query occ vs select from occupancy
Hi TSM people, I saw some uncommon output from a Q OCC command for a large node this morning and I would like to ask if any of you saw this before: Server is 5.5.5.2 on AIX. Query occupancy gives me: tsm:q occ X_FSX Node Name Type Filespace FSID StorageNumber of Physical Logical Name Pool Name Files Space Space Occupied Occupied (MB) (MB) -- -- - -- - - - X_FS8 Bkup /homepool 1 FS-COPY21,843,78 3,968,123 3,888,302 8 .35 .25 X_FS8 Bkup /homepool 1 FS-DISK7,181 483,413.1 483,413.1 2 2 X_FS8 Bkup /homepool 1 FS-TAPE21,849,19 4,234,593 4,046,654 8 .39 .60 X_FS8 Bkup / 2 FS-COPY 186,630 18,717.17 16,554.75 X_FS8 Bkup / 2 FS-TAPE 186,732 21,191.67 16,697.96 X_FS8 Bkup /boot 3 FS-COPY 234 50.10 49.97 X_FS8 Bkup /boot 3 FS-TAPE 234 78.27 49.97 So I conclude that my /homepool filesystem uses about 4TB logical storage in TSM And a SELECT gives something else: tsm: select NODE_NAME,FILESPACE_NAME,STGPOOL_NAME,NUM_FILES,LOGICAL_MB from occupancy where node_name='X_FSX' NODE_NAME FILESPACE_NAME STGPOOL_NAME NUM_FILES LOGICAL_MB -- -- -- --- X_FSX /homepool FS-COPY 21843788 46837975.20 X_FSX /homepool FS-DISK 7181483413.11 X_FSX /homepool FS-TAPE 21849198 46996327.55 X_FSX / FS-COPY 186630 16554.74 X_FSX / FS-TAPE 186732 16697.95 X_FSX /boot FS-COPY 23449.96 X_FSX /boot FS-TAPE 23449.96 And now I get 40+TB instead of 4? Met vriendelijke groet / Kind regards, Paul van Dongen
FW: query occ vs select from occupancy
Hi, Before someone tells me that used two different nodes, this was the result of a wrong replace action. I can assure that both commands were directed to the same node name Met vriendelijke groet / Kind regards, Paul van Dongen -Original Message- From: ADSM: Dist Stor Manager [mailto:ADSM-L@VM.MARIST.EDU] On Behalf Of Paul van Dongen Sent: Friday, November 16, 2012 10:18 To: ADSM-L@VM.MARIST.EDU Subject: [ADSM-L] query occ vs select from occupancy Hi TSM people, I saw some uncommon output from a Q OCC command for a large node this morning and I would like to ask if any of you saw this before: Server is 5.5.5.2 on AIX. Query occupancy gives me: tsm:q occ X_FSX Node Name Type Filespace FSID StorageNumber of Physical Logical Name Pool Name Files Space Space Occupied Occupied (MB) (MB) -- -- - -- - - - X_FS8 Bkup /homepool 1 FS-COPY21,843,78 3,968,123 3,888,302 8 .35 .25 X_FS8 Bkup /homepool 1 FS-DISK7,181 483,413.1 483,413.1 2 2 X_FS8 Bkup /homepool 1 FS-TAPE21,849,19 4,234,593 4,046,654 8 .39 .60 X_FS8 Bkup / 2 FS-COPY 186,630 18,717.17 16,554.75 X_FS8 Bkup / 2 FS-TAPE 186,732 21,191.67 16,697.96 X_FS8 Bkup /boot 3 FS-COPY 234 50.10 49.97 X_FS8 Bkup /boot 3 FS-TAPE 234 78.27 49.97 So I conclude that my /homepool filesystem uses about 4TB logical storage in TSM And a SELECT gives something else: tsm: select NODE_NAME,FILESPACE_NAME,STGPOOL_NAME,NUM_FILES,LOGICAL_MB from occupancy where node_name='X_FSX' NODE_NAME FILESPACE_NAME STGPOOL_NAME NUM_FILES LOGICAL_MB -- -- -- --- X_FSX /homepool FS-COPY 21843788 46837975.20 X_FSX /homepool FS-DISK 7181483413.11 X_FSX /homepool FS-TAPE 21849198 46996327.55 X_FSX / FS-COPY 186630 16554.74 X_FSX / FS-TAPE 186732 16697.95 X_FSX /boot FS-COPY 23449.96 X_FSX /boot FS-TAPE 23449.96 And now I get 40+TB instead of 4? Met vriendelijke groet / Kind regards, Paul van Dongen
Tsm for VE V6.4
Hi to all Did anyone know if the official version of Tsm for VE version 6.4 is in production ? Regards Robert Ouzen
Re: Tsm for VE V6.4
Hi Robert, TSM for VE 6.4 becomes generally available today (November 16, 2012) I don't know at exactly what hour it will appear on the download sites, but today is the day. Thanks, Del ADSM: Dist Stor Manager ADSM-L@vm.marist.edu wrote on 11/16/2012 05:57:23 AM: From: Robert Ouzen rou...@univ.haifa.ac.il To: ADSM-L@vm.marist.edu, Date: 11/16/2012 05:58 AM Subject: Tsm for VE V6.4 Sent by: ADSM: Dist Stor Manager ADSM-L@vm.marist.edu Hi to all Did anyone know if the official version of Tsm for VE version 6.4 is in production ? Regards Robert Ouzen
Re: FW: query occ vs select from occupancy
I suspect this: http://www.ibm.com/support/docview.wss?uid=swg1IC81110 Best regards, Andy Raibeck IBM Software Group Tivoli Storage Manager Client Product Development Level 3 Team Lead Internal Notes e-mail: Andrew Raibeck/Hartford/IBM@IBMUS Internet e-mail: stor...@us.ibm.com IBM Tivoli Storage Manager support web page: http://www.ibm.com/support/entry/portal/Overview/Software/Tivoli/Tivoli_Storage_Manager ADSM: Dist Stor Manager ADSM-L@vm.marist.edu wrote on 2012-11-16 04:51:00: From: Paul van Dongen paul.vandon...