Re: TSM 5.1.6.1 core dump

[Alexander Verkooyen]

TSM 4.2.3.2 had the same problem (IC35420).
It was solved in 4.2.3.3

Alexander

-Original Message-
From: Loon, E.J. van - SPLXM [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: donderdag 27 februari 2003 13:08
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: TSM 5.1.6.1 core dump


Hi *SM-ers!
My test TSM 5.1.6.1 (on AIX 4.3.3) crashed last night. The following message
was written to the dsmserv.err:

02/27/2003 00:07:44  ANRD Same condition variable destruct more than
once; thread 38 (tid 0).

Anybody seen this before?
Maybe someone from development can advice me whether I should report this? I
will save the core file, just in case.
Kindest regards,
Eric van Loon
KLM Royal Dutch Airlines


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

Re: Client tries to backup non-existing files

[Alexander Verkooyen]

Richard was right (Thanks Richard!).
My sql query finished. It found the deleted files.
The server thinks the files are still active.

I'm going to rename the file space and ask the customer
to run a fresh backup. After a few weeks I'll remove
the renamed file space. I see no other way to get rid
of these false references in the server.

Thanks to everybody who responded to my question!

Best regards,

Alexander

John Naylor wrote:
>
> Thats a good thought Richard, and easily checked with an sql query
> However if this is the same as I am seeing the sql does not find anything.
>
> Richard Sims <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> on 12/19/2002 06:33:30 PM
>
> Please respond to "ADSM: Dist Stor Manager" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>
> To:   [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> cc:(bcc: John Naylor/HAV/SSE)
> Subject:  Re: Client tries to backup non-existing files
>
> >12/19/02   04:43:43 ANS1228E Sending of object '/bla/bla/file' failed
> >
> >Every night the client complains about the same files.
> >
> >And now for the bizarre part: According to our
> >customer these files have been removed from
> >the client some time ago...
>
> Hmmm... I wonder if the Sending error might be the client having seen
> the name in the active-files list it got from the server at the start
> of the backup and, not having found the file in the client file system,
> is trying to incite an Expire, but is having trouble communicating that
> file name to the server (odd characters, etc.).  Keep in mind that many
> message-issuance routines expect normalcy in the strings they handle,
> and neither look for nor deal with inadvertent non-displayable, binary
> characters.  That kind of thing can always throw off an investigation:
> what you see is not the reality.
>
>   Richard Sims, BU
>
> **
> The information in this E-Mail is confidential and may be legally
> privileged. It may not represent the views of Scottish and Southern
> Energy plc.
> It is intended solely for the addressees. Access to this E-Mail by
> anyone else is unauthorised. If you are not the intended recipient,
> any disclosure, copying, distribution or any action taken or omitted
> to be taken in reliance on it, is prohibited and may be unlawful.
> Any unauthorised recipient should advise the sender immediately of
> the error in transmission.
>
> Scottish Hydro-Electric, Southern Electric, SWALEC and S+S
> are trading names of the Scottish and Southern Energy Group.
> **

--
---
Alexander Verkooijen([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Senior Systems Programmer
SARA High Performance Computing

Re: Client tries to backup non-existing files

[Alexander Verkooyen]

Mark Stapleton wrote:

> Well, there's part of the problem there. '*' is an invalid character for
> a filename in any UNIX system I've ever heard of. Such filenames appear
> from time to time when using misconfigured moves and copies.
>
> Get the box's owner to rename the files so that the '*' doesn't appear
> anymore. Such as:
>
> mv my?file.txt my_file.txt

I'm afraid that it will be quite difficult
to rename the files since they no longer
exist.

Kind regards,

Alexander

--
---
Alexander Verkooijen([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Senior Systems Programmer
SARA High Performance Computing

Re: Client tries to backup non-existing files

[Alexander Verkooyen]

Richard,

Yes, you might be right. I've started a SQL query
to find out if the server still thinks the
files are active.

Best regards,

Alexander

Richard Sims wrote:

> Hmmm... I wonder if the Sending error might be the client having seen
> the name in the active-files list it got from the server at the start
> of the backup and, not having found the file in the client file system,
> is trying to incite an Expire, but is having trouble communicating that
> file name to the server (odd characters, etc.).  Keep in mind that many
> message-issuance routines expect normalcy in the strings they handle,
> and neither look for nor deal with inadvertent non-displayable, binary
> characters.  That kind of thing can always throw off an investigation:
> what you see is not the reality.
>
>   Richard Sims, BU

--
---
Alexander Verkooijen([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Senior Systems Programmer
SARA High Performance Computing

Re: Client tries to backup non-existing files

[Alexander Verkooyen]

John Naylor wrote:
>
> I have exactly the same issue with a couple of my clients (netware).
>  The files no longer exist on the client, but I see many ANS1228E failure
> messages.
> However the backup completes successfully with the failures totalled in the
> Activity statistics.
> I would suggest that you take it up with IBM, but I see that although your
> server is supported your client is down level, so you might not get very far.

I agree. That is why I posted this to the list. The first thing
support is going to tell me is "upgrade your client to the latest
level" and I don't want to bother our customer with an upgrade
when it doesn't solve his problem.

But when all else fails, upgrading may be the only solution.

Thanks for your reply.

