What brand of LTO4 tape drive are you using?

[Kathleen M Hallahan]

And specifically, in what kind of library, and what is your opinion of it?
 I'm talking specifically about the drive manufacturer, not the tapes
themselves--although if anyone has any notable experiences with tape brand
to drive brand compatibility that would be handy info as well.

Thanks!

_

Kathleen Hallahan
Freddie Mac

Re: How to map OS devices to element numbers/locations

[Kathleen M Hallahan]

Nicholas,

On the GUI, under Service>Drive VPD, you can tie serial number to frame
and row, which can tie back to element under the drive menu.  Use lscfg -v
info for serial numbers in AIX.  It's a few steps, but all of the data can
be chained together.

Hope this helps!

_

Kathleen Hallahan
Freddie Mac




   Nicholas Rodolfich <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
   Sent by: "ADSM: Dist Stor Manager" 
   10/31/2007 10:56 AM
   Please respond to
"ADSM: Dist Stor Manager" 


To
ADSM-L@VM.MARIST.EDU
cc

Subject
How to map OS devices to element numbers/locations






Hello All,

Thanks for your help!!

We have TSM 5.3.5/AIX 5.3.5/ IBM pSeries 55a/IBM 3584 (8-LTO1 & 8-
LTO2) drives. We have an IBM 2109 switch in the D32 cabinet and an IBM
2005-B16 switch in the L32 expansion cabinet.

I recently had an adapter replaced and when the new AIX devices were
recreated the AIX devices came back in a different order so the
locations/element numbers changed. I supposed I expected the device
assignments to come back the same since no physical changes were made to
the drive or adapter location only the adapter itself.   At any rate, I
need a way to easily map the AIX devices (rmt0, rmt1, etc..) to the
proper element numbers and thereby their location within the library for
service issues. The 3584 GUI doesn't show it (only element numbers). Is
there a way to do this readily?

Nicholas


IMPORTANT NOTICE:  This message and any included attachments are from East
Jefferson General Hospital, and is intended only for the addressee(s), and
may include Protected Health (PHI) or other confidential information.  If
you are the intended recipient, you are obligated to maintain it in a
secure and confidential manner and re-disclosure without additional
consent or as permitted by law is prohibited.   If you are not the
intended recipient, use of this information is strictly prohibited and may
be unlawful.  Please promptly reply to the sender by email and delete this
message from your computer. East Jefferson General Hospital greatly
appreciates your cooperation.

Re: Sropping expiration for specific clients

[Kathleen M Hallahan]

They are, but for retention purposes they do work as the same one.  In
other words, when a node is moved from one domain to another, no rebinding
takes place.  Which I'm very glad of, since I don't know how we'd do this
otherwise.   :-)

_

Kathleen Hallahan
Freddie Mac





   Larry Clark <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
   Sent by: "ADSM: Dist Stor Manager" 
   10/22/2007 02:01 PM
   Please respond to
"ADSM: Dist Stor Manager" 


To
ADSM-L@VM.MARIST.EDU
cc

Subject
Re: Sropping expiration for specific clients






Ok, just wanted to clarify. Those would be different management classes
even
though they have the same name.

----- Original Message -
From: "Kathleen M Hallahan" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: 
Sent: Monday, October 22, 2007 1:33 PM
Subject: Re: [ADSM-L] Sropping expiration for specific clients


> Yes, exactly.  We have a domain with its own copygroup, storage pools,
> etc.  We just reuse the names of the management classes and assign
> different retention to them inside of those.  Since our management
classes
> are pretty standardized anyway, it's not too complicated to do.
>
> _
>
> Kathleen Hallahan
> Freddie Mac
>
>
>
>
>
>   Larry Clark <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>   Sent by: "ADSM: Dist Stor Manager" 
>   10/22/2007 01:29 PM
>   Please respond to
> "ADSM: Dist Stor Manager" 
>
>
> To
> ADSM-L@VM.MARIST.EDU
> cc
>
> Subject
> Re: Sropping expiration for specific clients
>
>
>
>
>
>
> h...
> so would you define a new copygroup in the new domain with new retention
> rules using the same managment class (name)?
>
> - Original Message -
> From: "Kathleen M Hallahan" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To: 
> Sent: Monday, October 22, 2007 1:15 PM
> Subject: Re: [ADSM-L] Sropping expiration for specific clients
>
>
>> Joy,
>>
>> Our approach has been to create a separate domain which contain the
same
>> management classes that the data is already bound to.  In this way, we
> can
>> move the affected nodes to the new domain with no rebinding of data,
and
>> maintain the inactive as well as the active data.  It also allows TSM
to
>> continue tracking and protecting the data  We then, of course, expect
> the
>> platform areas to restore the data they need to a separate location, so
>> that we aren't stuck with open-ended interminable retention
requirements
>> that no one can agree to revert
>>
>> Hope this is useful!
>>
>> Kathleen
>>
>> _
>>
>> Kathleen Hallahan
>> Freddie Mac
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>   Joy Hanna <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>>   Sent by: "ADSM: Dist Stor Manager" 
>>   10/22/2007 12:59 PM
>>   Please respond to
>> "ADSM: Dist Stor Manager" 
>>
>>
>> To
>> ADSM-L@VM.MARIST.EDU
>> cc
>>
>> Subject
>> Sropping expiration for specific clients
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> Hello,
>>  Due to a legal request we are being asked not to expire any data for
>> some specific TSM clients. Is there a way to exclude a group of clients
>> from expiring any data for a time period? I see there is a way to do
>> this for archived data. I'm talking incremental backup data. If I stop
>> expiring altogether I think it wouldn't be long before I put my whole
>> environment at risk. The only way I can think of to do this would be to
>> rename all filespaces where I suspect there might be data I do not want
>> to expire. This however would cause all those renamed filespaces to
back
>> up in full tonight. We're talking several TB of file server data. Any
>> ideas? Sincerely, Joy
>>
>> Joy Hanna
>> Enterprise Storage Group
>> I.T. Computer Operations
>> (503)745-7748
>> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>>