@vancis.nl To: ADSM-L@vm.marist.edu, Date: 2012-11-16 04:53 Subject: FW: query occ vs select from occupancy Sent by: ADSM: Dist Stor Manager ADSM-L@vm.marist.edu Hi, Before someone tells me that used two different nodes, this was the result of a wrong replace action. I can assure that both commands were directed to the same node name Met vriendelijke groet / Kind regards, Paul van Dongen -Original Message- From: ADSM: Dist Stor Manager [mailto:ADSM-L@VM.MARIST.EDU] On Behalf Of Paul van Dongen Sent: Friday, November 16, 2012 10:18 To: ADSM-L@VM.MARIST.EDU Subject: [ADSM-L] query occ vs select from occupancy Hi TSM people, I saw some uncommon output from a Q OCC command for a large node this morning and I would like to ask if any of you saw this before: Server is 5.5.5.2 on AIX. Query occupancy gives me: tsm:q occ X_FSX Node Name Type Filespace FSID Storage Number of Physical Logical Name Pool Name Files Space Space Occupied Occupied (MB) (MB) -- -- - -- - - - X_FS8 Bkup /homepool 1 FS-COPY21, 843,78 3,968,123 3,888,302 8 .35 .25 X_FS8 Bkup /homepool 1 FS-DISK 7,181 483,413.1 483,413.1 2 2 X_FS8 Bkup /homepool 1 FS-TAPE21, 849,19 4,234,593 4,046,654 8 .39 .60 X_FS8 Bkup / 2 FS-COPY 186,630 18,717.17 16,554.75 X_FS8 Bkup / 2 FS-TAPE 186,732 21,191.67 16,697.96 X_FS8 Bkup /boot 3 FS-COPY 234 50.10 49.97 X_FS8 Bkup /boot 3 FS-TAPE 234 78.27 49.97 So I conclude that my /homepool filesystem uses about 4TB logical storage in TSM And a SELECT gives something else: tsm: select NODE_NAME,FILESPACE_NAME,STGPOOL_NAME,NUM_FILES,LOGICAL_MB from occupancy where node_name='X_FSX' NODE_NAME FILESPACE_NAME STGPOOL_NAME NUM_FILES LOGICAL_MB -- -- -- --- X_FSX /homepool FS-COPY 21843788 46837975.20 X_FSX /homepool FS-DISK 7181483413.11 X_FSX /homepool FS-TAPE 21849198 46996327.55 X_FSX / FS-COPY 186630 16554.74 X_FSX / FS-TAPE 186732 16697.95 X_FSX /boot FS-COPY 23449.96 X_FSX /boot FS-TAPE 23449.96 And now I get 40+TB instead of 4? Met vriendelijke groet / Kind regards, Paul van Dongen
Re: hypothetical situation with dedup turned on
You hit the nail right on the head. Is TSM smart enough to trigger another backup and then fix any issues that might occur because of dedup? David Tyree Interface Analyst South Georgia Medical Center 229.333.1155 -Original Message- From: ADSM: Dist Stor Manager [mailto:ADSM-L@VM.MARIST.EDU] On Behalf Of Alex Paschal Sent: Friday, November 16, 2012 1:09 AM To: ADSM-L@VM.MARIST.EDU Subject: Re: [ADSM-L] hypothetical situation with dedup turned on Hi, David. You can still do as you're already doing: audit volume fix=yes to find the damaged blocks, then do a move data against the good data. That would leave the unreadable data on the volume. If the copypool volume is unavailable for a restore volume, then the only thing you could do is delete volume discarddata=yes and take the concomitant loss of data that refers to the bad blocks. TSM should then re-back up that data during the next full incremental backup. (Full incremental? Oxymoron! Also, maybe too much vodka. Stoli's Orange, tonight. ;-) Question for the IBMers: Is TSM smart enough to delete all of the file objects that refer to the deduped/damaged/discarded blocks? I would expect so, especially with the ~new DB2 referential integrity enforcement, but I think that's exactly what David's question is getting at. Could we get an authoritative answer on that? And a more egg-head question from me: if a few damaged blocks are inside an aggregate, my understanding is that the entire aggregate would be marked bad during the audit, which means TSM wouldn't be able to move data reconstruct=yes, which would cause a larger footprint of data loss. Is my hypothesis correct? Hmm. Now that I think about it, CRC would have to be enabled on the stgpool to detect those few bad blocks within an aggregate, otherwise the headers/magic numbers for the aggregate/blocks would still be readable/good and the aggregate would audit as intact. Thoughts? Another question: do file volumes get magic numbers? Haha (Sorry, I blame the vodka.) On 11/15/2012 12:58 PM, Tyree, David wrote: This a hypothetical situation. In this situation the needed tape from the copy pool is not available. I realize that the data would be lost but how what you do next? if we were still running v5 of TSM we would do a move data (MOVE VOL XXX) to save what we could then delete the volume (DEL VOL XXX). We would lose some data but the next backup cycle would rebackup any missing active data. Since we are now running v6 with dedup it seems like the process would be different. Each volume no longer contains a complete set of files. They now contain parts of files. David Tyree Interface Analyst South Georgia Medical Center 229.333.1155 -Original Message- From: ADSM: Dist Stor Manager [mailto:ADSM-L@VM.MARIST.EDU] On Behalf Of Grigori Solonovitch Sent: Thursday, November 15, 2012 2:58 PM To: ADSM-L@VM.MARIST.EDU Subject: Re: [ADSM-L] hypothetical situation with dedup turned on Have you tried to use standard copy pol to recover any problems in primary pool? Grigori G. Solonovitch Senior Technical Architect Ahli United Bank Kuwait www.ahliunited.com.kw Please consider the environment before printing this E-mail -Original Message- From: ADSM: Dist Stor Manager [mailto:ADSM-L@VM.MARIST.EDU] On Behalf Of Tyree, David Sent: Wednesday, November 14, 2012 10:36 PM To: ADSM-L@VM.MARIST.EDU Subject: [ADSM-L] hypothetical situation with