09:22:21 ANS5283E The operation was unsuccessful.
*
Searching the internet for codes spotted the following sites:
*
http://www-01.ibm.com/support/docview.wss?rs=663context=SSGSG7dc=DB560dc=DB520uid=swg21392932loc=en_UScs=UTF-8lang=enrss=ct663other
*
http://www-01.ibm.com/support/docview.wss?rs=663context=SSGSG7dc=DB560dc=DB520uid=swg21392932loc=en_UScs=UTF-8lang=enrss=ct663other
*
http://publib.boulder.ibm.com/infocenter/tsminfo/v6/index.jsp?topic=/com.ibm.itsm.messages.doc/msgs6603.html
*
http://publib.boulder.ibm.com/infocenter/tsminfo/v6/index.jsp?topic=/com.ibm.itsm.messages.doc/msgs6603.html
*http://www-01.ibm.com/support/docview.wss?uid=swg21295294*
http://www-01.ibm.com/support/docview.wss?uid=swg21295294
None of the solutions proposed by IBM decided. I am having 12 GB available
on C: \ drive, I made a copy of the volume using the Windows and returned
the following output:
*vssadmin 1.1 - Ferramenta de linha de comando administrativa de c¢pias de
sombra de volume
(C) Copyright 2001-2005 Microsoft Corp.*
*Cópia de sombra para 'C:\' criada com êxito
Identificação da cópia de sombra:
{82bfd321-5616-49ec-b01e-e77043d0a158}
Nome do volume da cópia de sombra: **
\\?\GLOBALROOT\Device\HarddiskVolumeShadowCopy68*
file:///?\GLOBALROOT\Device\HarddiskVolumeShadowCopy68
Does anyone know why this error is happening on the copy of SystemState?
--
abs,
Bruno Oliveira
Beagá - Minas Gerais - Brazil
55 31 9342 4111
--
abs,
Bruno Oliveira
Beagá - Minas Gerais - Brazil
55 31 9342 4111
Re: Per terabyte licensing
You are right, we eventually got an agreement for a sub-processor license for Oracle, but IBM didn't volunteer that. We insisted, and eventually won the concession after much negotiating. And I am sure part of the reason we got the concession is because of the size customer we are; a smaller customer has no leverage for expecting special pricing. Best Regards, John D. Schneider The Computer Coaching Community, LLC Office: (314) 635-5424 / Toll Free: (866) 796-9226 Cell: (314) 750-8721 Original Message Subject: Re: [ADSM-L] Per terabyte licensing From: Mark Blunden m...@au1.ibm.com Date: Mon, September 28, 2009 7:04 pm To: ADSM-L@VM.MARIST.EDU IBM does have a sub-capacity license process. You need to talk to your sales rep to find out the details. Basically, if you are only using 2 cpus for Oracle out of 128 total cpus available, then you only have to pay for 2 DB licenses. Obvioulsy other LPARs are probably servicing other data requirements which will need backing up, but you don't have to pay for the lot if you don't use the lot. regards, Mark Kelly Lipp l...@storserver. COM To Sent by: ADSM: ADSM-L@VM.MARIST.EDU Dist Stor cc Manager ads...@vm.marist Subject .EDU Re: Per terabyte licensing 29/09/2009 09:48 AM Please respond to ADSM: Dist Stor Manager ads...@vm.marist .EDU And remember, too, that the PVU thing contemplated something like a DB2 license. Perhaps you had two or three systems that would run DB2. It did not contemplate something like TSM where EVERY system in the environment would have the software running. Keeping track of a couple of systems and their various processor/core/PVU stuff is relatively simple. Keeping track of that same thing across several hundred (never mind your case!) is very difficult. The one size fits all mentality of Tivoli software clearly missed the mark with TSM. Kelly Lipp Chief Technical Officer www.storserver.com 719-266-8777 x7105 STORServer solves your data backup challenges. Once and for all. -Original Message- From: ADSM: Dist Stor Manager [mailto:ads...@vm.marist.edu] On Behalf Of John D. Schneider Sent: Monday, September 28, 2009 4:47 PM To: ADSM-L@VM.MARIST.EDU Subject: Re: [ADSM-L] Per terabyte licensing Kelly, You are right, IBM must build their license model to ensure the profit they expect. We can't blame them for doing this as a business. They can't give their product away for free. But the PVU based licensing model is a huge problem for an environment like ours that has over 2000 clients of all different shapes and kinds. Lots of separate servers, but also VMWare partitions, and AIX LPARs, and NDMP clients, etc. Keeping up with the PVU rules is a huge effort, especially the way IBM did it. In Windows, the OS might tell you that you have 2 processors. But is that a single-core dual processor, or two separate processors. The OS can't tell, but IBM insists there is a difference, because it counts PVUs differently in this case. That is too nit-picky if you ask me, and places too difficult a burden on the customer. There are freeware utilities that will correctly count processors IBM's way, but to run them on 2000 servers is a pain, too. We ended up writing our own scripts to call a freeware tool IBM recommended, then parse the resulting answer to get the details into a summarized format. As if that wasn't enough, the freeware tool crashed about 20 of our servers before we realized it. Boy, was that hard to explain to management! It is also very objectionable to us that they don't have sub-processor licensing for large servers like pSeries 595s. We have a 128 processor p595, with a 2-processor LPAR carved out of it running Oracle. Even if we aren't running Oracle on any of the other LPARs, we have to pay for a 128 processor Oracle license. That is insane, and bad for everybody, including IBM. We also have to pay for 128 processors of regular TSM client licenses, even if we have only allocated half the processors in the p595. These are unfair licensing practices, and just make IBM look greedy. To simplify the license counting problem, we are looking at IBM License Metric Tool, but it is a big software product to install and deploy on 2000 servers, too, just to count TSM licenses. ILMT 7.1 was deeply flawed, and 7.2 just came out, so we are going to take a look at that. From my perspective, a total-TB-under-management model would be very easy on the customer, as long as it was reasonably fair. It would be easy to run 'q occ' on all our TSM servers and pull together the result. You could find out your whole TSM license footprint in 10 minutes. The first time we had to it counting PVUs, it took us two months. Best Regards, John D. Schneider The Computer Coaching Community, LLC Office: (314) 635-5424 / Toll Free: (866) 796-9226 Cell: (314) 750-8721 Original Message Subject: Re: [ADSM-L] Per terabyte licensing From: Kelly Lipp l...@storserver.com Date: Mon, September 28,
