Re: Large Linux clients
An old trick I used for many years:
to investigate a problem filesystem, do a find in that filesystem.
If the find dies, tsm definitly will die.
I'll bet your find will die, and that's why your backup will die/hang or
whatever also. A find will do a filestat on all files/dirs, actually the same
the backup does.
So your issue is OS related and not tsm.
Cheers
Henk ()
On Tuesday 29 March 2005 12:11, you wrote:
On Mar 29, 2005, at 12:37 PM, Zoltan Forray/AC/VCU wrote:
...However, then I try to backup the tree at the third-level (e.g.
/coyote/dsk3/), the client pretty much siezes immediately and
dsmerror.log
says B/A Txn Producer Thread, fatal error, Signal 11. The server
shows
the session as SendW and nothing going else going on
Zoltan -
Signal 11 is a segfault - a software failure.
The client programming has a defect, which may be incited by a problem
in that area of the file system (so have that investigated). A segfault
can be induced by memory constraint, which in this context would most
likely be Unix Resource Limits, so also enter the command 'limit' in
Linux csh or tcsh and potentially boost the stack size ('unlimit
stacksize'). This is to say that the client was probably invoked under
artificially limited environmentals.
Richard Sims
Re: TSM and SATA Disk Pools
If anyone here has an inroad to whomever administers this mailing list, an intervention would be most welcome. Richard? Cheers, Henk ten Have (a typical Calling a Richard...;)
Re: TSM and SATA Disk Pools
The List administrator (Martha McConaghy) can be reached via the List's official web page, http://www2.marist.edu/htbin/wlvindex?adsm-l . Well, I knew it was a typical Calling a Richard Richard Sims in the Pilgrims state (where they landed at Provincetown, on the tip of Cape Cod, only later moving on to Plymouth) Cheers, Henk ten Have in the Lincoln state (where I landed at Chicago, on the tip of Lake Michigan, only later moved on to Champaign.)
Re: Weird tape utilization
Well, it took some time convincing Level 2 support, but IBM has opened APAR IC43086 for this behavior! Eric - you'v better luck then I had many years ago (when I mentioned this problem to IBM). So, in the future we don't have to run the SQL statement down below anymore. Good thing, because it runs for 9 hours in my shop! A nasty side affect is that it puts a lock on your storage pool which causes all storage pool update commands to hang until the command has finished!! Well, I like to keep things simple and used this script for many years (if I remember well): select volume_name as Volume, days(current_date)-days(last_write_date) as Days since last write, pct_utilized as utilized, stgpool_name as Storage pool name from volumes where status='FILLING' and days(last_write_date) (days(current_date)-14) Runs for a couple of seconds and gives you a list of FILLING tapes not used in 14 days. And then you decide on which tapes you like to run a MOVE DATA. Cheers, Henk ten Have (Izze Zimpel)
Re: Customize GUI
We should ask IBM to publish new Redbook. TSM for Executives You mean TSM for Dummies. Cheers, Henk ten Have Any opinions expressed by the current President of the United States are those of the President and DO NOT reflect the views of the individual sender of this message.
Re: Antwort: Re: each dbbackup to new tape?
The procedure for doing this is documented in the Tivoli manuals. The answer is: run two copies of TSM server, and have them back up their databases to each other. If you have two copies of TSM server, fine. If not, you have to pay for your second copy. I bet it's much cheaper to buy some tapes and send them offline. Cheers, Henk ten Have (back after one year)
Re: ADSM/TSM article in July 2003 Computer Technology Review (wwpi.com)
There is a nice article on the history of TSM (WDSF/ADSM/TSM) in the July 2003 copy of Computer Technology Review... Talking about history, after working for +8 years with ADSM/TSM and being a member of this great list, I'm nearly f.cking history (I'm moving to the USA in September). Thanks to all of you who have been a great help to me in all those years. Have a good one! Cheers, Henk ten Have
Re: Define a command script
On 14-Mar-03 Nicolas Savva wrote: Any ideas for a command script that will take a full backup of db on 3590 tape Command script is a little bit overdone, just make an admin schedule: backup db devclass=3590 type=full Cheers, Henk ten Have
Re: urgent! server is down!
On 12-Mar-03 Michelle Wiedeman wrote: a big kiss for u all! Hmm...I'm to late now with a good advise I guess;-) Cheers, Henk ten Have
Re: 5.1.6.2 Upgrade
My only complaint is the speed of the expiration - it's never fast enough for me. Gretchen, what is your expiration speed? We expire over a million objects per hour (AIX 4.3.3, TSM 4.2.3.3). My only complaint is the speed of the deletion - out of +4 million examined objects, none is deleted the last 5 days.;-) See expiration runs, deletion not done I posted last Monday. Cheers, Henk ten Have.