dedup turned on I've had some sys admins ask me about a possible situation with using dedup on our primary storage pool. We are currently using dedup and I can't come up with a good answer. Ok, our primary storage pool is using dedup. Something (corruption, whatever) happens to one of the files in the primary pool and the data needed to recover the file in the primary pool is not available. I attempt to do a restore of the corrupt file and the needed tape is not available. How would I go about fixing that kind of a situation? Back before we started using dedup we could just do a move volume to save what we could and then do a delete volume and the next backup of the server would straighten everything out. We might lose inactive copies but the next backup cycle would catch the missing active files. With the way dedup works I'm not sure what we would do. Any suggestions? David Tyree Interface Analyst South Georgia Medical Center 229.333.1155 Please consider the environment before printing this Email. CONFIDENTIALITY AND WAIVER: The information contained in this electronic mail message and any attachments hereto may be legally privileged and confidential. The information is intended only for the recipient(s) named in this message. If you are not the intended recipient you are notified that any use, disclosure,
Re: tsm windows 2003 physical server restore to vmware
The best thing to do is to make the investment in TBMR. The product is designed and supported to do exactly what you described with no special infrastructure or changes to TSM required. TBMR does the bare metal recovery adjusts the Windows OS to make sure all the drivers and preconditions are met and then puts back the TSM backup. I doubt you have the time to do all the things Andy mentioned. http://www.cristie.com/products/disaster-recovery/tbmr/windows/ On Thu, Nov 15, 2012 at 10:04 PM, Andrew Raibeck stor...@us.ibm.com wrote: As I like to say: Try it and see! I do not speak for Microsoft, but my understanding is that if you run into a problem that is OS related, they might provide best effort assistance at best. Having said that, the best chance for this to work is to ensure that VMware guest has its virtual hardware configured as similarly as possible to that of your TSM Windows server. The most likely cause of problems will be differences in hardware. Be sure to even consider the disk geometry when matching the h/w configuration, e.g., number of sectors per track, number of tracks per cylinder, etc., on the virtual h/w should match those of the physical machine. Proper planning, test, test, test, revise as needed, and more test, test, test, are keys to success. Best regards, Andy Raibeck IBM Software Group Tivoli Storage Manager Client Product Development Level 3 Team Lead Internal Notes e-mail: Andrew Raibeck/Hartford/IBM@IBMUS Internet e-mail: stor...@us.ibm.com IBM Tivoli Storage Manager support web page: http://www.ibm.com/support/entry/portal/Overview/Software/Tivoli/Tivoli_Storage_Manager ADSM: Dist Stor Manager ADSM-L@vm.marist.edu wrote on 2012-11-15 19:33:49: From: Tim Brown tbr...@cenhud.com To: ADSM-L@vm.marist.edu, Date: 2012-11-15 19:36 Subject: tsm windows 2003 physical server restore to vmware Sent by: ADSM: Dist Stor Manager ADSM-L@vm.marist.edu Is it possible to restore a physical windows 2003 server to a windows 2003 image running under vmware via tsm Thanks, Tim Brown Supervisor Computer Operations Central Hudson Gas Electric 284 South Ave Poughkeepsie, NY 12601 Email: tbr...@cenhud.commailto:tbr...@cenhud.com mailto:tbr...@cenhud.com Phone: 845-486-5643 Fax: 845-486-5921 Cell: 845-235-4255 This message contains confidential information and is only for the intended recipient. If the reader of this message is not the intended recipient, or an employee or agent responsible for delivering this message to the intended recipient, please notify the sender immediately by replying to this note and deleting all copies and attachments. -- Ken Bury
Re: tsm windows 2003 physical server restore to vmware
I doubt you have the time to do all the things Andy mentioned. But I stand by my test, revise, test advice, regardless of the solution! :-))) Best regards, Andy Raibeck IBM Software Group Tivoli Storage Manager Client Product Development Level 3 Team Lead Internal Notes e-mail: Andrew Raibeck/Hartford/IBM@IBMUS Internet e-mail: stor...@us.ibm.com IBM Tivoli Storage Manager support web page: http://www.ibm.com/support/entry/portal/Overview/Software/Tivoli/Tivoli_Storage_Manager ADSM: Dist Stor Manager ADSM-L@vm.marist.edu wrote on 2012-11-16 08:18:25: From: Kenneth Bury kenbu...@gmail.com To: ADSM-L@vm.marist.edu, Date: 2012-11-16 08:19 Subject: Re: tsm windows 2003 physical server restore to vmware Sent by: ADSM: Dist Stor Manager ADSM-L@vm.marist.edu The best thing to do is to make the investment in TBMR. The product is designed and supported to do exactly what you described with no special infrastructure or changes to TSM required. TBMR does the bare metal recovery adjusts the Windows OS to make sure all the drivers and preconditions are met and then puts back the TSM backup. I doubt you have the time to do all the things Andy mentioned. http://www.cristie.com/products/disaster-recovery/tbmr/windows/ On Thu, Nov 15, 2012 at 10:04 PM, Andrew Raibeck stor...