Best regards,

Alexander


> I would raise it myself but both mine are unsupported client levels , with the
> clients due for replacement.
>
> Imre Csatlos <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> on 12/19/2002 02:59:04 PM
>
> Please respond to "ADSM: Dist Stor Manager" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>
> To:   [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> cc:(bcc: John Naylor/HAV/SSE)
> Subject:  Re: Client tries to backup non-existing files
>
> Hi,
>
> Is yout client backing up the whole file system or just specific files?
> Like 'dsmc inc "/bla/bla/my*files.txt`
>
> Also you can try umount and fsck for those file system, but I suspect the
> problem is somewhere in the
> backup file specifications.
>
> If all the other files are backed up apart from those "missing" files, then
> the backup is successfull afterall. :)
>
> Regards,
> Imre Csatlos
>
> -Original Message-
> From: Alexander Verkooyen [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: 2002. december 19. 15:11
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: Client tries to backup non-existing files
>
> Hi all,
>
> I have a rather bizarre problem.
>
> One of our customers tries to backup a
> file system on a Solaris 5.8 system
> using a 4.1.2.0 TSM client.
>
> Our server is 4.2.3.1 on AIX 4.3.3.0
>
> Every night the backup fails because
> the client is unable to backup hundreds
> of files. The log file is filled with
> messages like these:
>
> 12/19/02   04:43:43 ANS1228E Sending of object '/bla/bla/file' failed
>
> Every night the client complains about the same files.
>
> And now for the bizarre part: According to our
> customer these files have been removed from
> the client some time ago. They are no longer present
> on the disks of the system. And yet the client
> tries to backup them (and because they are not there
> any more it fails).
>
> I found one strange thing about these ghost files:
> Their names contain an *
>
> For example: my*file.txt
>
> Has anybody seen this before? I can't find anything in
> the FAQ or the archives about a similar problem.
>
> Regards,
>
> Alexander
> --
> ---
> Alexander Verkooijen([EMAIL PROTECTED])
> Senior Systems Programmer
> SARA High Performance Computing
>
> **
> The information in this E-Mail is confidential and may be legally
> privileged. It may not represent the views of Scottish and Southern
> Energy plc.
> It is intended solely for the addressees. Access to this E-Mail by
> anyone else is unauthorised. If you are not the intended recipient,
> any disclosure, copying, distribution or any action taken or omitted
> to be taken in reliance on it, is prohibited and may be unlawful.
> Any unauthorised recipient should advise the sender immediately of
> the error in transmission.
>
> Scottish Hydro-Electric, Southern Electric, SWALEC and S+S
> are trading names of the Scottish and Southern Energy Group.
> **

--
---
Alexander Verkooijen([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Senior Systems Programmer
SARA High Performance Computing

Re: Client tries to backup non-existing files

[Alexander Verkooyen]

Hi,

Imre Csatlos wrote:

> Is yout client backing up the whole file system or just specific files?
> Like 'dsmc inc "/bla/bla/my*files.txt`

They are making a backup of the whole file system like 'dsmc i /bla'

> Also you can try umount and fsck for those file system, but I suspect the
> problem is somewhere in the
> backup file specifications.

We are certainly going to ask them to do a fsck,
but I also suspect that the * in the file names is causing this.

> If all the other files are backed up apart from those "missing" files, then
> the backup is successfull afterall. :)

Yes, you're right. All the other files in the file system are
backed up so we do have a good backup of this file system.
We just want to get rid of those error messages.

Thanks for your reply.

Kind regards,

Alexander

>
> Regards,
>     Imre Csatlos
>
> -Original Message-
> From: Alexander Verkooyen [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: 2002. december 19. 15:11
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: Client tries to backup non-existing files
>
> Hi all,
>
> I have a rather bizarre problem.
>
> One of our customers tries to backup a
> file system on a Solaris 5.8 system
> using a 4.1.2.0 TSM client.
>
> Our server is 4.2.3.1 on AIX 4.3.3.0
>
> Every night the backup fails because
> the client is unable to backup hundreds
> of files. The log file is filled with
> messages like these:
>
> 12/19/02   04:43:43 ANS1228E Sending of object '/bla/bla/file' failed
>
> Every night the client complains about the same files.
>
> And now for the bizarre part: According to our
> customer these files have been removed from
> the client some time ago. They are no longer present
> on the disks of the system. And yet the client
> tries to backup them (and because they are not there
> any more it fails).
>
> I found one strange thing about these ghost files:
> Their names contain an *
>
> For example: my*file.txt
>
> Has anybody seen this before? I can't find anything in
> the FAQ or the archives about a similar problem.
>
> Regards,
>
> Alexander
> --
> ---
> Alexander Verkooijen([EMAIL PROTECTED])
> Senior Systems Programmer
> SARA High Performance Computing

--
---
Alexander Verkooijen([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Senior Systems Programmer
SARA High Performance Computing

Client tries to backup non-existing files

[Alexander Verkooyen]

Hi all,

I have a rather bizarre problem.

One of our customers tries to backup a
file system on a Solaris 5.8 system
using a 4.1.2.0 TSM client.

Our server is 4.2.3.1 on AIX 4.3.3.0

Every night the backup fails because
the client is unable to backup hundreds
of files. The log file is filled with
messages like these:

12/19/02   04:43:43 ANS1228E Sending of object '/bla/bla/file' failed

Every night the client complains about the same files.

And now for the bizarre part: According to our
customer these files have been removed from
the client some time ago. They are no longer present
on the disks of the system. And yet the client
tries to backup them (and because they are not there
any more it fails).

I found one strange thing about these ghost files:
Their names contain an *

For example: my*file.txt

Has anybody seen this before? I can't find anything in
the FAQ or the archives about a similar problem.

Regards,

Alexander
--
---
Alexander Verkooijen([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Senior Systems Programmer
SARA High Performance Computing

Re: Two Windows backup questions (repost)

[Alexander Verkooyen]

Interesting, I didn't know that.