Re: Per terabyte licensing
Kelly, You are right. IBM's pricing model also has in mind IBM customers that have dozens of Tivoli titles, Websphere, etc., which all use the PVU model. I think that IBM should build the license counting into the product, whether they want to use PVUs or whatever as the metric. There is no reason why the the TSM client code could not be enhanced to gather whatever metric is in use and feed it back to the server. This could be true of Websphere clients and most of the others. Build the code to count the licenses quietly in the background, and provide a simple report you can call from the product to find out what you are using. Compliance would be easy. Best Regards, John D. Schneider The Computer Coaching Community, LLC Office: (314) 635-5424 / Toll Free: (866) 796-9226 Cell: (314) 750-8721 Original Message Subject: Re: [ADSM-L] Per terabyte licensing From: Kelly Lipp l...@storserver.com Date: Mon, September 28, 2009 6:48 pm To: ADSM-L@VM.MARIST.EDU And remember, too, that the PVU thing contemplated something like a DB2 license. Perhaps you had two or three systems that would run DB2. It did not contemplate something like TSM where EVERY system in the environment would have the software running. Keeping track of a couple of systems and their various processor/core/PVU stuff is relatively simple. Keeping track of that same thing across several hundred (never mind your case!) is very difficult. The one size fits all mentality of Tivoli software clearly missed the mark with TSM. Kelly Lipp Chief Technical Officer www.storserver.com 719-266-8777 x7105 STORServer solves your data backup challenges. Once and for all. -Original Message- From: ADSM: Dist Stor Manager [mailto:ads...@vm.marist.edu] On Behalf Of John D. Schneider Sent: Monday, September 28, 2009 4:47 PM To: ADSM-L@VM.MARIST.EDU Subject: Re: [ADSM-L] Per terabyte licensing Kelly, You are right, IBM must build their license model to ensure the profit they expect. We can't blame them for doing this as a business. They can't give their product away for free. But the PVU based licensing model is a huge problem for an environment like ours that has over 2000 clients of all different shapes and kinds. Lots of separate servers, but also VMWare partitions, and AIX LPARs, and NDMP clients, etc. Keeping up with the PVU rules is a huge effort, especially the way IBM did it. In Windows, the OS might tell you that you have 2 processors. But is that a single-core dual processor, or two separate processors. The OS can't tell, but IBM insists there is a difference, because it counts PVUs differently in this case. That is too nit-picky if you ask me, and places too difficult a burden on the customer. There are freeware utilities that will correctly count processors IBM's way, but to run them on 2000 servers is a pain, too. We ended up writing our own scripts to call a freeware tool IBM recommended, then parse the resulting answer to get the details into a summarized format. As if that wasn't enough, the freeware tool crashed about 20 of our servers before we realized it. Boy, was that hard to explain to management! It is also very objectionable to us that they don't have sub-processor licensing for large servers like pSeries 595s. We have a 128 processor p595, with a 2-processor LPAR carved out of it running Oracle. Even if we aren't running Oracle on any of the other LPARs, we have to pay for a 128 processor Oracle license. That is insane, and bad for everybody, including IBM. We also have to pay for 128 processors of regular TSM client licenses, even if we have only allocated half the processors in the p595. These are unfair licensing practices, and just make IBM look greedy. To simplify the license counting problem, we are looking at IBM License Metric Tool, but it is a big software product to install and deploy on 2000 servers, too, just to count TSM licenses. ILMT 7.1 was deeply flawed, and 7.2 just came out, so we are going to take a look at that. From my perspective, a total-TB-under-management model would be very easy on the customer, as long as it was reasonably fair. It would be easy to run 'q occ' on all our TSM servers and pull together the result. You could find out your whole TSM license footprint in 10 minutes. The first time we had to it counting PVUs, it took us two months. Best Regards, John D. Schneider The Computer Coaching Community, LLC Office: (314) 635-5424 / Toll Free: (866) 796-9226 Cell: (314) 750-8721 Original Message Subject: Re: [ADSM-L] Per terabyte licensing From: Kelly Lipp l...@storserver.com Date: Mon, September 28, 2009 3:05 pm To: ADSM-L@VM.MARIST.EDU And the key to that would be to add the phrase in some cases... No matter what IBM does there will be happy people and unhappy people. While a core based model doesn't make sense to many of us, a per TB model may turn out to make even less sense. To argue on their side, they must find a model that
Re: VSS Error
Bruno,
VSS tends to be fickle at times on Windows system. I have resolved numerous VSS
issues on W2k3 but none on W2k8 so far; the issues lies within Windows not TSM.
You could try the following steps:
** Run the vssadmin list writers then check the state of your writers. If you
have any writers showing failures, restart the COM+ event System Notification
and COM+ System Application, Volume Shadow Copy and Microsoft Software Shadow
Copy services.