@us.ibm.com wrote: As I like to say: Try it and see! I do not speak for Microsoft, but my understanding is that if you run into a problem that is OS related, they might provide best effort assistance at best. Having said that, the best chance for this to work is to ensure that VMware guest has its virtual hardware configured as similarly as possible to that of your TSM Windows server. The most likely cause of problems will be differences in hardware. Be sure to even consider the disk geometry when matching the h/w configuration, e.g., number of sectors per track, number of tracks per cylinder, etc., on the virtual h/w should match those of the physical machine. Proper planning, test, test, test, revise as needed, and more test, test, test, are keys to success. Best regards, Andy Raibeck IBM Software Group Tivoli Storage Manager Client Product Development Level 3 Team Lead Internal Notes e-mail: Andrew Raibeck/Hartford/IBM@IBMUS Internet e-mail: stor...@us.ibm.com IBM Tivoli Storage Manager support web page: http://www.ibm.com/support/entry/portal/Overview/Software/Tivoli/ Tivoli_Storage_Manager ADSM: Dist Stor Manager ADSM-L@vm.marist.edu wrote on 2012-11-15 19:33:49: From: Tim Brown tbr...@cenhud.com To: ADSM-L@vm.marist.edu, Date: 2012-11-15 19:36 Subject: tsm windows 2003 physical server restore to vmware Sent by: ADSM: Dist Stor Manager ADSM-L@vm.marist.edu Is it possible to restore a physical windows 2003 server to a windows 2003 image running under vmware via tsm Thanks, Tim Brown Supervisor Computer Operations Central Hudson Gas Electric 284 South Ave Poughkeepsie, NY 12601 Email: tbr...@cenhud.commailto:tbr...@cenhud.com mailto:tbr...@cenhud.com Phone: 845-486-5643 Fax: 845-486-5921 Cell: 845-235-4255 This message contains confidential information and is only for the intended recipient. If the reader of this message is not the intended recipient, or an employee or agent responsible for delivering this message to the intended recipient, please notify the sender immediately by replying to this note and deleting all copies and attachments. -- Ken Bury
Re: HP/UX SAP backup
One thing would be if you hit the max scratch setting on your pools. That's the common thing we hit when we that the no space available messge. Rick From: Huebner, Andy andy.hueb...@alcon.com To: ADSM-L@VM.MARIST.EDU Date: 11/15/2012 03:57 PM Subject:HP/UX SAP backup Sent by:ADSM: Dist Stor Manager ADSM-L@VM.MARIST.EDU I am trying to get SAP LAN free backups working. Everything seems fine until it reaches the end of a tape, then we get : 11/14/2012 12:50:10 ANR0522W (Session: 189263, Origin: HP-SAP) Transaction failed for session 63740 for node HP-SAP (TDP R3 HP) - no space available in storage pool DB_D_VIRTP_09 and all successor pools. (SESSION: 189263) We have looked at everything we can think of with no luck. The backup will not go to the next tape. Does anyone have any ideas on what I am missing? AIX 6.1 TSM version 5.4.6.2 (built just for this) HP/UX 11.11 (cannot be upgraded) Storage Agent 5.4.6.2 (newest available) DataDomain VTL - LTO1 tape drives. We have tried 1 - 8 mount points. It will fill the first tapes then will fail to mount any more tapes. We are not out of space in the pool: tsm: TSMServerq stg db_d_virtp_09 f=d Storage Pool Name: DB_D_VIRTP_09 Storage Pool Type: Primary Device Class Name: LTO-5 Estimated Capacity: 204,800 G Space Trigger Util: Pct Util: 0.1 Pct Migr: 0.1 Pct Logical: 100.0 High Mig Pct: 90 Low Mig Pct: 70 Migration Delay: 0 Migration Continue: Yes Migration Processes: 1 Reclamation Processes: 1 Next Storage Pool: Reclaim Storage Pool: Maximum Size Threshold: No Limit Access: Read/Write Description: Overflow Location: Cache Migrated Files?: Collocate?: No Reclamation Threshold: 60 Offsite Reclamation Limit: Maximum Scratch Volumes Allowed: 1,000 Number of Scratch Volumes Used: 1 Delay Period for Volume Reuse: 0 Day(s) Migration in Progress?: No Amount Migrated (MB): 0.00 Elapsed Migration Time (seconds): 0 Reclamation in Progress?: No Last Update by (administrator): ANDY Last Update Date/Time: 11/15/2012 09:03:03 Storage Pool Data Format: Native Copy Storage Pool(s): Active Data Pool(s): Continue Copy on Error?: Yes CRC Data: No Reclamation Type: Threshold Overwrite Data when Deleted: show sspool - Pool DB_D_VIRTP_09(76): Strategy=30, ClassId=2, ClassName=LTO-5, Next=0, ReclaimPool=0, HighMig=90, LowMig=70, MigProcess=1, Access=0, MaxSize=0, Cache=0, Collocate=0, Reclaim=60, MaxScratch=1000, ReuseDelay=0, crcData=False, verifyData=True, ReclaimProcess=1, OffsiteReclaimLimit=NoLimit, ReclamationType=0 Index=11, OpenCount=0, CreatePending=False, DeletePending=False CopyPoolCount=0, CopyPoolIdList=, CopyContinue=Yes Shreddable=False, shredCount=0 AS Extension: NumDefVols=1, NumEmptyVols=0, NumScratchVols=1, NumRsvdScratch=0 Andy Huebner - 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 windows 2003 physical server restore to vmware