Re: Sropping expiration for specific clients

[Kathleen M Hallahan]

Yes, exactly.  We have a domain with its own copygroup, storage pools,
etc.  We just reuse the names of the management classes and assign
different retention to them inside of those.  Since our management classes
are pretty standardized anyway, it's not too complicated to do.

_

Kathleen Hallahan
Freddie Mac





   Larry Clark <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
   Sent by: "ADSM: Dist Stor Manager" 
   10/22/2007 01:29 PM
   Please respond to
"ADSM: Dist Stor Manager" 


To
ADSM-L@VM.MARIST.EDU
cc

Subject
Re: Sropping expiration for specific clients






h...
so would you define a new copygroup in the new domain with new retention
rules using the same managment class (name)?

- Original Message -
From: "Kathleen M Hallahan" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: 
Sent: Monday, October 22, 2007 1:15 PM
Subject: Re: [ADSM-L] Sropping expiration for specific clients


> Joy,
>
> Our approach has been to create a separate domain which contain the same
> management classes that the data is already bound to.  In this way, we
can
> move the affected nodes to the new domain with no rebinding of data, and
> maintain the inactive as well as the active data.  It also allows TSM to
> continue tracking and protecting the data  We then, of course, expect
the
> platform areas to restore the data they need to a separate location, so
> that we aren't stuck with open-ended interminable retention requirements
> that no one can agree to revert
>
> Hope this is useful!
>
> Kathleen
>
> _
>
> Kathleen Hallahan
> Freddie Mac
>
>
>
>
>
>   Joy Hanna <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>   Sent by: "ADSM: Dist Stor Manager" 
>   10/22/2007 12:59 PM
>   Please respond to
> "ADSM: Dist Stor Manager" 
>
>
> To
> ADSM-L@VM.MARIST.EDU
> cc
>
> Subject
> Sropping expiration for specific clients
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Hello,
>  Due to a legal request we are being asked not to expire any data for
> some specific TSM clients. Is there a way to exclude a group of clients
> from expiring any data for a time period? I see there is a way to do
> this for archived data. I'm talking incremental backup data. If I stop
> expiring altogether I think it wouldn't be long before I put my whole
> environment at risk. The only way I can think of to do this would be to
> rename all filespaces where I suspect there might be data I do not want
> to expire. This however would cause all those renamed filespaces to back
> up in full tonight. We're talking several TB of file server data. Any
> ideas? Sincerely, Joy
>
> Joy Hanna
> Enterprise Storage Group
> I.T. Computer Operations
> (503)745-7748
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>

Re: Sropping expiration for specific clients

[Kathleen M Hallahan]

Joy,

Our approach has been to create a separate domain which contain the same
management classes that the data is already bound to.  In this way, we can
move the affected nodes to the new domain with no rebinding of data, and
maintain the inactive as well as the active data.  It also allows TSM to
continue tracking and protecting the data  We then, of course, expect the
platform areas to restore the data they need to a separate location, so
that we aren't stuck with open-ended interminable retention requirements
that no one can agree to revert

Hope this is useful!

Kathleen

_

Kathleen Hallahan
Freddie Mac





   Joy Hanna <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
   Sent by: "ADSM: Dist Stor Manager" 
   10/22/2007 12:59 PM
   Please respond to
"ADSM: Dist Stor Manager" 


To
ADSM-L@VM.MARIST.EDU
cc

Subject
Sropping expiration for specific clients






Hello,
  Due to a legal request we are being asked not to expire any data for
some specific TSM clients. Is there a way to exclude a group of clients
from expiring any data for a time period? I see there is a way to do
this for archived data. I'm talking incremental backup data. If I stop
expiring altogether I think it wouldn't be long before I put my whole
environment at risk. The only way I can think of to do this would be to
rename all filespaces where I suspect there might be data I do not want
to expire. This however would cause all those renamed filespaces to back
up in full tonight. We're talking several TB of file server data. Any
ideas? Sincerely, Joy

Joy Hanna
Enterprise Storage Group
I.T. Computer Operations
(503)745-7748
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

Occupancy vs. backups table file count

[Kathleen M Hallahan]

Ok, well, I'm not sure how I got this far not knowing that this happened
or why, but I don't really run these kinds of numbers generally.  Can
someone explain to me why the number of file-type active files in a
'select from backups' query would exceed the number of files listed in a
'query occupancy'?  I must be missing some fundamental understanding of
what one or the other is counting.  I'm seeing this on two different
versions of TSM server (both on AIX), so it's not new.

An example:

tsm: SWC>select sum(num_files) from occupancy where node_name='SWCUNX01'
and fil
 espace_name='/testing' and stgpool_name like 'P%'

 Unnamed[1]
---
   7776

tsm: SWC>select count(*) from backups where node_name='SWCUNX01' and
filespace_n
 ame='/testing' and type='FILE' and state='ACTIVE_VERSION'
ANR2963W This SQL query may produce a very large result table, or may
require a
significant amount of time to compute.