** Check the writers state once more and run a manual system state backup with
the ntbackup utility. If it runs without issues, then VSS should be fine and
you system state backup will work within TSM.
We tend to get random VSS issues in our environment; after restarting the
services above, we don't get those errors back.
As a last resort, you could re-register you dlls after exporting then deleting
the subscription hive under
HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE\SOFTWARE\Microsoft\EventSystem\{26c409cc-ae86-11d1-b616-00805fc79216}\
(restarting the services above will create a new subscription hive in the
registry) then
cd /d %windir%\system32
net stop vss
net stop swprv
regsvr32 ole32.dll
regsvr32 oleaut32.dll
regsvr32 vss_ps.dll
vssvc /register
regsvr32 /i swprv.dll
regsvr32 /i eventcls.dll
regsvr32 es.dll
regsvr32 stdprov.dll
regsvr32 vssui.dll
regsvr32 msxml.dll
regsvr32 msxml3.dll
regsvr32 msxml4.dll
Good luck.
BERTAUT TCHUISE
TSM/NetApp Storage Administrator
Legg Mason Technology Services
*410-580-7032
btchu...@leggmason.com
-Original Message-
From: ADSM: Dist Stor Manager [mailto:ads...@vm.marist.edu] On Behalf Of Bruno
Oliveira
Sent: Tuesday, September 29, 2009 8:44 AM
To: ADSM-L@VM.MARIST.EDU
Subject: [ADSM-L] VSS Error
Hi,
I have a TSM v5.5 server running on a Windows 2003 and a TSM v6.1 client
running Windows 2008. That has errors during the copy of SystemState only, file
copy is normal.
In dsmerror.log appears the following error message:
*09/29/2009 09:22:19 ANS1959W Removing previous incomplete group '\System
State\0\SystemState' Id:0-2609054
09/29/2009 09:22:21 VssRequestor::checkWriterStatus:
VssRequestor::checkWriterStatus() failed with hr=VSS_E_WRITERERROR_NONRETRYABLE
09/29/2009 09:22:21 ANS5269E The Microsoft Volume Shadow Copy Services writer
'NTDS' current state (VSS_WS_FAILED_AT_POST_SNAPSHOT) is not valid for the
current operation or cannot be determined. The last error reported is
'800423f4'.
09/29/2009 09:22:21 ANS5271E A Microsoft Volume Shadow Copy Services writer is
in an invalid state before snapshot initialization.
09/29/2009 09:22:21 ANS5250E An unexpected error was encountered.
TSM function name : baHandleSnapshot
TSM function : BaStartSnapshot() failed.
TSM return code : 4353
TSM file : backsnap.cpp (3745)
09/29/2009 09:22:21 ANS1327W The snapshot operation for
'PROBHSRV01\SystemState\NULL\System State\SystemState' failed with error
code: 4353.
09/29/2009 09:22:21 ANS5283E The operation was unsuccessful.
*
Searching the internet for codes spotted the following sites:
*
http://www-01.ibm.com/support/docview.wss?rs=663context=SSGSG7dc=DB560dc=DB520uid=swg21392932loc=en_UScs=UTF-8lang=enrss=ct663other
*http://www-01.ibm.com/support/docview.wss?rs=663context=SSGSG7dc=DB560dc=DB520uid=swg21392932loc=en_UScs=UTF-8lang=enrss=ct663other
*
http://publib.boulder.ibm.com/infocenter/tsminfo/v6/index.jsp?topic=/com.ibm.itsm.messages.doc/msgs6603.html
*http://publib.boulder.ibm.com/infocenter/tsminfo/v6/index.jsp?topic=/com.ibm.itsm.messages.doc/msgs6603.html
*http://www-01.ibm.com/support/docview.wss?uid=swg21295294*http://www-01.ibm.com/support/docview.wss?uid=swg21295294
None of the solutions proposed by IBM decided. I am having 12 GB available on
C: \ drive, I made a copy of the volume using the Windows and returned the
following output:
*vssadmin 1.1 - Ferramenta de linha de comando administrativa de c¢pias de
sombra de volume
(C) Copyright 2001-2005 Microsoft Corp.* *Cópia de sombra para 'C:\' criada com
êxito
Identificação da cópia de sombra: {82bfd321-5616-49ec-b01e-e77043d0a158}
Nome do volume da cópia de sombra: **
\\?\GLOBALROOT\Device\HarddiskVolumeShadowCopy68*file:///?\GLOBALROOT\Device\HarddiskVolumeShadowCopy68
Does anyone know why this error is happening on the copy of SystemState?
--
abs,
Bruno Oliveira
Beagá - Minas Gerais - Brazil
55 31 9342 4111
IMPORTANT: E-mail sent through the Internet is not secure. Legg Mason
therefore recommends that you do not send any confidential or sensitive
information to us via electronic mail, including social security numbers,
account numbers, or personal identification numbers. Delivery, and or timely
delivery of Internet mail is not guaranteed. Legg Mason therefore recommends
that you do not send time sensitive
or action-oriented messages to us via electronic mail.