IMHO, wy too expensive. -Original Message- From: ADSM: Dist Stor Manager [mailto:ADSM-L@VM.MARIST.EDU] On Behalf Of Kenneth Bury Sent: Friday, November 16, 2012 8:18 AM To: ADSM-L@VM.MARIST.EDU Subject: Re: [ADSM-L] tsm windows 2003 physical server restore to vmware The best thing to do is to make the investment in TBMR. The product is designed and supported to do exactly what you described with no special infrastructure or changes to TSM required. TBMR does the bare metal recovery adjusts the Windows OS to make sure all the drivers and preconditions are met and then puts back the TSM backup. I doubt you have the time to do all the things Andy mentioned. http://www.cristie.com/products/disaster-recovery/tbmr/windows/ On Thu, Nov 15, 2012 at 10:04 PM, Andrew Raibeck stor...@us.ibm.com wrote: As I like to say: Try it and see! I do not speak for Microsoft, but my understanding is that if you run into a problem that is OS related, they might provide best effort assistance at best. Having said that, the best chance for this to work is to ensure that VMware guest has its virtual hardware configured as similarly as possible to that of your TSM Windows server. The most likely cause of problems will be differences in hardware. Be sure to even consider the disk geometry when matching the h/w configuration, e.g., number of sectors per track, number of tracks per cylinder, etc., on the virtual h/w should match those of the physical machine. Proper planning, test, test, test, revise as needed, and more test, test, test, are keys to success. Best regards, Andy Raibeck IBM Software Group Tivoli Storage Manager Client Product Development Level 3 Team Lead Internal Notes e-mail: Andrew Raibeck/Hartford/IBM@IBMUS Internet e-mail: stor...@us.ibm.com IBM Tivoli Storage Manager support web page: http://www.ibm.com/support/entry/portal/Overview/Software/Tivoli/Tivol i_Storage_Manager ADSM: Dist Stor Manager ADSM-L@vm.marist.edu wrote on 2012-11-15 19:33:49: From: Tim Brown tbr...@cenhud.com To: ADSM-L@vm.marist.edu, Date: 2012-11-15 19:36 Subject: tsm windows 2003 physical server restore to vmware Sent by: ADSM: Dist Stor Manager ADSM-L@vm.marist.edu Is it possible to restore a physical windows 2003 server to a windows 2003 image running under vmware via tsm Thanks, Tim Brown Supervisor Computer Operations Central Hudson Gas Electric 284 South Ave Poughkeepsie, NY 12601 Email: tbr...@cenhud.commailto:tbr...@cenhud.com mailto:tbr...@cenhud.com Phone: 845-486-5643 Fax: 845-486-5921 Cell: 845-235-4255 This message contains confidential information and is only for the intended recipient. If the reader of this message is not the intended recipient, or an employee or agent responsible for delivering this message to the intended recipient, please notify the sender immediately by replying to this note and deleting all copies and attachments. -- Ken Bury
Re: hypothetical situation with dedup turned on
I can confirm that if you do audit volume fix=yes , then a MOVE DATA, that it LOOKS like it works. The issue you mention below hadn't occurred to me. Ick. Could turn ME into a vodka drinker.. But believe me, Ive got deduprequiresbackup yes in place, and back up to a non-deduped copy pool. (And, by the way, the term full incremental makes me twitch, even without the vodka!) -Original Message- From: ADSM: Dist Stor Manager [mailto:ADSM-L@VM.MARIST.EDU] On Behalf Of Alex Paschal Sent: Friday, November 16, 2012 1:09 AM To: ADSM-L@VM.MARIST.EDU Subject: Re: [ADSM-L] hypothetical situation with dedup turned on Hi, David. You can still do as you're already doing: audit volume fix=yes to find the damaged blocks, then do a move data against the good data. That would leave the unreadable data on the volume. If the copypool volume is unavailable for a restore volume, then the only thing you could do is delete volume discarddata=yes and take the concomitant loss of data that refers to the bad blocks. TSM should then re-back up that data during the next full incremental backup. (Full incremental? Oxymoron! Also, maybe too much vodka. Stoli's Orange, tonight. ;-) Question for the IBMers: Is TSM smart enough to delete all of the file objects that refer to the deduped/damaged/discarded blocks? I would expect so, especially with the ~new DB2 referential integrity enforcement, but I think that's exactly what David's question is getting at. Could we get an authoritative answer on that? And a more egg-head question from me: if a few damaged blocks are inside an aggregate, my understanding is that the entire aggregate would be marked bad during the audit, which means TSM wouldn't be able to move data reconstruct=yes, which would cause a larger footprint of data loss. Is my hypothesis correct? Hmm. Now