Do you wish to proceed? (Yes (Y)/No (N)) y

 Unnamed[1]
---
   8620

I had thought that by filtering my backups query on type and state I would
be comparing apples to apples and get an idea of what proportion of the
data was active, but that doesn't seem to be the case.  I was trying to
use the occupancy numbers as reflective of the total, and subtract from
there, so that I could do less querying of backups.

What am I missing?

Thanks!

Kathleen

_

Kathleen Hallahan
Freddie Mac

Re: upgrade of 200 GB DB

[Kathleen M Hallahan]

Yep, I'm actually waiting for a copy job to finish so that we can put that
version on our problem server this morning.

Fingers crossed...


_

Kathleen Hallahan
Freddie Mac





   Peter Jones <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
   Sent by: "ADSM: Dist Stor Manager" 
   07/27/2007 09:34 AM
   Please respond to
"ADSM: Dist Stor Manager" 


To
ADSM-L@VM.MARIST.EDU
cc

Subject
Re: upgrade of 200 GB DB






Hi,

> I had a client that I upgraded to 5.4 and consistently one of the TDP
> for SQL  instances refuses to terminate ...

> Kathleen M Hallahan wrote:
> > We are seeing
> > behavior that suggests that it's not always releasing network
> > communications properly, but not all the time and not for all
> > communications.

Search for PK43462 as fixed in 5.4.1.0 at:

http://www.ibm.com/software/support/

The problems you are both experiencing sound very similar.


Hope this helps,

Pete

--
Peter Jones Oxford University Computing Services
TSM Symposium 2007  Tivoli Storage Manager : Preparing the Path
25-27 September 2007http://tsm-symposium.oucs.ox.ac.uk/

Re: upgrade of 200 GB DB

[Kathleen M Hallahan]

Oh, understood; we're normally the last people to go to new code.  A
combination of circumstances here more or less forced our hand this time.

I suppose someone has to report problems to the list first



_

Kathleen Hallahan
Freddie Mac
Storage Management -- Tape
703-450-3317




   "Stapleton, Mark" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
   Sent by: "ADSM: Dist Stor Manager" 
   07/17/2007 02:04 PM
   Please respond to
"ADSM: Dist Stor Manager" 


To
ADSM-L@VM.MARIST.EDU
cc

Subject
Re: upgrade of 200 GB DB






There is a lesson here: do not perform an upgrade to any code (TSM or
otherwise) until there is at least one maintenance level available, unless
there is a specific reason to use a patch level to fix a particular
problem.

--
Mark Stapleton ([EMAIL PROTECTED])



From: ADSM: Dist Stor Manager on behalf of Kathleen M Hallahan
Of greater concern is that the performance at the new code does not seem
to be as good, in a rather vague and intermittent way.  We are seeing
behavior that suggests that it's not always releasing network
communications properly, but not all the time and not for all
communications.  We have not seen this in either of the two much smaller
environments that it's been installed on.  So if you have a lot of
connections on a daily basis, you might start seeing some impact.  We've
opened a ticket to IBM

I would love to know if you (or anyone else) see any behavior differences
over time at 5.4.  I haven't seen much here in the way of complaint but I
don't know if that means it's really great stable code, or if there just
aren't many people using it yet.  Or both, and we're flukey.  :-)

Re: upgrade of 200 GB DB

[Kathleen M Hallahan]

It took us less than 45 minutes for the upgrade from 5.2.3.1 to 5.4.0.3.
Our database is nearly 470GB although it's currently at 28% utilized (yes,
I know, it's a long story...), and runs on a P650.

Of greater concern is that the performance at the new code does not seem
to be as good, in a rather vague and intermittent way.  We are seeing
behavior that suggests that it's not always releasing network
communications properly, but not all the time and not for all
communications.  We have not seen this in either of the two much smaller
environments that it's been installed on.  So if you have a lot of
connections on a daily basis, you might start seeing some impact.  We've
opened a ticket to IBM

I would love to know if you (or anyone else) see any behavior differences
over time at 5.4.  I haven't seen much here in the way of complaint but I
don't know if that means it's really great stable code, or if there just
aren't many people using it yet.  Or both, and we're flukey.  :-)

_

Kathleen Hallahan
Freddie Mac





   Daad Ali <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
   Sent by: "ADSM: Dist Stor Manager" 
   07/17/2007 12:20 PM
   Please respond to
"ADSM: Dist Stor Manager" 


To
ADSM-L@VM.MARIST.EDU
cc

Subject
upgrade of 200 GB DB






I am planning to upgrade my 200 GB TSM 5.2.6 Database to 5.4

  Does anyone have any estimate on how long that will take?

  I do realise there are many other variables but wondering how long it
will take roughly.

  TSM log is 12 GB

  My LPAR is a P550 with 4 CPUs and 10 GB of memory.

  thank you in advance.
  Daad



-
Be smarter than spam. See how smart SpamGuard is at giving junk email the
boot with the All-new Yahoo! Mail

Re: 3584 library sharing followup

[Kathleen M Hallahan]

Thanks to both of you for your information!