Regards,

Alexander

"Loon, E.J. van - SPLXM" wrote:
>
> Hi Alexander!
> Unfortunately that doesn't say that all files are backed up. My Windows NT
> machine also has a SYSTEM OBJECT filespace on the TSM server. However, it
> only contains the registry files and the event log. The presence of the
> SYSTEM OBJECT filespace does not guarantee that it contains all system
> object files.
> Kindest regards,
> Eric van Loon
> KLM Royal Dutch Airlines
>
> -Original Message-
> From: Alexander Verkooyen [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Monday, December 09, 2002 15:14
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: Re: Two Windows backup questions (repost)
>
> Hi Eric,
>
> We did some tests on Windows XP (not 2000). When we
> did an incremental backup on a system without a
> DOMAIN statement in dsm.opt a file space of
> the type "SYSTEM OBJECT" would appear on the
> TSM server for this node.
>
> So I think one can assume that the system object
> is included by default.
>
> Best regards,
>
> Alexander
>
> "Loon, E.J. van - SPLXM" wrote:
> >
> > Hi Alexander!
> > I know the registry files are included by default, but are the system
> > objects on Windows 2000?
> > Kindest regards,
> > Eric van Loon
> > KLM Royal Dutch Airlines
> >
> > -Original Message-
> > From: Alexander Verkooyen [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> > Sent: Monday, December 09, 2002 14:16
> > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > Subject: Re: Two Windows backup questions (repost)
> >
> > "Loon, E.J. van - SPLXM" wrote:
> > >
> > > Hi *SM-ers!
> > > This is a repost because I did not receive any answer about a week ago.
> > > I have two Windows related questions:
> > >
> > > 1) When running an incremental, TSM backs up the registry files by
> > default.
> > > We are soon going to add several Windows 2000 client which use Active
> > > Directory. I read in the manual that Active Directory is part of the
> > System
> > > Objects which can be backed up using the BACKUP SYSTEMOBJECT command.
> So,
> > if
> > > I'm reading things correctly one has to issue both commands ('dsmc i'
> and
> > > 'dsmc backup systemobject') for a complete backup?
> >
> > In my experience the system object is included
> > in the incremental backup by default
> > as long as no DOMAIN is specified in dsm.opt
> >
> > Regards,
> >
> > Alexander
> > --
> > ---
> > Alexander Verkooijen([EMAIL PROTECTED])
> > Senior Systems Programmer
> > SARA High Performance Computing
> >
> > **
> > For information, services and offers, please visit our web site:
> http://www.klm.com. This e-mail and any attachment may contain confidential
> and privileged material intended for the addressee only. If you are not the
> addressee, you are notified that no part of the e-mail or any attachment may
> be disclosed, copied or distributed, and that any other action related to
> this e-mail or attachment is strictly prohibited, and may be unlawful. If
> you have received this e-mail by error, please notify the sender immediately
> by return e-mail, and delete this message. Koninklijke Luchtvaart
> Maatschappij NV (KLM), its subsidiaries and/or its employees shall not be
> liable for the incorrect or incomplete transmission of this e-mail or any
> attachments, nor responsible for any delay in receipt.
> > **
>
> --
> ---
> Alexander Verkooijen([EMAIL PROTECTED])
> Senior Systems Programmer
> SARA High Performance Computing

--
---
Alexander Verkooijen([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Senior Systems Programmer
SARA High Performance Computing

Re: Two Windows backup questions (repost)

[Alexander Verkooyen]

Hi Eric,

We did some tests on Windows XP (not 2000). When we
did an incremental backup on a system without a
DOMAIN statement in dsm.opt a file space of
the type "SYSTEM OBJECT" would appear on the
TSM server for this node.

So I think one can assume that the system object
is included by default.

Best regards,

Alexander

"Loon, E.J. van - SPLXM" wrote:
>
> Hi Alexander!
> I know the registry files are included by default, but are the system
> objects on Windows 2000?
> Kindest regards,
> Eric van Loon
> KLM Royal Dutch Airlines
>
> -Original Message-
> From: Alexander Verkooyen [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Monday, December 09, 2002 14:16
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: Re: Two Windows backup questions (repost)
>
> "Loon, E.J. van - SPLXM" wrote:
> >
> > Hi *SM-ers!
> > This is a repost because I did not receive any answer about a week ago.
> > I have two Windows related questions:
> >
> > 1) When running an incremental, TSM backs up the registry files by
> default.
> > We are soon going to add several Windows 2000 client which use Active
> > Directory. I read in the manual that Active Directory is part of the
> System
> > Objects which can be backed up using the BACKUP SYSTEMOBJECT command. So,
> if
> > I'm reading things correctly one has to issue both commands ('dsmc i' and
> > 'dsmc backup systemobject') for a complete backup?
>
> In my experience the system object is included
> in the incremental backup by default
> as long as no DOMAIN is specified in dsm.opt
>
> Regards,
>
> Alexander
> --
> ---
> Alexander Verkooijen([EMAIL PROTECTED])
> Senior Systems Programmer
> SARA High Performance Computing
>
> **
> For information, services and offers, please visit our web site: http://www.klm.com. 
>This e-mail and any attachment may contain confidential and privileged material 
>intended for the addressee only. If you are not the addressee, you are notified that 
>no part of the e-mail or any attachment may be disclosed, copied or distributed, and 
>that any other action related to this e-mail or attachment is strictly prohibited, 
>and may be unlawful. If you have received this e-mail by error, please notify the 
>sender immediately by return e-mail, and delete this message. Koninklijke Luchtvaart 
>Maatschappij NV (KLM), its subsidiaries and/or its employees shall not be liable for 
>the incorrect or incomplete transmission of this e-mail or any attachments, nor 
>responsible for any delay in receipt.
> **

--
---
Alexander Verkooijen([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Senior Systems Programmer
SARA High Performance Computing

Re: Two Windows backup questions (repost)

[Alexander Verkooyen]

"Loon, E.J. van - SPLXM" wrote:
>
> Hi *SM-ers!
> This is a repost because I did not receive any answer about a week ago.
> I have two Windows related questions:
>
> 1) When running an incremental, TSM backs up the registry files by default.
> We are soon going to add several Windows 2000 client which use Active
> Directory. I read in the manual that Active Directory is part of the System
> Objects which can be backed up using the BACKUP SYSTEMOBJECT command. So, if
> I'm reading things correctly one has to issue both commands ('dsmc i' and
> 'dsmc backup systemobject') for a complete backup?