expiration runs, deletion not done
AIX 4.3.3, TSM 4.2.3.3. Since a couple of days expirations runs, but deletion stops after an error: 02/21/03 14:44:10 ANRD imutil.c(5570): ThreadId100 Bitfile id 0.496165168 not found. 02/21/03 14:44:11 (100) Generating Database Transaction Table Context: 02/21/03 14:44:11 (100) *** no transactions found *** 02/21/03 14:44:11 (100) Generating SM Context Report: 02/21/03 14:44:11 (100) *** no sessions found *** 02/21/03 14:44:11 (100) Generating AS Vol Context Report: 02/21/03 14:44:11 (100) No mounted (or mount in progress) volumes. 02/21/03 14:44:11 (100) Generating ssSession Context Report: 02/21/03 14:44:11 (100) No storage service sessions active. 02/21/03 14:44:11 (100) Generating ssOpenSeg Context Report: 02/21/03 14:44:11 (100) No storage service segments found. 02/21/03 14:44:11 (100) Generating BF Copy Control Context Report: 02/21/03 14:44:11 (100) No global copy control blocks. and a couple of 100 other (silly) messages. 'Normally', if expirations ends before it is finished, the next expiration startes where the last expirations did stop. So, smart as we are (ahum), we stop expiration after the error and restart. But in this case this trick doesn't work. Every expiration starts all over again, hardly deleting anything, hit this error again, continues with examination and stops at the end of his list. Number of examined object is now nearly 4 million, my guess is that at least 3 million should be deleted. Not to mention that we will ran out of tapes pretty soon Cheers, Henk ten Have (completely clueless and not amused)
Re: expiration runs, deletion not done
Henk - Possibly: You could do a Select search on your Backups or Archives tables for that OBJECT_ID, to identify the filespace object involved, and perhaps via Contents determine what tape volume it is on, then do an Audit Volume Fix=Yes ? Richard, I know which filespace is involved (i.e. the last ANR4391 before the error starts). I try (tomorrow) to find the tape volume. At least it's a good try to give an audit volume a chance. I'm curious: Did you do a CANcel EXPIration or CANcel PRocess ? Actually I did a CANcel PRocess. I tried now a CANcel EXPIration. Guess what? Expiration don't start ALL over, but keeps starting a couple of dozen filespaces BEFORE the one which gives the error. I'll be damned Anyway, you give me some things to try, thanks. I'll let you know about my experience the next days. Cheers, Henk (next days? Don't think so, tomorrow...before we ran out of tape volumes)
Re: TSM v.4.2.3.2 server on AIX
David, We did note that TSM v.4.2.3.3 server patch was released on Friday though. Does anybody know if there are any problems of mysterious or unexplained crashing that existed within the 4.2.3.2 code set? On Tuesday 15th Jan (when we went to 4.2.3.3) we had exactly the same problems, which I mentioned here btw. On Monday 27th Jan I wrote (here): AIX 4.3.3.0, TSM 4.2.3.2. Since we'r running this level, server crashes at least once every day. Tivoli wrote me: === ACTION TAKEN: I have reviewed the status update. This trace back appears to match IC35420 which is currently scheduled to be included in the 4.2.3.4. The current estimate for availability of 4.2.3.3 is end of the month. This is only an estimate and is subject to revision if necessary. === Last Friday 4.2.3.3 became available: ** ** * * $$4233 Fixes delivered in patch 4.2.3.3 * ** ** ... IC35420 TSM SERVER CORE DUMPS WHEN EBUSY IS RETURNED AFTER AN ATTEMPT TO UNSET CONDITION VARIABLE IN PKDESTROYCONDITION() ... Cheers, Henk ten Have (asap to TSM 4.2.3.3) Well, 'asap' was the same day. Since we'r running 4.2.3.3 the core dumps are gone. Cheers, Henk (not that I heard anything from Tivoli sofar, but that's another issue)
Re: TSM 4.2.3.2 crash
I wrote: AIX 4.3.3.0, TSM 4.2.3.2. Since we'r running this level, server crashes at least once every day. Tivoli wrote me: === ACTION TAKEN: I have reviewed the status update. This trace back appears to match IC35420 which is currently scheduled to be included in the 4.2.3.4. The current estimate for availability of 4.2.3.3 is end of the month. This is only an estimate and is subject to revision if necessary. === Last Friday 4.2.3.3 became available: * * $$4233 Fixes delivered in patch 4.2.3.3 * ... IC35420 TSM SERVER CORE DUMPS WHEN EBUSY IS RETURNED AFTER AN ATTEMPT TO UNSET CONDITION VARIABLE IN PKDESTROYCONDITION() ... Cheers, Henk ten Have (asap to TSM 4.2.3.3)
TSM 4.2.3.2 crash
AIX 4.3.3.0, TSM 4.2.3.2. Since we'r running this level, server crashes at least once every day. Activity log is clueless, dsmserv.err log gives: 01/15/2003 02:14:49 ANRD Same condition variable destruct more than once; thread 138 (tid 0). 01/15/2003 02:14:49 ANR7838S Server operation terminated. 01/15/2003 02:14:49 ANR7833S Server thread 1 terminated in response to program abort. 01/15/2003 02:14:49 ANR7833S Server thread 2 terminated in response to program abort. .. Anyone seen this before? Cheers, Henk ten Have
Re: Monthly TSM FAQ 12/2002
02-16. Whatever happened to Richard Sims? AFAIK Richard is unable to *receive* messages from the list. Thus he is neither able to answer in real-time nor to know is the question already answered. If he was able to get the list messages through it would be able at least to answer in private :-( I still don't have any clue WHY he is unable to *receive* messages from the list. Cheers, Henk ten Have
Re: Server halted!!
On 02-Dec-02 Murthy V Gongala wrote: I am running a TSM server 4.2 on AIX 5L. Today as i was running some backups the server halted suddenly with teh following error. 12/02/2002 15:55:54 ANR7834S Thread 51 (tid 3340) terminating on signal 11 (Segmentation violation). [knip] Has any one faced such problem before. Yes we did. On year ago with TSM server 4.2.1.7 on AIX 4.3.3: IC32183 TSM SERVER CAN CRASH DURING PROCESS PREEMPTION WITH SEGMENTATION FAULT. (solved in 4.2.1.8) IC32233 TSM server can core with a segmentation violation when attempting to acquire an idle mount point. (solved in 4.2.1.9) Btw, we ran now TSM server 4.2.3.1 without any problems (knock knock on wood). Cheers, Henk ten Have.
Re: tape become full in 21 percent.