_

Kathleen Hallahan
Freddie Mac





   William Boyer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
   Sent by: "ADSM: Dist Stor Manager" 
   09/16/2006 01:02 PM
   Please respond to
"ADSM: Dist Stor Manager" 


To
ADSM-L@VM.MARIST.EDU
cc

Subject
Re: 3584 library sharing followup






The problem is that after "cloning" the existing database to the 2nd
instance, they BOTH have the same volume information. When you
do the AUDIT LIBR on the library client, the library manager updates the
ownership of all the tapes known by that client. So if you
were to then run an AUDIT LIBR from the 2nd (cloned) instance, ALL the
same volumes would now be "owned" by the 2nd instance. The
library manager doesn't seem to enforce that if an instance already owns
the volume(s) that another instance just can't take
ownership away.

The TYPE=REMOTE entries in the library manager volhist table prevent you
from being able to check in a tape that has data on it as a
scratch volume. But if there's no TYPE=REMOTE entry for that tape, you can
check it in as scratch and another instance can actually
overwrite the data on that tape. So you need to be careful about keeping
track what tapes are still good for each instance.

Another thing I noticed, if client1 owns a tape and client2 calls for it
to be mounted...the library manager will mount the tape and
change the ownership over to client2. Maybe this is WAD, but I don't think
that the library manager should allow the ownership
change of a tape volume just because a client asks. I don't think that the
library manager should even allow a non-owner instance to
mount the tape. Ownership changes should be a manual process to get the
desired effect. Interesting that if on the library manager a
tape is checked in and owned by client1, you cannot issue the UPD LIBV
command to change ownership to client2. You must first check
out the volume and then check it back in so the library manager is listed
as the owner and private. Then you can issue the UPD LIBV
command to make client2 the owner.

So my current DB has both daily and monthly data, separate domains and
storage pools. I'll be "cloning" the database over to another
instance. Then:

On DAILY instance (current):
- update all the monthly volumes to ACC=UNAVAIL
- Lock all the monthly nodes.
- VARY OFF all the monthly disk volumes.

On the MONTHLY instance (cloned):
- Update all daily volumes to ACC=UNAVAIL
- Lock all daily nodes.
- VARY OFF the daily disk volumes.

On the library manager:
- Change ownership of all checked in MONTHLY tapes.
- Delete the TYPE-REMOTE entries for all the MONTHLY tapes.

At this point any monthly tapes not checked in to the library are not
known to the library manaager. So you could actually check
these tapes in as scratch. This is where you need to be careful. Also you
don't want to do an AUDIT LIBR on either of the clients at
this point. As it will change the ownership of all the tapes to that
client. Then you'll have to start all over again.

On the DAILY instance:
- DELETE all the monthly data/filespace/nodes/domains.

On the MONTHLY instance:
- Delete all the daily data/filespace/nodes/domains.

One thing I did notice is that if client1 owns the tape and client2
deletes that tape the library manager will report an error and
not change the status of the tape. So when you delete a DAILY tape from
the MONTHLY instance, ownership and status won't change.


Once all the volumes/data has been deleted from the appropriate instances,
you can issue the AUDIT LIBR to update the library
manager for correct ownership.

This was a lot of trial and error and testing. I haven't split the
production database. That's planned for next month.

Bill


-Original Message-
From: ADSM: Dist Stor Manager [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of
TSM_User
Sent: Saturday, September 16, 2006 1:13 AM
To: ADSM-L@VM.MARIST.EDU
Subject: Re: 3584 library sharing followup

On one of the instance you will delete the library and then create a new
"shared" library.  When you run the audit library command
on a library client it updates the library manager updates it's volhist to
show that the volumes in its library are remote and not
belong to the other instnace.

  We had a server that we wanted to retire but it had been the library
manager. We simply made one of the other library clients the
manager.  Due to the fact that this new instance had no information about
any of the library clients we found we only had to run the
audit library command on all the library clients after they were pointed
to the new library manager.

  Seems like this same approch would work for you.

Kathleen M Hallahan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
  Last week, Bill Boyer posted a message (which I no longer have) about
splitting a database and library sharing. and ownership of
tapes.

3584 library sharing followup

[Kathleen M Hallahan]

Last week, Bill Boyer posted a message (which I no longer have) about
splitting a database and library sharing. and ownership of tapes.  I saw
one response suggesting exporting and importing the data, but nothing
else.

Did anyone ever come up with other ideas on this?  I'm actually getting
ready to do something similar, splitting a very large TSM database by
loading a duplicate instance onto the same AIX server and then selectively
deleting from each.  I'm presuming that using the TSM library sharing
function will create the same ownership issue for us as Bill is/was
experiencing.  There is far too much data for export/import to be
practical.

In our case, all of the tapes for one (legacy) instance will reside
outside of the library unless needed for a specific restore, and no new
data will be added.  Can I leave the library definitions intact in the
second instance, and just make sure the two systems never have the same
drive online at the same time?  I would then check tapes into the legacy
instance of TSM when restores were required.  As this is old data, it
would only happen on an occasional basis.

We're on TSM 5.2.3.1 on AIX 5.2, using a 3584 with LTO2 drives.

Thanks!



_

Kathleen Hallahan
Freddie Mac

Sepaton question

[Kathleen M Hallahan]

Hello,

I'm interested in finding out from those people who are using Sepaton
systems for their TSM backups, what kind of nightly volume do you write to
it?  I have the specs from the company regarding what it supports; what
I'm interested in is how it holds up in the real world under heavy write
loads.  An idea of how the data is distributed (millions and millions of
small files, or a few large database files, etc.) would be handy too, if
you have it off the top of your head.

Thanks!