In my experience the system object is included
in the incremental backup by default
as long as no DOMAIN is specified in dsm.opt

Regards,

Alexander
--
---
Alexander Verkooijen([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Senior Systems Programmer
SARA High Performance Computing

Re: Admin Help text is wrapping..

[Alexander Verkooyen]

I followed Eric's advise and used smitty
to install the message filesets that weren't
installed last night (no need to de-install
and re-install the server, although that works
too).

Everything works fine now.

Thanks,

Alexander

> 4.2.2.7 on a Netstor box help upd looks normal...
>
>
> -Original Message-----
> From: Alexander Verkooyen [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Tuesday, July 30, 2002 7:07 AM
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: Re: Admin Help text is wrapping..
>
>
> Hi,
>
> We upgraded from 4.2.1.11 to 4.2.2.7 (AIX 4.3.3 ML 10) last night and
> we are having the same problem now.
>
>
> Alexander
>
> > Hi all,
> >  we've just upgraded our TSM server to 5.1.1 and we are having
> problems with
> > the command line help function. When entering 'HELP UPD' via the TSM Admin
> > command line, the server replies with the following format text...
> >
> > tsm: ADSM>help upd
> > UPDATE Commands||UPDATE Commands||Use the UPDATE command to modify one or
> more
> > attributes of an existing TSM|object.||The following is a list of UPDATE
> > commands
> > for TSM:|| UPDATE ADMIN (Update an Administrator)| UPDATE
> BACKUPSET
> > (Update a Retention Value Assigned to a Backup Set)| UPDATE CLIENTOPT
> > (Update
> > a Client Option Sequence Number)| UPDATE CLOPTSET (Update a Client
> Option
> > Set
> > Description)| UPDATE COPYGROUP (Update a Copy Group)| UPDATE
> DATAMOVER
> > (Update a Data Mover)| UPDATE DBBACKUPTRIGGER (Update the Database
> Backup
> > Trigger)| UPDATE DEVCLASS (Update the Attributes of a Device Class)|
> > UPDATE DOMAIN (Update a Policy Domain)| UPDATE DRIVE (Update a Drive)|
> > UPDATE LIBRARY (Update a Library)| UPDATE LIBVOLUME (Change the Status
> of a
> > Storage Volume)| UPDATE MACHINE (Update Machine Information)|
> UPDATE
> > MGMTCLASS (Update a Management Class)| UPDATE NODE (Update Node
> Attributes)|
> >UPDATE PATH (Change a Path)| UPDATE POLICYSET (Update a Policy Set
> > Description)| UPDATE PROFILE (Update a Profile Description)|
> UPDATE
> > RECOVERYMEDIA (Update Recovery Media)| UPDATE SCHEDULE (Update a
> Schedule)|
> >   UPDATE SCRIPT (Update a Tivoli Storage Manager Script)| UPDATE
> SERVER
> > (Update a Server Defined for Server-to-Server| Communications)|
> UPDATE
> > SERVERGROUP (Update a Server Group Description)| UPDATE SPACETRIGGER
> (Update
> > the Database or Recovery Log Space| Triggers)| UPDATE STGPOOL
> (Update a
> > Storage Pool)| UPDATE VOLHISTORY (Update Sequential Volume History
> > Information)| UPDATE VOLUME (Change a Storage Pool Volume)||
> > tsm: ADSM>
> >
> > It appears that it does not recognise the carriage return character. The
> same
> > happens when entering the command through the command line on the Web
> Interface.
> > It happens on both V5.1 & V3.7 clients.
> >
> > The Server is running TSM 5.1.1 on AIX 4.3.3
> >
> > Does anybody know how to rectify this ?
> >
> > many thanks,
> > Nick Rutherford
> >
> >
> > *
> > This e-mail is confidential and intended solely for the use of the
> > individual to whom it is addressed.  Any views or opinions presented
> > are solely those of the author and do not necessarily represent
> > those of Honda of the UK Manufacturing Ltd.
> >
> > If you are not the intended recipient please notify the sender
> > immediately by return e-mail and then delete this message from your
> > system.  Also be advised that any use, disclosure, forwarding,
> > printing or copying of this e-mail if sent in error is strictly
> > prohibited.  Thank you for your co-operation.
> > *
>
>
> ---
> Alexander Verkooijen([EMAIL PROTECTED])
> Senior Systems Programmer
> SARA High Performance Computing


---
Alexander Verkooijen([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Senior Systems Programmer
SARA High Performance Computing

Re: Admin Help text is wrapping..

[Alexander Verkooyen]

Hi,

We upgraded from 4.2.1.11 to 4.2.2.7 (AIX 4.3.3 ML 10) last night and
we are having the same problem now.