On 25-Nov-02 Zlatko Krastev wrote: Consider following scenario: 1. you backup say 40 GB 2. next day you backup 40 GB of which 35 GB updated - 35 GB from step 1 expire. Only if you expire your backupdata after one day. 3. perform step 2 for four days. Who will expire his backupdata after one day? And compression has also nothing todo with Pct. Util., full is full and this number must be 100.0, and at least you must see an Estimated Capacity of 100/200Gb, or if client compression is on and the data is good compressed, you normally will se the native size of the tape as Estimated Capacity. Cheers, Henk ten Have
Re: tape become full in 21 percent.
On 25-Nov-02 Zlatko Krastev wrote: -- Only if you expire your backupdata after one day Yes, but this was intended to be an example to illustrate, not a real-life case. But the question was tape become full in 21 percent, which I guess is real-life and I guess nobody uses an expire from one day. If is fixed value (be it 100 or not) it will give us no information at all and should not be displayed. Pct. utilized is the ratio of current / (current+expired). It is updated whenever data is written to the volume or after expiration. Data write changes current component while expiration reduces current and increases expired. Yes yes yes, but I thought the question was writing a tape, tape becomes full, and Util is still 30%. I mean, I familiar with writing a bunch of tapes every full, from scratch until full, and then Util is 100%. Well, anyway, it's Monday Cheers, Henk ten Have.
Re: CLEANUP BACKUPGROUPS question
On 18-Nov-02 Charles F. Fisher wrote: The site I'm at is getting ready to upgrade to 4.2.3. One reason is to be able to run CLEANUP BACKUPGROUPS on the database; are there any special actions or precautions that should be taken before doing so (once the upgrade is in place)? We didn't and just run CLEANUP BACKUPGROUP: 11/15/02 14:50:34 ANR0984I Process 1781 for CLEANUP BACKUPGROUPS started in the BACKGROUND at 14:50:34. .. 11/15/02 18:10:24 ANR4730I CLEANUP BACKUPGROUPS evaluated 3541 groups and deleted 235 orphan groups with 412737 group members deleted with completion state 'FINISHED'. 11/15/02 18:10:25 ANR0987I Process 1781 for CLEANUP BACKUPGROUPS running in the BACKGROUND processed 3541 items with a completion state of SUCCESS at 18:10:25. Cheers, Henk ten Have
Re: Tivoli Manual are now on IBM.com
On 12-Nov-02 Luis Nevarez wrote: The Tivoli manuals are now listed under Library on the left Nav bar.. These manuals are still available for free to Tivoli users. http://submit.boulder.ibm.com/tividd/td/tdprodlist.html Netscape is unable to locate blablabla. Cheers, Henk ten Have (all those wedsite's sucks)
Re: Migration requires Backup ... ?
Sascha, I currently have a little problem understanding how the switch Migration requires Backup works for my HSM-Client. I understand that a file can only be migrated to TSM when a Backup version of this file already exists on the server. Nope. If you define in your MGmtclass MIGREQUIRESBkup NO, then migration will can take place even if there is no backup version. Am I right that I have 2 backups of the same file consuming twice the space on the tapes if I use this option ? Yes, I'm afraid you'r right. But because HSM is still a little bit tricky (ok, we use it now for more then 7 years), we prefere MIGREQUIRESBkup YES, which is the default also. Quite confused, Not anymore, I hope... Cheers, Henk ten Have.
Re: TSM: DB Best Practises ?
Just one week ago, one of our customers HAD TO execute an audit db after 3 years of not to do it. That causes the TSM server had to be stopped for more than 50 hours!!. (50 hours without backup or any possibility to restore). So, with this expample, my personal opinion is, TSM server administrator should plan one (at least) or two audit db a year. That will cost you then one (at least) or two times 50 hours every year. Cheers, Henk ten Have (we never had to do a audit db ever, which is now 7 years, and like to keep it that way)
Re: Solaris 9
On 03-Sep-02 Bob Booth - UIUC wrote: I asked the same question several weeks ago. I have not yet called ITSM support on the issue, however, I was able to hack the install script and Solaris 9 seems to work with no problems (so far). I will let the list know what support tells me about client support for Solaris 9. Tivoli (Freddy Saldena) told me at the SHARE that a Solaris 9 client is released when TSM 5.1.15 is released, probably Oct. '02. I don't have a clue why it isn't released now. Cheers, Henk ten Have.
Re: A lot of questions concerning encryption and compression !!!
On 08-Aug-02 Prather, Wanda wrote: If your clients are doing compression, the server only records how many bytes it received. True. And if the client sends a file and file changed during processing. File skipped., then the server keeps counting. We had a customer with a client who sends every night +70Gb (Total number of bytes transferred: +70Gb). A q occup shows only 16Gb. He was trying to backup a 15Gb file which changed during processing, and the client tries that 4 times, which makes +70Gb sending to the server every night which was complete useless of course and a waste of bandwith. Cheers, Henk ten Have (who wonders who's is attending the next SHARE)
Re: Select statement question
Wayne, Can anyone help me with a select query that will tell me how much data I've backed up in the last 24 hours? select sum(cast(bytes/1024/1024/1024 as decimal(6,3))) Total GB Backup - from summary where start_time=current_timestamp - 1 day and activity='BACKUP' Cheers, Henk ten Have
Re: Minimizing Database Utilization
On 31-Jul-02 Todd Lundstedt wrote: Expiration is working fine. It starts every morning at 5 AM, and runs for about 30-40 minutes. * ANR0812I Inventory file expiration process 295 completed: examined 944182 objects, deleting 37102 backup objects, 0 archive objects, 0 DB backup volumes, and 0 recovery plan files. 0 errors were encountered * Does this mean I only have 944,182 objects being managed by the database? No, this means that you had 944,182 inactive objects. If so, it sounds like I do have something bloating my database. If Thomas D. can get primary and copy pool backups for 4.8 million + files in a 10GB database, and my 8GB database is filled nearly 70% utilized with less than a million objects, something is wrong somewhere. Try a select sum(num_files) as File Count from occupancy and you know exactly how many object you have. My guess is you have 17230769 objectswell, between 16 an 17 million... Cheers, Henk ten Have.