_

Kathleen Hallahan
Freddie Mac

Re: Conferences

[Kathleen M Hallahan]

I was actually just looking at the Baltimore conference listing for TSM
content, and all I can find is one session on future directions.  Is this
an anomaly, or should I be looking somewhere else?  Baltimore is close
enough that I could probably justify going for at least some of the event,
if I had that to point to.

Thanks,

Kathleen

_

Kathleen Hallahan
Freddie Mac





   Bob Booth <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
   Sent by: "ADSM: Dist Stor Manager" 
   07/20/2006 04:58 PM
   Please respond to
"ADSM: Dist Stor Manager" 


To
ADSM-L@VM.MARIST.EDU
cc

Subject
Re: Conferences






On Thu, Jul 20, 2006 at 03:23:32PM -0500, Mark Stapleton wrote:
> "ADSM: Dist Stor Manager"  wrote on 07/20/2006
> 02:28:17 PM:
> > Look at the "Tivoli Technical User Conference".  It's in the spring
> > in the USA.
> > Never have gone so cannot say if it is worth it.
> >
> > Rob Berendt wrote:
> > > So is there a TSM conference, much like IBM's COMMON conference for
> their
> > > i5 systems?
> > > If so, is it worth it?
>
> The Tivoli Tech conference is good if you're looking for high-level
views
> of multiple Tivoli applications (not just TSM) and their interactions
with
> hardware and infrastructure.
>
> If you're looking for TSM stuff at medium- or hard-core engineering
> levels, look elsewhere. This conference is pretty lightweight. Stories
> I've heard make SHARE or the Oxford conference as the ones to consider.

SHARE's website is misleading at best, when it comes to TSM content.  It
is
a wonderful place to meet the developers, and other TSM users.  SHARE is
also
the place to put in product requirements and actually get feedback.

After being involved with SHARE for over 15 years, and seeing
WDSF/ADSM/ITSM
content grow, I would vouch for it being the premier TSM conference for
the
US.  Take a look at the conference agenda for more information about the
content as opposed to using the initial web page as a starting place. Most
all of the TSM sessions I have attended have been OS independent.

We (SHARE) are always looking for speakers with user experiences as well.

Held twice a year, being volunteer run, and a good bargin as well, you
really
can't beat it.

IMHO

cheers,

bob

Re: Updating a Netware password via a script.

[Kathleen M Hallahan]

Thanks for the info and suggestion--I've passed it on to the netware
admin, and hopefully this will resolve it.

Thanks!

Kathleen



_

Kathleen Hallahan
Freddie Mac
Storage Management -- Tape
703-450-3317




   Robert Ouzen Ouzen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
   Sent by: "ADSM: Dist Stor Manager" 
   07/03/2006 12:23 PM
   Please respond to
"ADSM: Dist Stor Manager" 


To
ADSM-L@VM.MARIST.EDU
cc

Subject
Re: Updating a Netware password via a script.






Kathleen

Look at apar IC24190  use the option -NWPWFILE=YES

Regards
Robert Ouzen
Haifa University
Israel

-Original Message-
From: ADSM: Dist Stor Manager [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of
Kathleen M Hallahan
Sent: Monday, July 03, 2006 6:17 PM
To: ADSM-L@VM.MARIST.EDU
Subject: [ADSM-L] Updating a Netware password via a script.

Our Netware admin has come to me looking for some assistance in updating
the Netware password via a script across all of her servers (due to a
security requirement, they all have to be changed every 90 days now).  To
do it manually involves running a dsmc incr of one file on every server
and inputting the Netware ID and password.  Because of the number of
clusters, she's calculated that this change could take up to 36 hours
every time it needs to be done, and is looking for a way to shorten the
timeline.

I did suggest that she use the -nwuser=servername\user:password option.
When she tested it out, it worked for the session, but did not update the
password file.

Has anyone ever tried to do anything like this?

Thanks,

Kathleen

TSM Server:  AIX 5.2.3.1
TSM Client:Netware 5.2.2.9 on Netware v. 6.5


_

Kathleen Hallahan
Freddie Mac
Storage Management -- Tape

Updating a Netware password via a script.

[Kathleen M Hallahan]

Our Netware admin has come to me looking for some assistance in updating
the Netware password via a script across all of her servers (due to a
security requirement, they all have to be changed every 90 days now).  To
do it manually involves running a dsmc incr of one file on every server
and inputting the Netware ID and password.  Because of the number of
clusters, she's calculated that this change could take up to 36 hours
every time it needs to be done, and is looking for a way to shorten the
timeline.

I did suggest that she use the -nwuser=servername\user:password option.
When she tested it out, it worked for the session, but did not update the
password file.

Has anyone ever tried to do anything like this?

Thanks,

Kathleen

TSM Server:  AIX 5.2.3.1
TSM Client:Netware 5.2.2.9 on Netware v. 6.5


_

Kathleen Hallahan
Freddie Mac
Storage Management -- Tape

Re: load/unload behavior/db backup failure

[Kathleen M Hallahan]

I generally do this sort of thing by creating macros with select queries.
A

select 'checkout libvol 3584lib',volume_name,'checklabel=no remove=no from
libvolumes'  > /output/file

should create a quick list for you.  Just delete the column heading lined
from the file and run the macro from inside TSM and your tapes should all
check out within a couple of minutes.