Alexander

> Hi all,
>  we've just upgraded our TSM server to 5.1.1 and we are having problems with
> the command line help function. When entering 'HELP UPD' via the TSM Admin
> command line, the server replies with the following format text...
>
> tsm: ADSM>help upd
> UPDATE Commands||UPDATE Commands||Use the UPDATE command to modify one or more
> attributes of an existing TSM|object.||The following is a list of UPDATE
> commands
> for TSM:|| UPDATE ADMIN (Update an Administrator)| UPDATE BACKUPSET
> (Update a Retention Value Assigned to a Backup Set)| UPDATE CLIENTOPT
> (Update
> a Client Option Sequence Number)| UPDATE CLOPTSET (Update a Client Option
> Set
> Description)| UPDATE COPYGROUP (Update a Copy Group)| UPDATE DATAMOVER
> (Update a Data Mover)| UPDATE DBBACKUPTRIGGER (Update the Database Backup
> Trigger)| UPDATE DEVCLASS (Update the Attributes of a Device Class)|
> UPDATE DOMAIN (Update a Policy Domain)| UPDATE DRIVE (Update a Drive)|
> UPDATE LIBRARY (Update a Library)| UPDATE LIBVOLUME (Change the Status of a
> Storage Volume)| UPDATE MACHINE (Update Machine Information)| UPDATE
> MGMTCLASS (Update a Management Class)| UPDATE NODE (Update Node Attributes)|
>UPDATE PATH (Change a Path)| UPDATE POLICYSET (Update a Policy Set
> Description)| UPDATE PROFILE (Update a Profile Description)| UPDATE
> RECOVERYMEDIA (Update Recovery Media)| UPDATE SCHEDULE (Update a Schedule)|
>   UPDATE SCRIPT (Update a Tivoli Storage Manager Script)| UPDATE SERVER
> (Update a Server Defined for Server-to-Server| Communications)| UPDATE
> SERVERGROUP (Update a Server Group Description)| UPDATE SPACETRIGGER (Update
> the Database or Recovery Log Space| Triggers)| UPDATE STGPOOL (Update a
> Storage Pool)| UPDATE VOLHISTORY (Update Sequential Volume History
> Information)| UPDATE VOLUME (Change a Storage Pool Volume)||
> tsm: ADSM>
>
> It appears that it does not recognise the carriage return character. The same
> happens when entering the command through the command line on the Web Interface.
> It happens on both V5.1 & V3.7 clients.
>
> The Server is running TSM 5.1.1 on AIX 4.3.3
>
> Does anybody know how to rectify this ?
>
> many thanks,
> Nick Rutherford
>
>
> *
> This e-mail is confidential and intended solely for the use of the
> individual to whom it is addressed.  Any views or opinions presented
> are solely those of the author and do not necessarily represent
> those of Honda of the UK Manufacturing Ltd.
>
> If you are not the intended recipient please notify the sender
> immediately by return e-mail and then delete this message from your
> system.  Also be advised that any use, disclosure, forwarding,
> printing or copying of this e-mail if sent in error is strictly
> prohibited.  Thank you for your co-operation.
> *


---
Alexander Verkooijen([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Senior Systems Programmer
SARA High Performance Computing

Re: INCLEXCL not working as expected on Windows XP client

[Alexander Verkooyen]

No, this works as designed.
exclude.dir overrides all include statements.

http://www.tivoli.com/support/public/Prodman/public_manuals/td/TSMC/GC32-0788-0
1/en_US/HTML/ans614.htm#HDRINEXOP

Regards,

Alexander

> We back up some Windows PCs to a TSM 4.1.5.3 server running on AIX 4.3.3.
> We usually restrict the backups to the "C:\My Documents" folder by having
> appropriate INCLEXCL statements in the server's CLIENTOPT set.
> This has been working just fine for Windows 98 clients.
>
> However, with Windows XP clients I have been unable to obtain this
> desired restricted backup policy.  I did install the TSM client 4.2.2.0,
> following the advice on the ADSM list, so Windows XP support should be OK.
> I have done many experiments with the INCLEXCL options, and I believe
> that the following options in the server or client should work:
>
>   EXCLUDE.DIR "C:\*"
>   INCLUDE "C:\Documents and Settings\...\*.*"
>
> The second line backs up documents, whereas the first line excludes
> everything else.  However, on Windows XP the first line apparently
> supercedes the second line, and nothing whatsoever gets backed up !!
> I think this is a fundamental kind of bug.
>
> Can anyone explain why the above example doesn't work as expected ?
> Even better, how do I achieve the policy of backing up only
> the "Documents and Settings" folders ?
>
> Thanks a lot,
> Ole Holm Nielsen
> Department of Physics
> Technical University of Denmark


---
Alexander Verkooijen([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Senior Systems Programmer
SARA High Performance Computing

Re: Antwort: executing commands before backup

[Alexander Verkooyen]

> hrmmm...
> I tried this in the Linux client's dsm.opt file.
>
> preschedulecmd "/path/to/script/vpnstart.sh"
>
> But kept getting this error for that command -
>
> ANS1036S Invalid option 'PRESHCEDULECMD' found in options file
  ^^^

Is this a typo?

Regrads,

Alexander

---
Alexander Verkooijen([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Senior Systems Programmer
SARA High Performance Computing

Re: q sched

[Alexander Verkooyen]

For the admin schedules try:

select schedule_name,active from admin_schedules

regards,

Alexander

> Hi ,
>
> IS there a single command I can use to query  the schedule and find the
> schedules that are not active.
>
> I did
>
> q sched type=admin f=d
>
> but I just want to see the name of the schedule and active?=yes/ no
>
> is it possible ? I'm sure it is and I believe some SQL statement can do it -
> wondering if anyone is having handy statement...?
>
> with regards,
>
> CAUTION - This message may contain privileged and confidential information intended 
>only for the use of the addressee named above. If you are not the intended recipient 
>of this message you are hereby notified that any use, dissemination, distribution or 
>reproduction of this message is prohibited. If you have received this message in 
>error please notify AMCOR immediately. Any views expressed in this message are those 
>of the individual sender and may not necessarily reflect the views of AMCOR.