Re: Minimizing Database Utilization
I based the increase in DB size on the 600k of database space per object stored by TSM rule. If I remember it correctly, it's 600 bytes, not 600Kb. Divide your db-size by the number of files and you will see that it will be between 300 and 350 bytes. Cheers, Henk ten Have (5548800/170794415=324)
Re: Occupancy comparison script
On 23-Jul-02 Prather, Wanda wrote: This goes top down instead of side by side ... but it's quick and easy! select stgpool_name, sum(physical_mb)/1024 as physical_GB from occupancy- group by stgpool_name order by stgpool_name HmmI think it's not quick and dirty...;-) : ANR2963W This SQL query may produce a very large result table, or may require a significant amount of time to compute. And yes, it take some time, but the result is ok. Cheers, Henk ten Have.
Re: Connecting with acsls
On 02-Jul-02 Firmes, Stephen wrote: Jacque, Are you starting the ACSLS daemon that facilitates communications between TSM and ACSLS? This is the code I put in my DSMSERV.RC script and I am having no issues. This logic is executed before you start the TSM server. acsdir=/opt/tivoli/tsm/devices/bin echo Starting ACSLS daemon. cd $acsdir ./rc.acs_ssi quiet $* || ACSLS Server (\$acsdir\) error.. Aborting. Or put it into the /etc/inittab: autoacs:2:once:/usr/tivoli/tsm/devices/bin/rc.acs_ssi quiet /dev/console 21 #Start the ssi agent Cheers, Henk ten Have.
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.
Re: AW: lock all client nodes
On 16-Apr-02 Francisco Molero wrote: lock node * , doesn't work No, but DISABLE SESSIONS does work. Cheers, Henk ten Have
Re: TSM DB Fullbackup 19GB takes 4 hours on OS/390 VTS
My 80% full 25gb FULL DB backup takes 1hr 20 minutes on 9672-x57 going to a 9840 tape. Our 72% full 56Gbyte FULL DB backup takes 1hr to 3590/3494 (SCSI attached) and to 9840/9310 (Fiber attached). Cheers, Henk ten Have.
Re: Audit db
Eric, I'm running TSM 4.2.1.9 on AIX and I recently removed and added a couple of storage pools. Now I'm seeing the famous messages: ANRD asutil.c(225): ThreadId0 Pool id -2 not found. ANRD asutil.c(225): ThreadId0 Pool id -2 not found. ANRD asutil.c(225): ThreadId0 Pool id -2 not found. ANRD asutil.c(225): ThreadId0 Pool id -2 not found. ANRD asutil.c(225): ThreadId0 Pool id 15 not found. ANRD asutil.c(225): ThreadId0 Pool id 15 not found. ANRD asutil.c(225): ThreadId0 Pool id 15 not found. ANRD asutil.c(225): ThreadId0 Pool id 15 not found. We see those messages from the beginning we upgraded to 4.2.1.x when we start the server (and we still see them on 4.2.1.11): 12/17/01 16:41:36 ANRD asutil.c(225): ThreadId0 Pool id -14 not found. 12/17/01 16:41:36 ANRD asutil.c(225): ThreadId0 Pool id -11 not found. 12/17/01 16:41:36 ANRD asutil.c(225): ThreadId0 Pool id -4 not found. Tivoli never good give us any clue about these messages. So I tried to run an online database audit, but the (I know, it's an undocumented one) command AUDIT DB FIX=YES gives me the following response: ANR2000E Unknown command - AUDIT DB. ANS8001I Return code 2. Has the online audit been removed from the 4.2 code It's better to remove command's that won't work...;-) Cheers, Henk ten Have.
Re: TSM Crashed
sreekumar, Is that the only cause that you upgraded your server from 4.1.x to 4.2.x ? Yes. 4.1.4.1 was very unstable and there was no higher version available, so we decided to upgrade to 4.2.1.4. Pls give your TSM setup details . What kind of setup details do you like to know? It may help me to reconsider my idea of going to 4.2.x. As I said before, 4.2.1.11 is quite stable. Cheers, Henk.
Re: TSM Crashed
Bruce, I'm running TSM 4.1.3.2 on AIX 4.3.3 ML8. Last night TSM crashed with this error in the dsmserv.err: Any ideas what this means why it happened? We had the same problems with 4.1.3.X, server crashed nearly every day, sometimes every 4 hours, and went immediatly to 4.2.1.X. We'r now on 4.2.1.11 and our server is now running quite well. Cheers, Henk ten Have.
Re: Antwort: End of Service
On 22-Mar-02 Günter Essers wrote: So: when will TSM 4.2 for AIX be available and shipped? September 2001. Cheers, Henk.
Re: SANergy in TSM 5.1 not a pre-req
On 13-Mar-02 Cindy Bogle wrote: SANergy is not a prerequisite to TSM V5.1. But my question was: Is it included in TSM V5.1?, and if yes, Is it SANergy 3.1?. Cheers, Henk.