that I think about it, CRC would have to be enabled on the stgpool to detect those few bad blocks within an aggregate, otherwise the headers/magic numbers for the aggregate/blocks would still be readable/good and the aggregate would audit as intact. Thoughts? Another question: do file volumes get magic numbers? Haha (Sorry, I blame the vodka.) On 11/15/2012 12:58 PM, Tyree, David wrote: This a hypothetical situation. In this situation the needed tape from the copy pool is not available. I realize that the data would be lost but how what you do next? if we were still running v5 of TSM we would do a move data (MOVE VOL XXX) to save what we could then delete the volume (DEL VOL XXX). We would lose some data but the next backup cycle would rebackup any missing active data. Since we are now running v6 with dedup it seems like the process would be different. Each volume no longer contains a complete set of files. They now contain parts of files. David Tyree Interface Analyst South Georgia Medical Center 229.333.1155 -Original Message- From: ADSM: Dist Stor Manager [mailto:ADSM-L@VM.MARIST.EDU] On Behalf Of Grigori Solonovitch Sent: Thursday, November 15, 2012 2:58 PM To: ADSM-L@VM.MARIST.EDU Subject: Re: [ADSM-L] hypothetical situation with dedup turned on Have you tried to use standard copy pol to recover any problems in primary pool? Grigori G. Solonovitch Senior Technical Architect Ahli United Bank Kuwait www.ahliunited.com.kw Please consider the environment before printing this E-mail -Original Message- From: ADSM: Dist Stor Manager [mailto:ADSM-L@VM.MARIST.EDU] On Behalf Of Tyree, David Sent: Wednesday, November 14, 2012 10:36 PM To: ADSM-L@VM.MARIST.EDU Subject: [ADSM-L] hypothetical situation with dedup turned on I've had some sys admins ask me about a possible situation with using dedup on our primary storage pool. We are currently using dedup and I can't come up with a good answer. Ok, our primary storage pool is using dedup. Something (corruption, whatever) happens to one of the files in the primary pool and the data needed to recover the file in the primary pool is not available. I attempt to do a restore of the corrupt file and the needed tape is not available. How would I go about fixing that kind of a situation? Back before we started using dedup we could just do a move volume to save what we could and then do a delete volume and the next backup of the server would straighten everything out. We might lose inactive copies but the next backup cycle would catch the missing active files. With the way dedup works I'm not sure what we would do. Any suggestions? David Tyree Interface Analyst South Georgia Medical Center 229.333.1155 Please consider the environment before printing this Email. CONFIDENTIALITY AND WAIVER: The information contained in this electronic mail message and any attachments hereto may be legally privileged and confidential.
Re: Tsm for VE V6.4
And a big THANK YOU to the developers for getting this out so soon. WOO HOO!! (that means I approve!) -Original Message- From: ADSM: Dist Stor Manager [mailto:ADSM-L@VM.MARIST.EDU] On Behalf Of Del Hoobler Sent: Friday, November 16, 2012 6:52 AM To: ADSM-L@VM.MARIST.EDU Subject: Re: [ADSM-L] Tsm for VE V6.4 Hi Robert, TSM for VE 6.4 becomes generally available today (November 16, 2012) I don't know at exactly what hour it will appear on the download sites, but today is the day. Thanks, Del ADSM: Dist Stor Manager ADSM-L@vm.marist.edu wrote on 11/16/2012 05:57:23 AM: From: Robert Ouzen rou...@univ.haifa.ac.il To: ADSM-L@vm.marist.edu, Date: 11/16/2012 05:58 AM Subject: Tsm for VE V6.4 Sent by: ADSM: Dist Stor Manager ADSM-L@vm.marist.edu Hi to all Did anyone know if the official version of Tsm for VE version 6.4 is in production ? Regards Robert Ouzen
Re: Tsm for VE V6.4
I join the WOO HOO of Wanda Thanks Robert Ouzen Haifa University Israel -Original Message- From: ADSM: Dist Stor Manager [mailto:ADSM-L@VM.MARIST.EDU] On Behalf Of Prather, Wanda Sent: Friday, November 16, 2012 5:57 PM To: ADSM-L@VM.MARIST.EDU Subject: Re: [ADSM-L] Tsm for VE V6.4 And a big THANK YOU to the developers for getting this out so soon. WOO HOO!! (that means I approve!) -Original Message- From: ADSM: Dist Stor Manager [mailto:ADSM-L@VM.MARIST.EDU] On Behalf Of Del Hoobler Sent: Friday, November 16, 2012 6:52 AM To: ADSM-L@VM.MARIST.EDU Subject: Re: [ADSM-L] Tsm for VE V6.4 Hi Robert, TSM for VE 6.4 becomes generally available today (November 16, 2012) I don't know at exactly what hour it will appear on the download sites, but today is the day. Thanks, Del ADSM: Dist Stor Manager ADSM-L@vm.marist.edu wrote on 11/16/2012 05:57:23 AM: From: Robert Ouzen rou...@univ.haifa.ac.il To: ADSM-L@vm.marist.edu, Date: 11/16/2012 05:58 AM Subject: Tsm for VE V6.4 Sent by: ADSM: Dist Stor Manager ADSM-L@vm.marist.edu Hi to all Did anyone know if the official version of Tsm for VE version 6.4 is in production ? Regards Robert Ouzen
Re: hypothetical situation with dedup turned on