This message is intended for the addressee only and may contain privileged or
confidential information. Unless you are the intended recipient, you
Open Letter to TSM Product Mangement. Was Per terabyte licensing
This has been a good discussion. I would like to change the tone a bit in order to help IBM product management as they ponder this issue. STORServer is an OEM of IBM TSM code and TSM is an integral part of our appliance. We compete in the marketplace against just about everyone else in the backup space. The most difficulty we encounter is with respect to our licensing which is necessarily identical to IBMs. I have thought long and hard about how to decouple client licensing from our product and stay in compliance with our OEM agreement. I have not come up with an idea. I postulate the following: a TSM client derives value from the TSM environment in two ways: 1. simply by having the ability to store and restore data on the TSM server and 2. from the intrinsic features the server uses to store maintain that data. Some clients use server features relatively less while others use them relatively more. The features used in the server are relevant to the overall business requirements rather than for a single client. At STORServer, we asses this value by determining how much it costs us to support an environment. We can expect to field a certain number of support calls per customer with client side issues and certain number with server side issues. The more clients a customer has, the more calls we’ll get and the more sophisticated the server side is (larger library, more disk, server to server, etc.) the more server side calls we'll get. To account for the client side calls is fairly simple since we have to pay IBM an annual support fee for the clients we've licensed from them. We uplift this slightly to cover our costs of support. On the server, we've taken the approach of basing the initial cost of our solution and ongoing support costs on the overall size (in Terabytes) of the server storage. We have four tiers: micro, up to 40TB of storage, small 40-80TB, medium 80-120TB and large over 120TB. The levels are somewhat arbitrary but reasonably reflect the STORServers in the field and correlated nicely with what our support numbers are telling us. I go into this as I think it would behoove IBM to consider a similar model. A client doesn't necessarily benefit more or less based on the number of cores it has. It does benefit, generally, from having the ability to backup and restore data. The overall environment benefits from the presence of the TSM server as it is that environment that allows for the secure maintenance of critical corporate data. It also provides services to recover after a disaster and finally, it provides a support organization to help a customer when it all goes wrong. The value of the solution is thus spread. A licensing scheme that spreads this value is appropriate. A client has a license no matter how big or small it is. Essentially a connection fee. The more clients you have the more you pay. The server is sized according to how much data is processed and stored. The more data that arrives each day and the more data that is stored necessarily results in a larger server environment and thus more value. It is very easy to count how much or how many of each. It is also easy to sell increments of licensing to accommodate growth. I would not be inclined to sell a per GB/month type scheme as this is too difficult for customers to budget. There must be a fixed component to licensing with a periodic true up period to make the scheme fair to IBM. Today, the licensing scheme is not fair to either party. Value as perceived by the customer is not tied to the number of cores in the processor and IBM cannot accurately determine if a customer is in compliance. This is not acceptable by either party. As I write this, I recall an earlier version of the licensing model: clients were free and we paid for the server stuff. It was priced by function. For instance, we paid for DRM and its support. That model wasn't correct as it rewarded the sites with large numbers of clients. One of you said it correctly: it's time to get this right once and for all. We need a fair licensing model that ensures TSM continues to be a viable product in the marketplace. That means one that rewards IBM for the hard work it does to provide the code and its support and one that provides real value to its customers. Subtract out the IBM bureaucracy and this is simple, right? Kelly Lipp Chief Technical Officer www.storserver.com 719-266-8777 x7105 STORServer solves your data backup challenges. Once and for all. -Original Message- From: ADSM: Dist Stor Manager [mailto:ads...@vm.marist.edu] On Behalf Of John D. Schneider Sent: Tuesday, September 29, 2009 8:52 AM To: ADSM-L@VM.MARIST.EDU Subject: Re: [ADSM-L] Per terabyte licensing Kelly, You are right. IBM's pricing model also has in mind IBM customers that have dozens of Tivoli titles, Websphere, etc., which all use the PVU model. I think that IBM should build the license
Re: Per terabyte licensing
We have sub-capacity licenses for TSM for some of our servers. We had to agree to install some kind of IBM licensing system. We haven't done it yet - but it's coming. It will require installing an agent on every server that has tsm clients. Rick John D. Schneider john.schnei...@c To OMPUTERCOACHINGCO ADSM-L@VM.MARIST.EDU MMUNITY.COM cc Sent by: ADSM: Dist Stor Subject Manager Re: Per terabyte licensing ads...@vm.marist .EDU 09/29/2009 10:44 AM Please respond to ADSM: Dist Stor Manager ads...@vm.marist .EDU You are right, we eventually got an agreement for a sub-processor license for Oracle, but IBM didn't volunteer that. We insisted, and eventually won the concession after much negotiating. And I am sure part of the reason we got the concession is because of the size customer we are; a smaller customer has no leverage for expecting special pricing. Best Regards, John D. Schneider The Computer Coaching Community, LLC Office: (314) 635-5424 / Toll Free: (866) 796-9226 Cell: (314) 750-8721 Original Message Subject: Re: [ADSM-L] Per terabyte licensing From: Mark Blunden m...@au1.ibm.com Date: Mon, September 28, 2009 7:04 pm To: ADSM-L@VM.MARIST.EDU IBM does have a sub-capacity license process. You need to talk to your sales rep to find out the details. Basically, if you are only using 2 cpus for Oracle out of 128 total cpus available, then you only have to pay for 2 DB licenses. Obvioulsy other LPARs are probably servicing other data requirements which will need backing up, but you don't have to pay for the lot if you don't use the lot. regards, Mark Kelly Lipp l...