Re: Anyone seen this ABORT/COREDUMP on AIX 4.3.3 TSM Server 4.
tsmadmin account for Excaliber Business Solutions aka Campbell wrote: Have received coredumps (third one in the last month) with dsmserv down situations. In dsmserv.err appears the following: 03/12/2002 03:12:22 ANR7834S Thread 293 (tid 12577) terminating on signal 11 (S egmentation violation). Anyone seen this before, or able to shed light on this? Oh yes, quite sometimes in 4.2.1.7. You have to upgrade to at least 4.2.1.9: IC32183 TSM SERVER CAN CRASH DURING PROCESS PREEMPTION WITH SEGMENTATION FAULT. xsolved in 4.2.1.8, or: IC32233 TSM server can core with a segmentation violation when attempting to acquire an idle mount point, solved in 4.2.1.9. We'r on 4.2.1.11 for some weeks and don't have any problems so far (knock knock knock on wood.) Cheers, Henk.
Re: Anyone seen this ABORT/COREDUMP on AIX 4.3.3 TSM Server 4.
Campbell: Henk, thanks. ..please identify where I can get this 4.2.1.9 code and README's? service.boulder.ibm.com, which you can find in one of your (old) README's, also a couple of mirror sites. I can only see 4.2.1.7 AIX server code on the Tivoli Websites. I never use the Tivoli Websites for server code. Cheers, Henk.
Re: Anyone seen this ABORT/COREDUMP on AIX 4.3.3 TSM Server 4.
for the TSM server downloads/fixes page. Had been unable to get to the Tivoli pages for a day or two. That's why I never use those Webpages for downloading Cheers, Henk.
Re: backup fails because inspection process takes too long.
John, Anyone know anything about this or have any suggestions on how to get this AIX client to successfully backup instead of spending so much time checking each file? Any help would be greatly appreciated. We did have such problems a long time ago. Every (AIX) user can screw up your backup, by making more then let's say 100.000 files in one directory. This is something Unix don't like. Even a ls -l will hardly ever end, ans so does the backupclient too. The only possibility to get a backup which will be successfully, is exclude such a directory, and better exclude such a user from your backup. Just start a 'dsmc i' and you find out where your client will die. Try a ls -l|wc -l and see what happens. Exclude that user and email him that his files/directories will never be backup from now one. I garantee you he will remove a lot of files (which will take him quite a while), make apologise himself and ask you after a while if you please will backup him again, with a couple of mea culpa's etc. Cheers, Henk.
Re: LAN Free backups
On 08-Mar-02 Joe Cascanette wrote: H...Another item I will have to purchase from Tivoli. im sure my company will love me now. I heard last week that SANergy will be part of TSM, starting with TSM 5.1, which will be announced April 9th. Cheers, Henk (who can't wait)
Re: AS/400 TSM
I wrote: Does anyone has experience, i.e. right now, in using TSM for AS/400 backup's? Is there a simple way to do that and what is the performance? Last week I heard there will be a AS/400 backupclient in TSM 5.1. Is that true Tivoli guru's? Cheers, Henk ten Have.
Sybase TSM
Does anyone has experience with Sybase and TSM? I know there exists SQL-BackTrack for Sybase, but that seems to me quite expensive. Cheers, Henk ten Have
Re: Slow Reclamation from disk
That's it, alright! That APAR was from ADSM 2.1 closed in July 1997!! I guess the fix is on the back burner. I know it's not Friday, but this is even funnier then all the I'm not here in about 8 languages;-) Cheers, Henk.
Re: AS/400 TSM
Steffan, I don't know what TSM 5.1 will bring but for now you have to either use Robot/Save (3rd party) or BRMS. Robot/Save will require enough local disk space to backup the system to disk before it send it to TSM (you might be able to do some break-down but we couldn't see a way on the particular system we installed it on). BRMS will only backup the data not the system. Performance in either case was not very good. Thanks. More people told me the performance isn't very good. Not to say poor/bad. Cheers, Henk (aka Hank)
Re: Thanks to All That Provided Input for the Share Session onSQ
I would like to have a copy, too. I DON'T like to have a copy and I DON't wanne know who would like to have a copy.. Cheers, Henk (and I also DON'T like to know who is out of the office)
AS/400 TSM
Does anyone has experience, i.e. right now, in using TSM for AS/400 backup's? Is there a simple way to do that and what is the performance? Cheers, Henk ten Have (heard bad stories about BMRS and ADSM V3 API)
Re: AS/400 TSM
Jon, thanks for your answers: 1 BRMS does all management and expiration of the files stored in TSM. 2 The backup times were extremely slow. This doesn't look something you like to deal with... In the end we removed the AS/400's from our environment. Someday when we upgrade and have a 3494 library we try to add the AS/400s to TSM again, but this time backing up through Fibre. Last question: how do you backup your AS/400 machines now and how is the performance? Cheers, Henk ten Have.
Re: AS/400 TSM
Daniel, We have a AS/400 backing up to TSM (NSM) and 3583. It works perfect, but the IBM guys had to set up the AS/400. Any idea what the IBM guys did set up? I don't suppose it's something magic? Cheers, Henk ten Have.
Re: lbtest
On 17-Feb-02 Jack Magill wrote: Where can I find documentation on the lbtest utility? I never found any documentation (on AIX). But at least lbtest works. Cheers, Henk ten Have.
Re: Richard Sims.. (was HOWTO: TSM Server Quickinst
On 08-Feb-02 Jim Kirkman wrote: Does anyone know what's happened to Richard? Hopefully something good, like retirement! I emailed him a month ago and asked him where he was / what he was doing. Still the same he told me, but he had problems reaching this list (I think for at least 5 month now). I miss his informative posts. We all do. Cheers, Henk.
Re: Richard Sims..NOT retired...de-listed!