_

Kathleen Hallahan
Freddie Mac
Storage Management -- Tape
703-450-3317




   "Gill, Geoffrey L." <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
   Sent by: "ADSM: Dist Stor Manager" 
   04/14/2006 04:15 PM
   Please respond to
"ADSM: Dist Stor Manager" 


To
ADSM-L@VM.MARIST.EDU
cc

Subject
Re: load/unload behavior/db backup failure






I was in the process of trying to do that but can't seem to remove the
tapes. Usually I do a checkout libvol 3584lib tapenumber remove=no. Can
this
be done in a huge bulk checkout and then labeled and checked in bulk also?

I've got 400 tapes so I'd like to run it once if possible, or at least
break
it out in groups of 50 or so.

Thanks,

Geoff Gill
TSM Administrator
PeopleSoft Sr. Systems Administrator
SAIC M/S-G1b
(858)826-4062
Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]



-Original Message-
From: ADSM: Dist Stor Manager [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of
Kathleen M Hallahan
Sent: Friday, April 14, 2006 12:45 PM
To: ADSM-L@VM.MARIST.EDU
Subject: Re: load/unload behavior/db backup failure

What Checklabel parameter did you use when you checked the tapes in?  If
you used either No or Barcode, then it might be worth doing a label libvol
of one tape and backing up the database to that volume to see if it works.
 If you used Checklabel=Yes, you could try taking that drive offline and
see if you get the same error on another drive.

When we've had tapes marked as private with no data on them in the past,
it's usually been an indicator of tape drive hardware problem.  I don't
recall a specific problem with reading the internal label on the
tapes--but we had a LOT of problems when we initially moved to LTO2/3584,
about two years ago, so I don't remember all of the different error
messages we got.

Hopefully some of this helps...

_

Kathleen Hallahan
Freddie Mac
Storage Management -- Tape
703-450-3317




   "Gill, Geoffrey L." <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
   Sent by: "ADSM: Dist Stor Manager" 
   04/14/2006 03:29 PM
   Please respond to
"ADSM: Dist Stor Manager" 


To
ADSM-L@VM.MARIST.EDU
cc

Subject
load/unload behavior/db backup failure






Well after trying to define everything, correct hopefully, it seems
something is wrong. What I have found is that trying to do a db backup
causes the load and unload of many tapes which all get set to private. The
error in the log is ANR8355E I/O error reading label for volume T1 in
drive LTO_2 (/dev/rmt2). ANR8778W Scratch volume T1 changed to Private
Status to prevent re-access. They all seem to load to this drive.



So the question is, are all these tapes that were supposed to be labeled
not, or is something else going on?



Thanks,



Geoff Gill

TSM Administrator

PeopleSoft Sr. Systems Administrator

SAIC M/S-G1b

(858)826-4062

Email:  <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: load/unload behavior/db backup failure

[Kathleen M Hallahan]

What Checklabel parameter did you use when you checked the tapes in?  If
you used either No or Barcode, then it might be worth doing a label libvol
of one tape and backing up the database to that volume to see if it works.
 If you used Checklabel=Yes, you could try taking that drive offline and
see if you get the same error on another drive.

When we've had tapes marked as private with no data on them in the past,
it's usually been an indicator of tape drive hardware problem.  I don't
recall a specific problem with reading the internal label on the
tapes--but we had a LOT of problems when we initially moved to LTO2/3584,
about two years ago, so I don't remember all of the different error
messages we got.

Hopefully some of this helps...

_

Kathleen Hallahan
Freddie Mac
Storage Management -- Tape
703-450-3317




   "Gill, Geoffrey L." <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
   Sent by: "ADSM: Dist Stor Manager" 
   04/14/2006 03:29 PM
   Please respond to
"ADSM: Dist Stor Manager" 


To
ADSM-L@VM.MARIST.EDU
cc

Subject
load/unload behavior/db backup failure






Well after trying to define everything, correct hopefully, it seems
something is wrong. What I have found is that trying to do a db backup
causes the load and unload of many tapes which all get set to private. The
error in the log is ANR8355E I/O error reading label for volume T1 in
drive LTO_2 (/dev/rmt2). ANR8778W Scratch volume T1 changed to Private
Status to prevent re-access. They all seem to load to this drive.



So the question is, are all these tapes that were supposed to be labeled
not, or is something else going on?



Thanks,



Geoff Gill

TSM Administrator

PeopleSoft Sr. Systems Administrator

SAIC M/S-G1b

(858)826-4062

Email:   [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: library inventory is off ?

[Kathleen M Hallahan]

An audit library should clear this up.  It may be helpful to have the 3584
to a physical scan on the library first.

If all else fails, you can try running a checkout libvol using remove=no
and checkl=no, and then check it back in.  But the fact that your library
and TSM server are out of sync with one another means the audit library is
probably called for in any case.

Hope it helps!

_

Kathleen Hallahan
Freddie Mac
Storage Management -- Tape





   "Vats.Ashok" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
   Sent by: "ADSM: Dist Stor Manager" 
   03/30/2006 01:16 PM
   Please respond to
"ADSM: Dist Stor Manager" 


To
ADSM-L@VM.MARIST.EDU
cc

Subject
Re: library inventory is off ?






We are running TSM server 5.3.0.0 on AIX 5.3.0 ml 2.

We have 3584lib and when we do >  q libv it returns saying that volume is
in the library.
3584LIB FT0243 Private   TSM01 Data 1,370 LTO


>Q vol FT0243
Volume Name  Storage Device Estimated  Pct
 Volume
 Pool Name   Class Name  Capacity Util
 Status
 --- -- -
- 
FT0243   LTOPOOL LTODEV 428,686.1 18.7
  Full

In fact  FT0243 is not physically in the library, it is out side. It looks
like data base is off or library is confused ? What I can do to fix it. I
would like to checkin the volume. When I try to check in it says volume
already in the library ?
Appreciate any help..