@storserver. COM To Sent by: ADSM: ADSM-L@VM.MARIST.EDU Dist Stor cc Manager ads...@vm.marist Subject .EDU Re: Per terabyte licensing 29/09/2009 09:48 AM Please respond to ADSM: Dist Stor Manager ads...@vm.marist .EDU And remember, too, that the PVU thing contemplated something like a DB2 license. Perhaps you had two or three systems that would run DB2. It did not contemplate something like TSM where EVERY system in the environment would have the software running. Keeping track of a couple of systems and their various processor/core/PVU stuff is relatively simple. Keeping track of that same thing across several hundred (never mind your case!) is very difficult. The one size fits all mentality of Tivoli software clearly missed the mark with TSM. Kelly Lipp Chief Technical Officer www.storserver.com 719-266-8777 x7105 STORServer solves your data backup challenges. Once and for all. -Original Message- From: ADSM: Dist Stor Manager [mailto:ads...@vm.marist.edu] On Behalf Of John D. Schneider Sent: Monday, September 28, 2009 4:47 PM To: ADSM-L@VM.MARIST.EDU Subject: Re: [ADSM-L] Per terabyte licensing Kelly, You are right, IBM must build their license model to ensure the profit they expect. We can't blame them for doing this as a business. They can't give their product away for free. But the PVU based licensing model is a huge problem for an environment like ours that has over 2000 clients of all different shapes and kinds. Lots of separate servers, but also VMWare partitions, and AIX LPARs, and NDMP clients, etc. Keeping up with the PVU rules is a huge effort, especially the way IBM did it. In Windows, the OS might tell you that you have 2 processors. But is that a single-core dual processor, or two separate processors. The OS can't tell, but IBM insists there is a
Re: Per terabyte licensing
Once you go that route you'll also need to keep copies of the reports that agent will kick out for 2 years. The agent is also only for Windows and AIX clients as of today. Joseph A Abbott MCSE 2003/2000, MCSA2003 Tivoli Storage Manager Architect jabb...@partners.org Cell-617-633-8471 Desk-617-724-4929 Page-# (617) 362-6341 6173391...@usamobility.net Be who you are and say what you feel because those who mind don't matter and those who matter don't mind. -Original Message- From: ADSM: Dist Stor Manager [mailto:ads...@vm.marist.edu] On Behalf Of Richard Rhodes Sent: Tuesday, September 29, 2009 11:42 AM To: ADSM-L@VM.MARIST.EDU Subject: Re: [ADSM-L] Per terabyte licensing We have sub-capacity licenses for TSM for some of our servers. We had to agree to install some kind of IBM licensing system. We haven't done it yet - but it's coming. It will require installing an agent on every server that has tsm clients. Rick John D. Schneider john.schnei...@c To OMPUTERCOACHINGCO ADSM-L@VM.MARIST.EDU MMUNITY.COM cc Sent by: ADSM: Dist Stor Subject Manager Re: Per terabyte licensing ads...@vm.marist .EDU 09/29/2009 10:44 AM Please respond to ADSM: Dist Stor Manager ads...@vm.marist .EDU You are right, we eventually got an agreement for a sub-processor license for Oracle, but IBM didn't volunteer that. We insisted, and eventually won the concession after much negotiating. And I am sure part of the reason we got the concession is because of the size customer we are; a smaller customer has no leverage for expecting special pricing. Best Regards, John D. Schneider The Computer Coaching Community, LLC Office: (314) 635-5424 / Toll Free: (866) 796-9226 Cell: (314) 750-8721 Original Message Subject: Re: [ADSM-L] Per terabyte licensing From: Mark Blunden m...@au1.ibm.com Date: Mon, September 28, 2009 7:04 pm To: ADSM-L@VM.MARIST.EDU IBM does have a sub-capacity license process. You need to talk to your sales rep to find out the details. Basically, if you are only using 2 cpus for Oracle out of 128 total cpus available, then you only have to pay for 2 DB licenses. Obvioulsy other LPARs are probably servicing other data requirements which will need backing up, but you don't have to pay for the lot if you don't use the lot. regards, Mark Kelly Lipp l...@storserver. COM To Sent by: ADSM: ADSM-L@VM.MARIST.EDU Dist Stor cc Manager ads...@vm.marist Subject .EDU Re: Per terabyte licensing 29/09/2009 09:48 AM Please respond to ADSM: Dist Stor Manager ads...@vm.marist .EDU And remember, too, that the PVU thing contemplated something like a DB2 license. Perhaps you had two or three systems that would run DB2. It did not contemplate something like TSM where EVERY system in the environment would have the software running. Keeping track of a couple of systems and their various processor/core/PVU stuff is relatively simple. Keeping track of that same thing across several hundred (never mind your case!) is very difficult. The one size fits all mentality of Tivoli software clearly missed the mark with TSM. Kelly Lipp Chief Technical Officer www.storserver.com 719-266-8777 x7105 STORServer solves your data backup challenges. Once and for all. -Original Message- From: ADSM: Dist Stor Manager [mailto:ads...@vm.marist.edu] On Behalf Of John D. Schneider Sent: Monday, September 28, 2009 4:47 PM To: ADSM-L@VM.MARIST.EDU Subject: Re: [ADSM-L] Per terabyte
Re: VSS Error
Thank you, everything worked properly.
2009/9/29 Tchuise, Bertaut btchu...@lmus.leggmason.com
Bruno,
VSS tends to be fickle at times on Windows system. I have resolved numerous
VSS issues on W2k3 but none on W2k8 so far; the issues lies within Windows
not TSM. You could try the following steps:
** Run the vssadmin list writers then check the state of your writers. If
you have any writers showing failures, restart the COM+ event System
Notification and COM+ System Application, Volume Shadow Copy and Microsoft
Software Shadow Copy services.
** Check the writers state once more and run a manual system state backup
with the ntbackup utility. If it runs without issues, then VSS should be
fine and you system state backup will work within TSM.
We tend to get random VSS issues in our environment; after restarting the
services above, we don't get those errors back.
As a last resort, you could re-register you dlls after exporting then
deleting the subscription hive under
HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE\SOFTWARE\Microsoft\EventSystem\{26c409cc-ae86-11d1-b616-00805fc79216}\
(restarting the services above will create a new subscription hive in the
registry) then
cd /d %windir%\system32
net stop vss
net stop swprv
regsvr32 ole32.dll
regsvr32 oleaut32.dll
regsvr32 vss_ps.dll
vssvc /register
regsvr32 /i swprv.dll
regsvr32 /i eventcls.dll
regsvr32 es.dll
regsvr32 stdprov.dll
regsvr32 vssui.dll
regsvr32 msxml.dll
regsvr32 msxml3.dll
regsvr32 msxml4.dll
Good luck.