On 08-Feb-02 Lisa Cabanas wrote: He hasn't retired. Has he been de-listed??? Inquiring minds want to know mail Date: Fri, 8 Feb 2002 10:09:46 -0500 From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: FW: Richard Sims.. (was HOWTO: TSM Server Quickinst I'm not the only person on the list who niticed this! Still having problems gettting on the list? Gosh... I'm missed! It was worth getting up this morning! :-) I've kept trying various things to prod the listserver, but it still won't send me a reply. Lisa also emailed me asking where I've been. She may post an explanation. I joked that, if nothing else, people can vote on whether to let me back in. ;-) We'll see what happens, end_mail Well, my question is: What will happen? Cheers, Henk.
Re: Easy way to Move Tape Volume between pools ?
On 18-Jan-02 BENTON Michael wrote: ADSM server 2.1.5.19 (Yep! some of us are a long way behind.) Does anyone know of a way to move tape volumes between storage pools, without having to do a move data operation on each tape ? Six years ago I should have known the answer;-) Cheers, Henk ten Have.
Re: node number??
On 19-Dec-01 Karel Bos wrote: 12/19/2001 15:07:52 ANR0871E Cannot find file space name for node 85, file space 1073741823. This is an old problem and fixed in 4.1.4. How can I see which node node 85 is and what filespace 1073741823? You can't. Cheers, Henk ten Have
TSM 4.2.1.6 AIX 4.3.3.0
I wrote: If any bad comes out of this, just let me know too. Well, it didn't take 24 hours. This morning my server was frozen. Simple queries like q mo, q vol, q libvol or q dr never give any result. q se (which worked) showed a lot of frozen admin session, wait time zero, but never ending. q proc (which also worked) showed backup stg processes which didn't do anything for a long time (probably finished, but never ending). The funny thing was that backup's still worked (backup's to diskpools). So finally I had to halt the server and did a restart. The activitylog and the dsmserv.err didn't show anything weird. Cheers, Henk (still not amused)
Re: TSM 4.2.1.6 AIX 4.3.3.0
On 31-Oct-01 Jim Kirkman wrote: We have seen this exact same scenario with 4.1.4 on OS390 2.10. Backups, q proc, and expiration working, DB backup and dr move cmds invoked but never ran, admin sessions 'frozen' and processes cancelling but never going away. It's only happened once, but then we've only been at 4.1.4 for about a month. I ended up 'bouncing' the server after expiration ended. I saw this same scenario with 4.1.X on AIX. And not once, but nearly 4 times a week. That was the (biggest) reason for upgrading to 4.2.1.X. Cheers, Henk.
Re: TSM 4.2.1
On 29-Oct-01 Joel Fuhrman wrote: I don't know if this works for server message, but it might suppress the ANR2841W messages: disable event console ANR2841W No, that doesn't work for server messages: Server events may not be disabled for the activity log receiver (ANR1829E). Cheers, Henk.
4.2.1.6 (was: Re: TSM Server v4.2.1)
On 30-Oct-01 Lambelet,Rene,VEVEY,GL-IS/CIS wrote: Andy, do you mean 4.1.2.16 and not 4.1.2.6 ? Nope. 4.1.2.6 is now available: service.boulder.ibm.com/storage/tivoli-storage-management/patches/server/AIX/4.2 .1.6 Cheers, Henk (upgrading right now)
Re: 4.2.1.6 (was: Re: TSM Server v4.2.1)
On 30-Oct-01 Suad Musovich wrote: You are both dyslexic 4.2.1.6 Hmm...like TSM you mean? Anyway, running 4.2.1.6 now for 4 hours, I must admit, we don't see any mount failed anymorebut we see now a complete new set of _wonderful_ messages: ANRD asvolmnt.c(519): ThreadId51 Mount point deadlock possible. ANR1092W Space reclamation terminated for volume 000827 - internal server error detected. ANR1227E BACKUP STGPOOL: Process 44 terminated - internal server error detected. Oh, and btw, the reg lic problems (ANR2841W) are not solved in 4.2.1.6, but were solved in 4.2.1.5 as Tivoli told us (4.2.1.3, 4.2.1.4 and 4.1.2.5 were only available for special(?) customers.) Cheers, Henk (waiting for 4.2.1.X, X6)
Re: 4.2.1.6 (was: Re: TSM Server v4.2.1)
On 30-Oct-01 Gill, Geoffrey L. wrote: I brought the server up at almost the time backup disk was supposed to kick off but noticed no processes running. I did a quick check of the log and saw these messages. Looks like maybe things tried to kick off before the server was truly available for operations. (SEE FIRST LINE BELOW) The messages I saw were after the server was up and running for 2 hours. If any good comes out of this I'll let you knowyou can count on the bad too. If any bad comes out of this, just let me know too. Cheers, Henk.