---
Alexander Verkooijen([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Senior Systems Programmer
SARA High Performance Computing

Re: Migrating data from other applications

[Alexander Verkooyen]

Restore the data, move it to a system on which a TSM client
is installed and start a TSM backup.
(assuming you still have access to the hardware/software
which was used to backup the data in the past)

Regards,

Alexander

> Hi!
>
> Does anyone have any tips on how they migrated their archived or 'long term
> retention' backup data from other backup applications?  We have multiple
> years worth of data and on various tape formats.
>
> Thanks in advance for any information you can provide.
>
> Brenda Collins,
> ING
> 612-342-3839


---
Alexander Verkooijen([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Senior Systems Programmer
SARA High Performance Computing

Re: Script for active data ...

[Alexander Verkooyen]

Just a thought, wouldn't it be easier to look on
the node itself how much data the disks hold?
Should be equal to the amount of active data
on tape, more or less.

Alexander

> Hi
>
> Did anyone write a script/macro to calculate the amount of active data for a
> node/filesystem 
> When I run a Q OCC nodeid filesystemid I got the total of data active and
> inactive version.
>
> T.I.A Regards
>
> Robert Ouzen


---
Alexander Verkooijen([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Senior Systems Programmer
SARA High Performance Computing

Re: TSM server problem

[Alexander Verkooyen]

Yes, we also expected to see I/O errors, but there were no
errors on the drives or the tapes.
The last process that mounted the tapes was a
backup stg.

Alexander

(The original message was written by me, but sent by Henk
due to a problem with my subscription to this list yesterday)

> Are you seeing any I/O errors on these tapes or errors on
> the drives?  What type of process was mounting the tapes -
> backup stg, reclamation etc.?
>  
> David Longo
>  
> >>> [EMAIL PROTECTED] 06/20/02 11:17AM >>>
> I couldn't find an APAR that describes what we have been seeing
> on our 4.2.1.11 (AIX 4.3.3) server during the last few weeks
> so I was wondering if we have discovered new bug.
>  
> First we got this message in the activity log:
>  
> 06/09/02   10:39:38  ANR1229W Volume 000591 cannot be backed up - volume is
>   offline or access mode is "unavailable" or "destroyed".
>  
> We did a 'q vol f=d'. The access mode of the volume was 'Available'
> so we dismissed it as a freak incident until the message repeated
> itself the next day.
>  
> This time we opened the (3494) library and verified that the
> volume was in the correct cell.
>  
> We tried a 'restore volume' followed by a 'delete volume'.
> The delete failed:
>  
> ANR2405E DELETE VOLUME: Volume 000591 is currently in use by
> clients and/or data management operations.
> ANS8001I Return code 14.
>  
> At that time there were no processes or sessions that used
> that particular volume. Also we had four other volumes
> that displayed the same behaviour.
> We halted the server and restarted it again which solved
> the problem. The volumes were no longer 'in use'.
> Today we noticed two other volumes that seem to have
> the same problem so I'm beginning to suspect that I've found
> a bug in the server.
>  
> All these volumes have one thing in common: When I seacrh
> the activity log for their mounts and dismounts I can't
> find a dismount message after their last mount (before they
> become 'unavailable'). It is as if the volumes are unmounted
> by the library but TSM isn't being notified of this.
>  
> Anyone seen this before?
>  
> Cheers,
> Henk.
>  
>  
>  
> "MMS " made the following
>  annotations on 06/20/2002 01:12:23 PM
> --
> This message is for the named person's use only.  It may contain confidential, 
>proprietary, or legally privileged information.  No confidentiality or privilege is 
>waived or lost by any mistransmission.  If you receive this message in error, please 
>immediately delete it and all copies of it from your system, destroy any hard copies 
>of it, and notify the sender.  You must not, directly or indirectly, use, disclose, 
>distribute, print, or copy any part of this message if you are not the intended 
>recipient.  Health First reserves the right to monitor all e-mail communications 
>through its networks.  Any views or opinions expressed in this message are solely 
>those of the individual sender, except (1) where the message states such views or 
>opinions are on behalf of a particular entity;  and (2) the sender is authorized by 
>the entity to give such views or opinions.
>  
> ÿÿ


---
Alexander Verkooijen([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Senior Systems Programmer
SARA High Performance Computing

Re: TSM server problem

[Alexander Verkooyen]

Hi,

Thanks for the suggestion. We didn't find any failed dismounts
of these volumes. (or any successful ones for that matter).