BERTAUT TCHUISE
TSM/NetApp Storage Administrator
Legg Mason Technology Services
*410-580-7032
btchu...@leggmason.com
-Original Message-
From: ADSM: Dist Stor Manager [mailto:ads...@vm.marist.edu] On Behalf Of
Bruno Oliveira
Sent: Tuesday, September 29, 2009 8:44 AM
To: ADSM-L@VM.MARIST.EDU
Subject: [ADSM-L] VSS Error
Hi,
I have a TSM v5.5 server running on a Windows 2003 and a TSM v6.1 client
running Windows 2008. That has errors during the copy of SystemState only,
file copy is normal.
In dsmerror.log appears the following error message:
*09/29/2009 09:22:19 ANS1959W Removing previous incomplete group '\System
State\0\SystemState' Id:0-2609054
09/29/2009 09:22:21 VssRequestor::checkWriterStatus:
VssRequestor::checkWriterStatus() failed with
hr=VSS_E_WRITERERROR_NONRETRYABLE
09/29/2009 09:22:21 ANS5269E The Microsoft Volume Shadow Copy Services
writer 'NTDS' current state (VSS_WS_FAILED_AT_POST_SNAPSHOT) is not valid
for the current operation or cannot be determined. The last error reported
is '800423f4'.
09/29/2009 09:22:21 ANS5271E A Microsoft Volume Shadow Copy Services writer
is in an invalid state before snapshot initialization.
09/29/2009 09:22:21 ANS5250E An unexpected error was encountered.
TSM function name : baHandleSnapshot
TSM function : BaStartSnapshot() failed.
TSM return code : 4353
TSM file : backsnap.cpp (3745)
09/29/2009 09:22:21 ANS1327W The snapshot operation for
'PROBHSRV01\SystemState\NULL\System State\SystemState' failed with error
code: 4353.
09/29/2009 09:22:21 ANS5283E The operation was unsuccessful.
*
Searching the internet for codes spotted the following sites:
*
http://www-01.ibm.com/support/docview.wss?rs=663context=SSGSG7dc=DB560dc=DB520uid=swg21392932loc=en_UScs=UTF-8lang=enrss=ct663other
*
http://www-01.ibm.com/support/docview.wss?rs=663context=SSGSG7dc=DB560dc=DB520uid=swg21392932loc=en_UScs=UTF-8lang=enrss=ct663other
*
http://publib.boulder.ibm.com/infocenter/tsminfo/v6/index.jsp?topic=/com.ibm.itsm.messages.doc/msgs6603.html
*
http://publib.boulder.ibm.com/infocenter/tsminfo/v6/index.jsp?topic=/com.ibm.itsm.messages.doc/msgs6603.html
*http://www-01.ibm.com/support/docview.wss?uid=swg21295294*
http://www-01.ibm.com/support/docview.wss?uid=swg21295294
None of the solutions proposed by IBM decided. I am having 12 GB available
on C: \ drive, I made a copy of the volume using the Windows and returned
the following output:
*vssadmin 1.1 - Ferramenta de linha de comando administrativa de c¢pias de
sombra de volume
(C) Copyright 2001-2005 Microsoft Corp.* *Cópia de sombra para 'C:\' criada
com êxito
Identificação da cópia de sombra: {82bfd321-5616-49ec-b01e-e77043d0a158}
Nome do volume da cópia de sombra: **
\\?\GLOBALROOT\Device\HarddiskVolumeShadowCopy68*file:///?\GLOBALROOT\Device\HarddiskVolumeShadowCopy68
Does anyone know why this error is happening on the copy of SystemState?
--
abs,
Bruno Oliveira
Beagá - Minas Gerais - Brazil
55 31 9342 4111
IMPORTANT: E-mail sent through the Internet is not secure. Legg Mason
therefore recommends that you do not send any confidential or sensitive
information to us via electronic mail, including social security numbers,
account numbers, or personal identification numbers. Delivery, and or timely
delivery of Internet mail is not guaranteed. Legg Mason therefore recommends
that you do not send time sensitive
or action-oriented messages to us
Re: VSS Error
Glad to hear that Bruno.
Thanks.
BERTAUT TCHUISE
TSM/NetApp Storage Administrator
Legg Mason Technology Services
*410-580-7032
btchu...@leggmason.com
-Original Message-
From: ADSM: Dist Stor Manager [mailto:ads...@vm.marist.edu] On Behalf Of Bruno
Oliveira
Sent: Tuesday, September 29, 2009 3:37 PM
To: ADSM-L@VM.MARIST.EDU
Subject: Re: [ADSM-L] VSS Error
Thank you, everything worked properly.
2009/9/29 Tchuise, Bertaut btchu...@lmus.leggmason.com
Bruno,
VSS tends to be fickle at times on Windows system. I have resolved
numerous VSS issues on W2k3 but none on W2k8 so far; the issues lies
within Windows not TSM. You could try the following steps:
** Run the vssadmin list writers then check the state of your
writers. If you have any writers showing failures, restart the COM+
event System Notification and COM+ System Application, Volume Shadow
Copy and Microsoft Software Shadow Copy services.
** Check the writers state once more and run a manual system state
backup with the ntbackup utility. If it runs without issues, then VSS
should be fine and you system state backup will work within TSM.
We tend to get random VSS issues in our environment; after restarting
the services above, we don't get those errors back.