FYI - We had all the normal settings and still lost our source dedupe data while running 6.3.0 to 6.3.1, and no TSM was not smart enough to figure out it was gone and back up a fresh copy. We are currently at 6.3.2.7. It was one of the 6.3.2.x updates, released around 10/1/2012, that finally fixed the problem, so that we don't appear to have lost any more source data since then. So make sure you are running one of the latest releases of TSM. Ray On Nov 16, 2012, at 9:51 AM, Prather, Wanda wanda.prat...@icfi.com wrote: I can confirm that if you do audit volume fix=yes , then a MOVE DATA, that it LOOKS like it works. The issue you mention below hadn't occurred to me. Ick. Could turn ME into a vodka drinker.. But believe me, Ive got deduprequiresbackup yes in place, and back up to a non-deduped copy pool. (And, by the way, the term full incremental makes me twitch, even without the vodka!) -Original Message- From: ADSM: Dist Stor Manager [mailto:ADSM-L@VM.MARIST.EDU] On Behalf Of Alex Paschal Sent: Friday, November 16, 2012 1:09 AM To: ADSM-L@VM.MARIST.EDU Subject: Re: [ADSM-L] hypothetical situation with dedup turned on Hi, David. You can still do as you're already doing: audit volume fix=yes to find the damaged blocks, then do a move data against the good data. That would leave the unreadable data on the volume. If the copypool volume is unavailable for a restore volume, then the only thing you could do is delete volume discarddata=yes and take the concomitant loss of data that refers to the bad blocks. TSM should then re-back up that data during the next full incremental backup. (Full incremental? Oxymoron! Also, maybe too much vodka. Stoli's Orange, tonight. ;-) Question for the IBMers: Is TSM smart enough to delete all of the file objects that refer to the deduped/damaged/discarded blocks? I would expect so, especially with the ~new DB2 referential integrity enforcement, but I think that's exactly what David's question is getting at. Could we get an authoritative answer on that? And a more egg-head question from me: if a few damaged blocks are inside an aggregate, my understanding is that the entire aggregate would be marked bad during the audit, which means TSM wouldn't be able to move data reconstruct=yes, which would cause a larger footprint of data loss. Is my hypothesis correct? Hmm. Now that I think about it, CRC would have to be enabled on the stgpool to detect those few bad blocks within an aggregate, otherwise the headers/magic numbers for the aggregate/blocks would still be readable/good and the aggregate would audit as intact. Thoughts? Another question: do file volumes get magic numbers? Haha (Sorry, I blame the vodka.) On 11/15/2012 12:58 PM, Tyree, David wrote: This a hypothetical situation. In this situation the needed tape from the copy pool is not available. I realize that the data would be lost but how what you do next? if we were still running v5 of TSM we would do a move data (MOVE VOL XXX) to save what we could then delete the volume (DEL VOL XXX). We would lose some data but the next backup cycle would rebackup any missing active data. Since we are now running v6 with dedup it seems like the process would be different. Each volume no longer contains a complete set of files. They now contain parts of files. David Tyree Interface Analyst South Georgia Medical Center 229.333.1155 -Original Message- From: ADSM: Dist Stor Manager [mailto:ADSM-L@VM.MARIST.EDU] On Behalf Of Grigori Solonovitch Sent: Thursday, November 15, 2012 2:58 PM To: ADSM-L@VM.MARIST.EDU Subject: Re: [ADSM-L] hypothetical situation with dedup turned on Have you tried to use standard copy pol to recover any problems in primary pool? Grigori G. Solonovitch Senior Technical Architect Ahli United Bank Kuwait www.ahliunited.com.kw Please consider the environment before printing this E-mail -Original Message- From: ADSM: Dist Stor Manager [mailto:ADSM-L@VM.MARIST.EDU] On Behalf Of Tyree, David Sent: Wednesday, November 14, 2012 10:36 PM To: ADSM-L@VM.MARIST.EDU Subject: [ADSM-L] hypothetical situation with dedup turned on I've had some sys admins ask me about a possible situation with using dedup on our primary storage pool. We are currently using dedup and I can't come up with a good answer. Ok, our primary storage pool is using dedup. Something (corruption, whatever) happens to one of the files in the primary pool and the data needed to recover the file in the primary pool is not available. I attempt to do a restore of the corrupt file and the needed tape is not available. How would I go about fixing that kind of a situation? Back before we started using dedup we could just do a move volume to save what we could and then
V6.4 experiences