Thanks,
Ashok

Re: 3584 library: problems with some trays

[Kathleen M Hallahan]

We tested it out in our environment, and did not find the same
problem--all tapes were scanned appropriately.

I guess our barcode scanner is right-side-up.



_

Kathleen Hallahan
Freddie Mac
Storage Management -- Tape
703-450-3317




   "Jurjen Oskam" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
   Sent by: "ADSM: Dist Stor Manager" 
   03/29/2006 09:40 AM
   Please respond to
"ADSM: Dist Stor Manager" 


To
ADSM-L@VM.MARIST.EDU
cc

Subject
Re: 3584 library: problems with some trays






On Wed, Mar 29, 2006 at 10:26:52AM +0100, Leigh Reed wrote:

> I raised a call with IBM and they have come back with the fact that it
> may be to do with a barcode scanner that has been installed upside down.

My call is still open. When a solution is available, I'll report back.

> -
> CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: This message is confidential, intended only for
> the named recipient(s) and may contain information that is privileged,
> or exempt from disclosure under applicable law. If you are not the
> intended recipient(s), you are notified that the dissemination,
> distribution or copying of this message is strictly prohibited. If you
> receive this message in error, or are not the named recipient(s), please
> notify the sender by reply e-mail, delete this e-mail from your
> computer, and destroy any copies in any form immediately. Receipt by
> anyone other than the named recipient(s) is not a waiver of any
> attorney-client, work product, or other applicable privilege.  This
> message and all contents may be reviewed by authorized parties of the
> Catholic Health System other than those named in the message header.
>
> The contents of this message do not bind the Catholic Health System to
> any contract, position, or course of action unless the sender is
> specifically authorized to enter into contracts on behalf of the
> Catholic Health System. The contents of this message do not necessarily
> constitute an official representation of the Catholic Health System.

Oh dear, it looks like someone from your Legal Department escaped and
came too close to a computer again. Please be more careful with them
in the future.

--
Jurjen Oskam

Re: 3584 library: problems with some trays

[Kathleen M Hallahan]

Fair enough.  :)  I think we're going to test this on Wednesday morning
(the next time someone will be out to that building), using the first two
frames of our library.  I'll post if anything interesting results.



_

Kathleen Hallahan
Freddie Mac
Storage Management -- Tape
703-450-3317




On Mon, Mar 20, 2006 at 02:33:00PM -0500, Kathleen M Hallahan wrote:

> Is this something you folks are seeing in all frames, or in just one?

Both. Our 3584 is just one frame. :)

--
Jurjen Oskam

Re: 3584 library: problems with some trays

[Kathleen M Hallahan]

Is this something you folks are seeing in all frames, or in just one?  We
just upgraded one library to this code not long ago, and I'd like to check
and see whether it's affecting us as well.  That particular library also
has a fair amount of empty space, but we're supposed to upgrade another
one that does not, and I don't want to run into this problem there.

Thanks!



_

Kathleen Hallahan
Freddie Mac





On Mon, 20 Mar 2006, Jurjen Oskam wrote:

> Some investigation revealed that the library was somehow "blind" to
> tapes in the last row of the first and second column, but this only
> happened after a library initialization due to a powerup or open/close
> of the entire front door.

> We're on library code 5770, and the TSM symptoms are errors about slots

I saw the same thing, but chalked it up to me doing something dumb.  I
didn't investigate since we're substantially under-taped, too.

I never saw this problem before updating to 5770.

--Jim

Re: Move data from a copy storage pool to another copy storage pool

[Kathleen M Hallahan]

Or you could simply run the command

backup stg primarypool newcopypool

and then delete the old copy pool after the new copy completes.  Unless
you need the 3590's back immediately, or there's a downside to this that
I'm not aware of...



_

Kathleen Hallahan
Freddie Mac





   "Meuleman, Ruud" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
   Sent by: "ADSM: Dist Stor Manager" 
   03/15/2006 11:00 AM
   Please respond to
"ADSM: Dist Stor Manager" 


To
ADSM-L@VM.MARIST.EDU
cc

Subject
Move data from a copy storage pool to another copy storage pool






Hi all,

To move data from a primary storage pool to another primary storage
pool, you can use the command 'move nodedata'. But how can you move data
from a copy storage pool to another copy storage pool? I have to move
data from 3590 tapes to 3592 tapes. I know I can delete volumes from the
copy storage pool and make a backup of the primary storage pool again.
But I prefer a saver way.

With regards,
Ruud Meuleman

Re: dsmerror.log in TSM 5.3

[Kathleen M Hallahan]

I've put in a DCR trying to get this changed back, in fact.  There's no
good reason for everyone who might run a backup or archive--including
DBAs, application/business users, etc.--to have write access to the file
like that.  And it runs contrary to the current climate of increasing
security.

DCRs from other users might help the process along...



_

Kathleen Hallahan
Freddie Mac
Distributed Backups
703-450-3317




   "Paul Zarnowski" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
   Sent by: "ADSM: Dist Stor Manager" 
   12/02/2005 04:53 PM
   Please respond to
"ADSM: Dist Stor Manager" 


To
ADSM-L@VM.MARIST.EDU
cc

Subject
dsmerror.log in TSM 5.3






Ok, so TSM client development has decided that starting with TSM 5.3,
the dsmerror.log file has to be writable, or else it will fail.