Regards,

Alexander

(The original message was written by me, but sent by Henk)

> Look for msgno=8469 and see if the dismounts have been failing.  I get this
> kind of behavior occasionally and have found that the dismount fails
> (hardware problem) and TSM transiently reports volumes unavailable.
>
>
>
>
>
> Henk ten Have
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]   To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> >cc:
> Sent by: Subject: TSM server problem
> "ADSM: Dist
> Stor Manager"
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> IST.EDU>
>
>
> 06/20/2002
> 10:17 AM
> Please respond
> to "ADSM: Dist
> Stor Manager"
>
>
>
>
>
>
> I couldn't find an APAR that describes what we have been seeing
> on our 4.2.1.11 (AIX 4.3.3) server during the last few weeks
> so I was wondering if we have discovered new bug.
>
> First we got this message in the activity log:
>
> 06/09/02   10:39:38  ANR1229W Volume 000591 cannot be backed up - volume is
>   offline or access mode is "unavailable" or
> "destroyed".
>
> We did a 'q vol f=d'. The access mode of the volume was 'Available'
> so we dismissed it as a freak incident until the message repeated
> itself the next day.
>
> This time we opened the (3494) library and verified that the
> volume was in the correct cell.
>
> We tried a 'restore volume' followed by a 'delete volume'.
> The delete failed:
>
> ANR2405E DELETE VOLUME: Volume 000591 is currently in use by
> clients and/or data management operations.
> ANS8001I Return code 14.
>
> At that time there were no processes or sessions that used
> that particular volume. Also we had four other volumes
> that displayed the same behaviour.
> We halted the server and restarted it again which solved
> the problem. The volumes were no longer 'in use'.
> Today we noticed two other volumes that seem to have
> the same problem so I'm beginning to suspect that I've found
> a bug in the server.
>
> All these volumes have one thing in common: When I seacrh
> the activity log for their mounts and dismounts I can't
> find a dismount message after their last mount (before they
> become 'unavailable'). It is as if the volumes are unmounted
> by the library but TSM isn't being notified of this.
>
> Anyone seen this before?
>
> Cheers,
> Henk.


---
Alexander Verkooijen([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Senior Systems Programmer
SARA High Performance Computing

Re: TSM server problem

[Alexander Verkooyen]

Thanks for the explanation! We'll probably upgrade to get
rid of this problem.
You're right, restarting the server solves the problem
temporarily but that is not something we want to do
on a regular basis. (had to restart dsmserv again this morning
to free two tapes)

Thanks again,

Alexander

(The original message was written by me but posted by Henk)

> I have seen similar things.  You have to put on 4.2.2 to correct this
> problem.  However, a recycle of the dsmserv will fix the problem.  The issue
> manifests itself in several ways.  I have only seen the problem once.  I am
> still on 4.2.1.15 which partially fixes the problem.  The problem is caused
> by a bunch of idle drives dismounting at the same time.  Apparently, there
> were some threading of updates to instorage control blocks that get hosed.
>
> Paul D. Seay, Jr.
> Technical Specialist
> Naptheon, INC
> 757-688-8180
>
>
> -Original Message-
> From: Henk ten Have [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Thursday, June 20, 2002 11:17 AM
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: TSM server problem
>
>
> I couldn't find an APAR that describes what we have been seeing on our
> 4.2.1.11 (AIX 4.3.3) server during the last few weeks so I was wondering if
> we have discovered new bug.
>
> First we got this message in the activity log:
>
> 06/09/02   10:39:38  ANR1229W Volume 000591 cannot be backed up - volume is
>   offline or access mode is "unavailable" or
> "destroyed".
>
> We did a 'q vol f=d'. The access mode of the volume was 'Available' so we
> dismissed it as a freak incident until the message repeated itself the next
> day.
>
> This time we opened the (3494) library and verified that the volume was in
> the correct cell.
>
> We tried a 'restore volume' followed by a 'delete volume'.
> The delete failed:
>
> ANR2405E DELETE VOLUME: Volume 000591 is currently in use by clients and/or
> data management operations. ANS8001I Return code 14.
>
> At that time there were no processes or sessions that used
> that particular volume. Also we had four other volumes
> that displayed the same behaviour.
> We halted the server and restarted it again which solved
> the problem. The volumes were no longer 'in use'.
> Today we noticed two other volumes that seem to have
> the same problem so I'm beginning to suspect that I've found
> a bug in the server.
>
> All these volumes have one thing in common: When I seacrh
> the activity log for their mounts and dismounts I can't
> find a dismount message after their last mount (before they become
> 'unavailable'). It is as if the volumes are unmounted by the library but TSM
> isn't being notified of this.
>
> Anyone seen this before?
>
> Cheers,
> Henk.


---
Alexander Verkooijen([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Senior Systems Programmer
SARA High Performance Computing

Re: Undocumented messages - Convert archive?

[Alexander Verkooyen]

Hi,

Thanks for the reply.
We tried that, but there is no help text
available for these messages.