Re: 4.2.1.6 (was: Re: TSM Server v4.2.1)
According to the information in apar IC30965 the licensing problem is supposed to be fixed in 4.2.1.6. * RECOMMENDATION: Apply fixing PTF when available. When the * fix is applied you may need to first delete * the nodelock file then touch the nodelock * file to recreate it. Did you recreate the nodelock file as recommended in the apar? Yeppo. We did. But if you read the README, you will also read that this problem was fixed in 4.2.1.5 (I gonne hate these numbers...). And this fix disappeared in 4.2.1.6. So we still have to deal with hundreds of thousends rediculous messages every day. (besides of hundreds of thousends other rediculous messages you get every day, every typo is logged in the activitylog for example, ok, wrong example, we don't do hundred of thousends typo's every day;-) Cheers, Henk (visiting a TSM-user day on Friday in Holland, will be big fun)
Re: TSM 4.2.1
On 25-Oct-01 Gill, Geoffrey L. wrote: I contacted Tivoli today regarding the PMR I have open. I don't know if this affects all platforms but on AIX 4.3.3 with TSM 4.2.1 about every 3 days I can count of a core dump of TSM, last night was the latest. According to We had 2 crashes last weekend. Tivoli they want me to change one parameter in the dsmserv.opt file, RESOURCETIMEOUT. Default is 10, they want me to change it to 20 to work around the problem for now. I will do that and see how it performs. They asked me (a week ago) to change it to 100. Which obviously didn't help. They opened a APAR on it, IC31884 in case anyone is interested. Even if this does help I still have the annoying tape problem issue on the 3494. Again, I don't know if this affects those running TSM on NT or WIN2K with a 3494. On AIX I've had database backups fail because all the drives were busy, Migration and backup tape processes fail because all the drives were busy. Mount errors and failures, dismount failures yet the tape is dismounted anyway, mtlib showing all the tapes that were scratch now private and all the tapes private now scratch. DRM saying all the tapes were ejected yet some left in with a status of mountable, yet TSM asking for me to insert the tape. TSM reporting tapes unavailable or destroyed yet queried as available and in read write status. This fix, I was told, would be out Friday or Monday.we'll see. What a mess. Indeed, what a mess. And don't forget the hundred of thousends ANR2841W messages we get every day. Cheers, Henk.
Re: tsm 4.2.1 licensing
On 23-Oct-01 ORNESS wrote: Tivoli told me that an APAR is opened but you can work with your server NOT IN COMPLIANCE... Except that I think your server becomes slower and slower every minut. Maybe the fact that we'r doing mayor HSM-filesystem restore's from one box to another box in a SAN caused these problems. Not to mention about all the ANR1401W messages we get during the day. Cheers, Henk.
Re: TSM v4.2.1
On 23-Oct-01 Bill Mansfield wrote: I heard second-hand that the license registration bug wasn't going to be fixed until TSM 5.x. Can anyone out there confirm? I hope not. Last 24 hours we had again 10 ANR2841W messages. And another thing I noticed about v4.2.1 AIX, our server becomes slower and slower everyday. I'm thinking of restart the server everyday Cheers, Henk (not amused)
Re: TSM v4.2.1
On 22-Oct-01 Neil Schofield wrote: The fact that others are experiencing identical problems at least gives me some hope of a resolution. You mean, we all end up in the same madhouse? Last night we get the following message: ANS1030E System ran out of memory. Process ended, which means: ...User Response: Stop TSM, restart TSM, and retry the operation... And just for fun, I counted the ANR2841W messages over the last 24 hours158379 : one hundred fifty eight thousend three hundred seventy nine, so you know this isn't a typo Cheers, Henk.
Re: TSM 4.2.1
On 22-Oct-01 Gill, Geoffrey L. wrote: For all those who are thinking of upgrading to 4.2.1, my opinion is don't. I have been up on it for 10 days and have already experienced 3 crashes. I also have a tape problem that I'm told was supposed to have been fixed. I have 2 PMR's open, both at level 2. I'm on AIX 4.3.3 and not sure if other platforms have had similar problems. I agree, this level sucks completely. Server crashes at least 3 times a week with internal errors (APAR IC31884), mount failed problems (if all drives are in use), and last but not least, after a server restart, most of the private volumes in the tape library becomes scratch, and scratch volumes becomes private (APAR IC31691). So what happens is that if TSM asked for a scratch volume, the Library Manager gives 95% of the time a private volume, thank God TSM recognise this volume as one of his a private volumes, asked again for a scratch volume, and on and on and on. So sometimes mount takes for hours. We use now a script to get the Library manager in sync with the TSM server (i.e. change the categories with mtlib). And we have a crontab entry which checks if our server is still running, if not, the server will started. Btw, the reason we went 2 weeks ago to 4.2.1 was that the 4.1.1 server did hang at least 5 times a week, so we had to halt the server and restart it everytime (symtoms were simple queries like q proc never ended, and cancel proc didn't work at all). And btw2, we run our TSM-server on AIX 4.3.3.0. Cheers, Henk (waiting for lot's of fixes)
Re: TSM 4.2.1
On 22-Oct-01 Magura, Curtis wrote: Well Have to say we are running at 4.2.1.0 on AIX 4.3.3 and a smaller Win2K box. The AIX box has a 3494 and 3590 drives. We did not see any of the problems mentioned. You are a lucky person;-) But try a select volume_name from libvolumes where status='Scratch' and count your TSM-scratch volumes, and do a mtlib -l /dev/lmcp0 -q C -s 012E|wc -l and see if they are in sync (012E if you defined your library with PRIVATECATegory 300 en SCRATCHCATegory 301, otherwise take a look with mtlib -l /dev/lmcp0 -q A to find your categories). Cheers, Henk.