As a last resort, you could re-register you dlls after exporting then
deleting the subscription hive under
HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE\SOFTWARE\Microsoft\EventSystem\{26c409cc-ae86-11d1-
b616-00805fc79216}\ (restarting the services above will create a new
subscription hive in the
registry) then
cd /d %windir%\system32
net stop vss
net stop swprv
regsvr32 ole32.dll
regsvr32 oleaut32.dll
regsvr32 vss_ps.dll
vssvc /register
regsvr32 /i swprv.dll
regsvr32 /i eventcls.dll
regsvr32 es.dll
regsvr32 stdprov.dll
regsvr32 vssui.dll
regsvr32 msxml.dll
regsvr32 msxml3.dll
regsvr32 msxml4.dll
Good luck.
BERTAUT TCHUISE
TSM/NetApp Storage Administrator
Legg Mason Technology Services
*410-580-7032
btchu...@leggmason.com
-Original Message-
From: ADSM: Dist Stor Manager [mailto:ads...@vm.marist.edu] On Behalf
Of Bruno Oliveira
Sent: Tuesday, September 29, 2009 8:44 AM
To: ADSM-L@VM.MARIST.EDU
Subject: [ADSM-L] VSS Error
Hi,
I have a TSM v5.5 server running on a Windows 2003 and a TSM v6.1
client running Windows 2008. That has errors during the copy of
SystemState only, file copy is normal.
In dsmerror.log appears the following error message:
*09/29/2009 09:22:19 ANS1959W Removing previous incomplete group
'\System State\0\SystemState' Id:0-2609054
09/29/2009 09:22:21 VssRequestor::checkWriterStatus:
VssRequestor::checkWriterStatus() failed with
hr=VSS_E_WRITERERROR_NONRETRYABLE
09/29/2009 09:22:21 ANS5269E The Microsoft Volume Shadow Copy Services
writer 'NTDS' current state (VSS_WS_FAILED_AT_POST_SNAPSHOT) is not
valid for the current operation or cannot be determined. The last
error reported is '800423f4'.
09/29/2009 09:22:21 ANS5271E A Microsoft Volume Shadow Copy Services
writer is in an invalid state before snapshot initialization.
09/29/2009 09:22:21 ANS5250E An unexpected error was encountered.
TSM function name : baHandleSnapshot
TSM function : BaStartSnapshot() failed.
TSM return code : 4353
TSM file : backsnap.cpp (3745)
09/29/2009 09:22:21 ANS1327W The snapshot operation for
'PROBHSRV01\SystemState\NULL\System State\SystemState' failed with
error
code: 4353.
09/29/2009 09:22:21 ANS5283E The operation was unsuccessful.
*
Searching the internet for codes spotted the following sites:
*
http://www-01.ibm.com/support/docview.wss?rs=663context=SSGSG7dc=DB5
60dc=DB520uid=swg21392932loc=en_UScs=UTF-8lang=enrss=ct663other
*
http://www-01.ibm.com/support/docview.wss?rs=663context=SSGSG7dc=DB5
60dc=DB520uid=swg21392932loc=en_UScs=UTF-8lang=enrss=ct663other
*
http://publib.boulder.ibm.com/infocenter/tsminfo/v6/index.jsp?topic=/c
om.ibm.itsm.messages.doc/msgs6603.html
*
http://publib.boulder.ibm.com/infocenter/tsminfo/v6/index.jsp?topic=/c
om.ibm.itsm.messages.doc/msgs6603.html
*http://www-01.ibm.com/support/docview.wss?uid=swg21295294*
http://www-01.ibm.com/support/docview.wss?uid=swg21295294
None of the solutions proposed by IBM decided. I am having 12 GB
available on C: \ drive, I made a copy of the volume using the Windows
and returned the following output:
*vssadmin 1.1 - Ferramenta de linha de comando administrativa de
c¢pias de sombra de volume
(C) Copyright 2001-2005 Microsoft Corp.* *Cópia de sombra para 'C:\'
criada com êxito
Identificação da cópia de sombra: {82bfd321-5616-49ec-b01e-e77043d0a158}
Nome do volume da cópia de sombra: **
\\?\GLOBALROOT\Device\HarddiskVolumeShadowCopy68*file:///?\GLOBALROOT
\Device\HarddiskVolumeShadowCopy68
Does anyone know why this error is happening on the copy of SystemState?