Regards,

Alexander

"Williams, Tim P {PBSG}" wrote:
> 
> I'm one level back, but try on a server, admin command line
> help anrmsg#   like help anr4392i
> 
> tsm: ADSM>help anr4389i
> 
> ---
> 
> ANR4389I Expiration process cancelled.
> 
> Explanation: The CANCEL EXPIRATION command was issued and successfully
> cancelled the current process.
> 
> System Action: Server operation continues.
> 
> User Response: None.
> 
> -Original Message-
> From: Stumpf, Joachim [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Friday, March 01, 2002 5:42 AM
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: Re: Undocumented messages - Convert archive?
> 
> 
> we got the same messages in our environment (TSM Server on OS/390)...
> it would be nice if someone can shed some light into this ...
> 
> --
> regards / Mit freundlichen Gruessen
> Joachim Stumpf
> Datev eG
> Nuremberg - Germany
> 
> 
> Alexander Verkooyen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> (Freitag,  1. März 2002, 12:16:01,
> CET):
> 
> > Hello,
> >
> > Yesterday we got some undocumented messages in
> > our server (4.2.1.11, AIX 4.3.3) activity log.
> > One of clients (4.2.1.20, Windows NT) finished
> > it's backup and then these messages appeared:
> >
> > 02/28/02   10:42:34  ANR0984I Process 282 for CONVERT ARCHIVE started in
> > the
> >   BACKGROUND at
> > 10:42:34.
> > 02/28/02   10:42:35  ANR4392I Audit of the Arch.Description.Objects
> > table for
> >   NODEBLAH completed (0):  found 0 directories and
> > files
> >   (0 inserted prior to Version 3), 0 object sets.
> > Deleted:
> >   0 directories and files, and 0 object
> > sets.
> > 02/28/02   10:42:35  ANR4393I Audit of the Description table for
> > NODEBLAH
> >   completed (0):  found 0 descriptions, 0
> > directories and
> >   files (0 inserted prior to Version 3), 0 object
> > sets.
> >   Deleted: 0 descriptions, 0 directories and files,
> > and 0
> >   object
> > sets.
> > 02/28/02   10:42:35  ANR4394I Audit with the archive table for
> > NODEBLAH
> >   completed (0).  The description tables have 0
> > directories
> >   and files, 0 object sets. Inserted: 0 directories
> > and
> >   files, and 0 object
> > sets.
> > 02/28/02   10:42:35  ANR0911I Conversion for NODEBLAH completed
> > (successful).
> >The description tables have 0 directories and
> > files, 0
> >   object sets.  Conversion inserted 0 directories
> > and
> >   files, and 0 object
> > sets.
> > 02/28/02   10:42:35  ANR0985I Process 282 for CONVERT ARCHIVE running in
> > the
> >   BACKGROUND completed with completion state SUCCESS
> > at
> >
> > 10:42:35.
> >
> > ANR4392I, ANR4393I and ANR4394I are listed in the messages manual
> > as "Messages not appearing in this publication"
> > ANR09841I and ANR0985I are documented, but they just tell
> > that a process has been started and has been completed.
> >
> > Does anybody if we should be worried or can
> > we just ignore these undocumented messages?
> >
> > TIA,
> >
> > Alexander
> > --
> > ---
> > Alexander Verkooijen([EMAIL PROTECTED])
> > Senior Systems Programmer
> > SARA High Performance Computing
> >

-- 
---
Alexander Verkooijen([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Senior Systems Programmer
SARA High Performance Computing

Re: TSM 4.2.1.10 Release to public

[Alexander Verkooyen]

We installed 4.2.1.11 last week. (on AIX 4.3.3)
It seems to be stable.

"Seay, Paul" wrote:
>
> Heck, 4.2.1.11 is out.
>
> -Original Message-
> From: Malbrough, Demetrius [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Friday, March 01, 2002 11:00 AM
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: Re: TSM 4.2.1.10 Release to public
>
>
> For AIX patch 4.2.1.10 is already released as of 02/01/02...
>
> ftp://service.boulder.ibm.com/storage/tivoli-storage-management/patches/serv
> er/AIX/
>
> Regards,
>
> Demetrius
>
> -Original Message-
> From: Tait, Joel [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Friday, March 01, 2002 9:40 AM
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: TSM 4.2.1.10 Release to public
>
>
> When is TSM 4.2.1.10 going to be released to the public TSM ftp site?
>
> I understand from a previous e-mail on this form, it was available on a
> password access site.
>
> Thanks
>
> Joel E. Tait
> Canada Customs & Revenue Agency
> Information Technology Branch
> Technology Operations and Client Support
> Distributed Technology and Infrastructure Management Distributed SAN / Unix
> Services Room 3166 HQ, 875 Heron Road Ottawa, Ontario, K1A 0L5 *Office (613)
> 941-8416 *Pager (613) 780-7605 *Fax (613) 952-6506
> * 
>
>  <>

--
---
Alexander Verkooijen([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Senior Systems Programmer
SARA High Performance Computing

Undocumented messages - Convert archive?

[Alexander Verkooyen]

Hello,

Yesterday we got some undocumented messages in
our server (4.2.1.11, AIX 4.3.3) activity log.
One of clients (4.2.1.20, Windows NT) finished
it's backup and then these messages appeared:

02/28/02   10:42:34  ANR0984I Process 282 for CONVERT ARCHIVE started in
the
  BACKGROUND at
10:42:34.
02/28/02   10:42:35  ANR4392I Audit of the Arch.Description.Objects
table for
  NODEBLAH completed (0):  found 0 directories and
files
  (0 inserted prior to Version 3), 0 object sets.
Deleted:
  0 directories and files, and 0 object
sets.
02/28/02   10:42:35  ANR4393I Audit of the Description table for
NODEBLAH
  completed (0):  found 0 descriptions, 0
directories and
  files (0 inserted prior to Version 3), 0 object
sets.
  Deleted: 0 descriptions, 0 directories and files,
and 0
  object
sets.
02/28/02   10:42:35  ANR4394I Audit with the archive table for
NODEBLAH
  completed (0).  The description tables have 0
directories
  and files, 0 object sets. Inserted: 0 directories
and
  files, and 0 object
sets.
02/28/02   10:42:35  ANR0911I Conversion for NODEBLAH completed
(successful).
   The description tables have 0 directories and
files, 0
  object sets.  Conversion inserted 0 directories
and
  files, and 0 object
sets.
02/28/02   10:42:35  ANR0985I Process 282 for CONVERT ARCHIVE running in
the
  BACKGROUND completed with completion state SUCCESS
at

10:42:35.

ANR4392I, ANR4393I and ANR4394I are listed in the messages manual
as "Messages not appearing in this publication"
ANR09841I and ANR0985I are documented, but they just tell
that a process has been started and has been completed.

Does anybody if we should be worried or can
we just ignore these undocumented messages?

TIA,

Alexander
--
---
Alexander Verkooijen([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Senior Systems Programmer
SARA High Performance Computing