Has anyone downloaded/played with V6.4, specifically the Windows client? I have and as always, I use my Windows 7 64bit workstation as guinea-pig and am seeing some strange things and am wondering if anyone else is seeing these: 1. Long installation pauses. From between the time it said checking your system to actually starting the process, it went away for at least 5-minutes. Never had any program take that long and no I don't have many things running 2. Constantly flashing/blinking windows. No idea what they are since they blink so quickly I can't see them. 3. Constantly changing (expanding shrinking about 5px) size/width of the Details Status Report window. Even the Task List window keeps changing. When a file with a long name is processed, the window sizing scroll-bars appear and then disappear with the next shorter-names file. I realize these are probably mostly cosmetic but they are annoying. -- *Zoltan Forray* TSM Software Hardware Administrator Virginia Commonwealth University UCC/Office of Technology Services zfor...@vcu.edu - 804-828-4807 Don't be a phishing victim - VCU and other reputable organizations will never use email to request that you reply with your password, social security number or confidential personal information. For more details visit http://infosecurity.vcu.edu/phishing.html
Re: V6.4 experiences
Hi, In my lab I have just updated my tsm Server Linux env to 6.4 and no issues. I have also updated my data movers for Vmware and I tried to do a vmware backup but I got a version incompatibility error, then I am updating the TSM for VE and I will update FCM for VE as well. Also I updated the tsm client under linux and Windows 32 and 64 and no news. Where is the TSM 6.3.3 documentation ? Regars, Fran De: Zoltan Forray zfor...@vcu.edu Para: ADSM-L@VM.MARIST.EDU Enviado: Viernes 16 de noviembre de 2012 18:27 Asunto: V6.4 experiences Has anyone downloaded/played with V6.4, specifically the Windows client? I have and as always, I use my Windows 7 64bit workstation as guinea-pig and am seeing some strange things and am wondering if anyone else is seeing these: 1. Long installation pauses. From between the time it said checking your system to actually starting the process, it went away for at least 5-minutes. Never had any program take that long and no I don't have many things running 2. Constantly flashing/blinking windows. No idea what they are since they blink so quickly I can't see them. 3. Constantly changing (expanding shrinking about 5px) size/width of the Details Status Report window. Even the Task List window keeps changing. When a file with a long name is processed, the window sizing scroll-bars appear and then disappear with the next shorter-names file. I realize these are probably mostly cosmetic but they are annoying. -- *Zoltan Forray* TSM Software Hardware Administrator Virginia Commonwealth University UCC/Office of Technology Services zfor...@vcu.edu - 804-828-4807 Don't be a phishing victim - VCU and other reputable organizations will never use email to request that you reply with your password, social security number or confidential personal information. For more details visit http://infosecurity.vcu.edu/phishing.html
free space on tsm
Can somebody give me some help? I have a LTO5 without space, and a need to do new backup's. But i dont have scratch tapes, even to free some space. I have several big backup's of a database on level 0 (full back ) and i can delete some old (if this its possible to do). I dont know how to free space, because de move data ... command finish with error (no free space avalable). tsm: TSMSERVERq vol Volume Name Storage Device Estimated Pct Volume Pool Name Class Name Capacity Util Status --- -- - - /tsm_data/diskpool.dsm BACKUPPOOL DISK 90,0 G 99,4 On-Line 145AASL5 TAPEPOOL LTO5C 2,0 T 12,8 Full 146AASL5 TAPEPOOL LTO5C 3,0 T 15,1 Filling 147AASL5 TAPEPOOL LTO5C 2,0 T 99,2 Full 148AASL5 TAPEPOOL LTO5C 2,0 T 47,1 Full 149AASL5 TAPEPOOL LTO5C 2,1 T 3,9 Full 246AASL5 TAPEPOOL LTO5C 1,9 T 80,7 Full 247AASL5 TAPEPOOL LTO5C 1,9 T 100,0 Full 248AASL5 TAPEPOOL LTO5C 3,0 T 0,0 Filling 249AASL5 TAPEPOOL LTO5C 2,4 T 71,9 Full 280AASL5 TAPEPOOL LTO5C 1,9 T 99,7 Full 281AASL5 TAPEPOOL LTO5C 2,2 T 10,3 Full 282AASL5 TAPEPOOL LTO5C 1,7 T 0,5 Full 283AASL5 TAPEPOOL LTO5C 2,0 T 0,0 Full 284AASL5 TAPEPOOL LTO5C 2,0 T 2,9 Full 420AASL5 TAPEPOOL LTO5C 1,9 T 3,0 Full 421AASL5 TAPEPOOL LTO5C 1,9 T 100,0 Full 422AASL5 TAPEPOOL LTO5C 3,0 T 76,8 Filling 423AASL5 TAPEPOOL LTO5C 3,0 T 35,9 Filling 424AASL5 TAPEPOOL LTO5C 2,0 T 19,2 Full Thanks for all your help Best regards, David
Re: free space on tsm
First, make sure expiration is running regularly, and run an Expire Inventory to try to clear some more space now. Look for any filespaces not receiving new data recently, and check with the owner to see if obsolete, where junkers can be deleted. Given your limited capacity, you should turn collocation off. Now do 'Query Volume __ Format=Detailed on your Filling tapes and assure that they are read-write. Perform 'Move Data __ Recons=Yes' on the least full filled tapes to start regaining space. Given the overall situation, you may be fighting a losing battle, where you need more tapes or a more capacious library. Richard Simsaway from Boston University