Re: tape(s) not mountable
I wrote: I have some (strange) tape problems, for example with tape 000401 (AIX 4.3.3.0, TSM server 4.1.4.1, 3494/3590E: Last night we also get dozens of No drives are currently available in library and Mount request denied for volume messages. The problem was that volume 000401 was stuck into one drive and that drive was still known as online and idle in TSM. So the clue of this story is (as Richard Sims mentioned a long time ago also if my memory is still works), if you have some silly behavior with mounting of volumes, check your library and drives first. Cheers, Henk.
tape(s) not mountable
I have some (strange) tape problems, for example with tape 000401 (AIX 4.3.3.0, TSM server 4.1.4.1, 3494/3590E: Problems with accessing some tapes, for example 000401: 10/03/01 08:21:57 ANR0406I Session 2438 started for node ISIS-S315 (AIX) (Tcp/Ip 145.100.17.2(4289)). 10/03/01 08:21:59 ANR1401W Mount request denied for volume 000401 - mount failed. 10/03/01 08:21:59 ANR1401W Mount request denied for volume 000401 - mount failed. 10/03/01 08:22:00 ANR1401W Mount request denied for volume 000401 - mount failed. 10/03/01 08:22:00 ANR0525W Transaction failed for session 2438 for node ISIS-S315 (AIX) - storage media inaccessible. 10/03/01 08:22:02 ANRD sstrans.c(601): Unexpected next frame sequence number 2 - aggregate may already be open. 10/03/01 08:22:02 ANR0530W Transaction failed for session 2438 for node ISIS-S315 (AIX) - internal server error detected. 10/03/01 08:22:03 ANRD sssess.c(480): Unexpected next frame sequence number - aggregate may be open at end of session. 10/03/01 08:22:03 ANR0403I Session 2438 ended for node ISIS-S315 (AIX). tsm: BASKETcheckout libvol 3494LIB 000401 ANR8442E CHECKOUT LIBVOLUME: Volume 000401 in library 3494LIB is currently in use. ANS8001I Return code 12. tsm: BASKETrestore volume 000401 10/03/01 13:01:42 ANR2017I Administrator ADMIN issued command: RESTORE VOLUME 000401 10/03/01 13:01:42 ANR2114I RESTORE VOLUME: Access mode for volume 000401 updated to destroyed. 10/03/01 13:01:42 ANR0984I Process 192 for RESTORE VOLUME started in the BACKGROUND at 13:01:42. 10/03/01 13:01:42 ANR1232I Restore of volumes in primary storage pool 3494POOL started as process 192. 10/03/01 13:01:42 ANR2110I RESTORE VOLUME started as process 192. 10/03/01 13:01:50 ANR1235I Restore process 192 ended for volumes in storage pool 3494POOL. 10/03/01 13:01:50 ANR0985I Process 192 for RESTORE VOLUME running in the BACKGROUND completed with completion state SUCCESS at 13:01:50. 10/03/01 13:01:50 ANR1240I Restore of volumes in primary storage pool 3494POOL has ended. Files Restored: 0, Bytes Restored: 0, Unreadable Files: 0, Unreadable Bytes: 0. 10/03/01 13:01:50 ANR1256W Volume 000401 contains files that could not be restored. Cheers, Henk.
Re: tape(s) not mountable
On 03-Oct-01 Patricia LeBlanc wrote: Is your tape in an 'unavailable' status??? Nope. Just read/write status. Cheers, Henk.
TSM/3494/9310
We are running a TSM-server on a AIX box (S7A, AIX 4.3.3.0) with a 3494 attached to it with 7 3590B drives. What I like to do is to use also a couple of 9840 drives in our PowderHorn 9310 by that TSM-server. ACSLS is running on Solaris. - Is anyone dealing with this kind of situation? If so, could you please contact me? - Does anyone know what I need to do to make this possible? Btw, our PowderHorn is also used by two SGI machines (Origin 2000 and 3800). Cheers, Henk ten Have.
Re: libstdc++-libc6.1-1.so.2 dependency in RedHat7.0 ?
On 07-Feb-01 Michael Jung wrote: The manual says that it is compatible to: Red Hat 6.1, 6.2, 7.0 SUSE 6.3, 6.4 Turbo Linux 6.0 Caldera Linux 2.3 The manual also says: "Linux86" (Linux for intel 80x86 family processor). My question is: does this client also work for a Alpha processor? Anyone any experience? Cheers, Henk.
Re: HSM disaster: all backups expired
Reinhard, With the new client software and after rebooting the machine, the situation has not changed. Files to be backed up are still recalled. This behavior was also 'available' in version 3.x (forgot the level, I try to forget HSM-problems I find as soon as possible.) Anyway, I have opened problems on these two matters. Let's see what comes out of it. Please keep us informed. HSM-problems are always chasing me Cheers, Henk (with nightmares from HSM-disasters)
Re: Restore Volume from offsite tapes
"q vol HO1302" shows it's in primary tape pool "q libvol 3494 HO1302" said no match found "mtlib -l /dev/lmcp0 -qV -VHO1302" shows I don't know which level ADSM you'r running, but we had exactly the same problems with adsm 3.1.2.55 (AIX 4.2.1, Atape 5.0.2.0, atldd 4.0.1.0): volumes are "not present in library", but still exist in LM and ADSM. At the same time we had also the opposite problem, suddenly volumes only exist in the LM and not anymore in ADSM (ADSM askes for CHECKIN). After upgrading to 3.7.3.x problems were gone. An other possibility is that you have a bad barcode reader in your LM. Cheers, Henk.
Re: Oggetto: ANR8355E I/O error
On 19-Sep-00 Alessio Prodon wrote: you can try with audit vol U00117 fix=yes, for try to fix errors on tape; but if library don't read the tape's label you must delete it !! with this command : del vol U00117 discardd=yes As I explained before "AUDIT VOLUME doesn't give any clue". Alessio Prodon (Proud to use adsm on AIX ) If hope your are kidding Cheers, Henk ten Have.
Re: 4.1 client for Windows
My apologies when I sound negative, but why should be bother to test/try-out out the TSM 4.1 client, when the distribution package is placed on the FTP server untested? This does not give me a good feeling! I think I speak for a Erik, this isn't something new, I'm afraid. I have seen untested (read: not working at all) AIX-clients and SGI-clients a couple of times in the passed years. Which is even more worse. And not to speak of all the (AIX) ADSM-servers with major bugs. Cheers, Henk.