--
abs,
Bruno Oliveira
Beagá - Minas Gerais - Brazil
55 31 9342 4111
IMPORTANT: E-mail sent through the Internet is not secure. Legg
TDP for Exchange on VM with LAN-FREE
Hello All, Thanks for your help!! I have a client that uses the Exchange TDP and are using LAN-FREE. The data is several TB. They currently to a full on the weekends and incrementals daily. Their TSM server is on AIX. They would like to move their physical Exchange servers to couple of VMs. The issue is that none of our VCPs seem to think that an HBA can be assigned to a individual guest for exclusive use thereby facilitating the use of LAN-FREE. Has anyone out there seen a similar configuration, or know that this works or have any other ideas on how to accomplish the backup without LAN-FREE? Regards, Nicholas
Re: Open Letter to TSM Product Mangement. Was Per terabyte licensing
I would like to add: Whatever you decide is fair for licensing the client - whether it be cores, or TB stored, or wombles, or hooha's, the client should REPORT BACK to the server how many wombles or hooha's it is using. The current system is most unfair to the customer, in that it requires an unreasonable amount of work to figure out what is required for compliance. If the client code can't figure it out, don't expect the human to. Solving the problem by selling the customer another product, that is also difficult to deploy on a large scale, is not the answer. W On Tue, Sep 29, 2009 at 11:39 AM, Kelly Lipp l...@storserver.com wrote: This has been a good discussion. I would like to change the tone a bit in order to help IBM product management as they ponder this issue. STORServer is an OEM of IBM TSM code and TSM is an integral part of our appliance. We compete in the marketplace against just about everyone else in the backup space. The most difficulty we encounter is with respect to our licensing which is necessarily identical to IBMs. I have thought long and hard about how to decouple client licensing from our product and stay in compliance with our OEM agreement. I have not come up with an idea. I postulate the following: a TSM client derives value from the TSM environment in two ways: 1. simply by having the ability to store and restore data on the TSM server and 2. from the intrinsic features the server uses to store maintain that data. Some clients use server features relatively less while others use them relatively more. The features used in the server are relevant to the overall business requirements rather than for a single client. At STORServer, we asses this value by determining how much it costs us to support an environment. We can expect to field a certain number of support calls per customer with client side issues and certain number with server side issues. The more clients a customer has, the more calls we’ll get and the more sophisticated the server side is (larger library, more disk, server to server, etc.) the more server side calls we'll get. To account for the client side calls is fairly simple since we have to pay IBM an annual support fee for the clients we've licensed from them. We uplift this slightly to cover our costs of support. On the server, we've taken the approach of basing the initial cost of our solution and ongoing support costs on the overall size (in Terabytes) of the server storage. We have four tiers: micro, up to 40TB of storage, small 40-80TB, medium 80-120TB and large over 120TB. The levels are somewhat arbitrary but reasonably reflect the STORServers in the field and correlated nicely with what our support numbers are telling us. I go into this as I think it would behoove IBM to consider a similar model. A client doesn't necessarily benefit more or less based on the number of cores it has. It does benefit, generally, from having the ability to backup and restore data. The overall environment benefits from the presence of the TSM server as it is that environment that allows for the secure maintenance of critical corporate data. It also provides services to recover after a disaster and finally, it provides a support organization to help a customer when it all goes wrong. The value of the solution is thus spread. A licensing scheme that spreads this value is appropriate. A client has a license no matter how big or small it is. Essentially a connection fee. The more clients you have the more you pay. The server is sized according to how much data is processed and stored. The more data that arrives each day and the more data that is stored necessarily results in a larger server environment and thus more value. It is very easy to count how much or how many of each. It is also easy to sell increments of licensing to accommodate growth. I would not be inclined to sell a per GB/month type scheme as this is too difficult for customers to budget. There must be a fixed component to licensing with a periodic true up period to make the scheme fair to IBM. Today, the licensing scheme is not fair to either party. Value as perceived by the customer is not tied to the number of cores in the processor and IBM cannot accurately determine if a customer is in compliance. This is not acceptable by either party. As I write this, I recall an earlier version of the licensing model: clients were free and we paid for the server stuff. It was priced by function. For instance, we paid for DRM and its support. That model wasn't correct as it rewarded the sites with large numbers of clients. One of you said it correctly: it's time to get this right once and for all. We need a fair licensing model that ensures TSM continues to be a viable product in the marketplace. That means one that rewards IBM for the hard work it does to provide the code and its support and one that provides real
Re: TDP for Exchange on VM with LAN-FREE
Hi Nicholas You could install TSM for SAN on the VM Host box, and set up a dedicated virtual ethernet adapter internally to pass the data from the VM Client to the host. This way you only need one extra HBA for all the VMs on the same host. Regards Steve Steven Harris, TSM Admin, Between Jobs, Sydney Australia Nicholas Rodolfich wrote: Hello All, Thanks for your help!! I have a client that uses the Exchange TDP and are using LAN-FREE. The data is several TB. They currently to a full on the weekends and incrementals daily. Their TSM server is on AIX. They would like to move their physical Exchange servers to couple of VMs. The issue is that none of our VCPs seem to think that an HBA can be assigned to a individual guest for exclusive use thereby facilitating the use of LAN-FREE. Has anyone out there seen a similar configuration, or know that this works or have any other ideas on how to accomplish the backup without LAN-FREE? Regards, Nicholas= No virus found in this incoming message. Checked by AVG - www.avg.com Version: 8.5.409 / Virus Database: 270.13.114/2401 - Release Date: 09/28/09 17:53:00
VCB fullvm Proxy Server - opinions?
TSM server is 6.1.2 on Windows Win2K3. I have a customer who has tested running VCB fullvm backups of VMWare guests, using the TSM 6.1 client running on a Win2K3 Proxy server. No problem getting the fullvm proxy backups to work. They are planning to virtualize the entire server farm, so in the next 2 months they will grow to ~ 100 VM's. They think they want to do VCB fullvm's of the guests once a week, on Saturdays. Now here's my opinion question: We had no problem getting the proxy backups to work, but just based on the number of VM's and ESX servers, I'm thinking I'll need more than 1 proxy server, to provide lots of parallelism (so far, the bottleneck doing the fullvms, is the COPY of the vmdk files to the proxy server disk);. This TSM server has 2 quad-core processors; EMC Symmetrix disk, 16G Ram, four 3592 tape drives - quite beefy for a Winders box. We haven't come close to saturating physical resources, and esp. on weekends, it really has not much to do. I can't see why, since we have lots of unused hardware resources, I shouldn't set it up as another proxy server. The fullvm copy to the proxy disk gets compressed by VCB, so there isn't that much data generated per hour to push to the TSM storage pools; the TSM server isn't going to be all that busy when the fullvms run. Anybody know a reason not to try it? I'm asking because the doc says you MUST have a separate physical server for the proxy, but I can't see why it would be a restriction, just an issue of resources. Thanks for any insight! W