Why?  What was the overwhelming reason to make this behavior change?

Unless I am missing an easy solution to this problem, this is going
to cause our users grief, and I don't see a simple solution.  I liked
it better when the client just continued to work, but didn't write to
the error log.  Now we have to explain to our users that they have to
rewrite their scripts, or they have to set environment variables, or
they have to be careful which directory they run TSM out of.  They
don't need this annoyance.  I don't see the reason for the change.

grr.

Does anyone know if MacOS X has something similar to an /etc/environment
file?

..Paul


--
Paul ZarnowskiPh: 607-255-4757
Manager, Storage Systems  Fx: 607-255-8521
719 Rhodes Hall, Ithaca, NY 14853-3801Em: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: volumes being marked seen as write protected

[Kathleen M Hallahan]

Oh yes, we see this from time to time.  We used to have a lot more of
these sorts of errors, and have spent considerable time working with IBM
on this sort of thing since moving to 3584 libraries.   Early on, a lot of
tape drives were replaced; sometimes, having the drive calibrated seems to
help.  We've got microcode upgrades scheduled soon, which I'm hoping
helps, but that's still an open question.  There doesn't seem to be a good
fix for this as yet; all we've been able to do is periodically check for
these tapes and update them, and keep reporting problems to IBM.



_

Kathleen Hallahan
Freddie Mac
Distributed Backups
703-450-3317




   "Aaron Durkee" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
   Sent by: "ADSM: Dist Stor Manager" 
   10/13/2005 12:44 PM
   Please respond to
"ADSM: Dist Stor Manager" 


To
ADSM-L@VM.MARIST.EDU
cc

Subject
volumes being marked seen as write protected






Hi All,
  Wondering if anyone else has seen this yet?
  Volumes scratch and private are being seen as write protected and either
marked as unavailable (those with data) or private (scratch volumes) When
I eject the tape its not write protected.  Its a 3584 tape library and I'm
pretty sure both the gen 1 and gen 2 drives are doing this, but need to
investigate details more.  All the media is gen 1.
  TSM server 5.3.1.4 on AIX 5.3 connected via 3534 fiber switches.

10/13/05 04:04:39 ANR8463E LTO volume 894ACT is write protected.
10/13/05 04:04:57 ANR8778W Scratch volume 894ACT changed to Private Status
to prevent re-access.

  Thanks in advace, Aaron


Aaron Durkee
Infrastructure Analyst
Networking and Technical Group
Catholic Health Systems, Inc.
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
phone: (716) 862-1713
fax: (716) 862-1717

Re: Novell backup performance

[Kathleen M Hallahan]

Thanks--I'll pass this along to her!



_

Kathleen Hallahan
Freddie Mac
Distributed Backups
703-450-3317




   "Troy Frank" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
   Sent by: "ADSM: Dist Stor Manager" 
   09/16/2005 11:19 AM
   Please respond to
"ADSM: Dist Stor Manager" 


To
ADSM-L@VM.MARIST.EDU
cc

Subject
Re: Novell backup performance






Open the server's remote management website (http://servername:8008),
click the "Set Parameters" link, then the "Communications" link.  It will
be in there.  You can also set it at the console with a command something
like "set tcp delayed acknowlegement = off".  I don't believe the setting
stays permanently that way, however (unless you add it to the
autoexec.ncf).


Troy Frank
Network Services
University of Wisconsin Medical Foundation
608.829.5384

>>> [EMAIL PROTECTED] 9/16/2005 9:27 AM >>>
Kurt,

I sent this information off to our Netware admin as a possible fix for
some issues we're having, and she cannot even locate the setting. I tried
a Google search with no luck, and a search of Novell's website didn't
return anything to me. I'm not a Netware person at all so I have no idea
what to even suggest to her. The systems in question are on Netware
6.5--do you know if the option still exists there, and if so, how I can
guide her to it?

Thanks much!

Kathleen



_

Kathleen Hallahan
Freddie Mac
Distributed Backups
703-450-3317




"Timothy Hughes" < [EMAIL PROTECTED] >
Sent by: "ADSM: Dist Stor Manager" < ADSM-L@VM.MARIST.EDU >
09/16/2005 08:05 AM
Please respond to
"ADSM: Dist Stor Manager" < ADSM-L@VM.MARIST.EDU >


To
ADSM-L@VM.MARIST.EDU
cc

Subject
Re: Novell backup performance






Thanks Again! Kurt and David

Kurt Beyers wrote:

> Check as well that the parameter TCP_DELAYED_ACKNOWLEDGEMENT=OFF on the
Novell server.
>
> Switching it from the default 'ON' to OFF improved the backups times
with a factor of 3 at a customer.
>
> best regards;
> Kurt
>
> 
>
> Van: ADSM: Dist Stor Manager namens David E Ehresman
> Verzonden: do 15/09/2005 20:25
> Aan: ADSM-L@VM.MARIST.EDU
> Onderwerp: Re: [ADSM-L] Novell backup performance
>
> When we had a similar problem Servergraph/TSM told us the bottleneck was
the network I/O. Upgrading the TSM server to a gig ethernet card and
switch dramatically improved the backup times of our Novel clients.
>
> >>> [EMAIL PROTECTED] 09/12/05 1:43 PM >>>
> Hello,
>
> We have a Novell client who's backup is taking to long
> We added the Resourceutilization line (8) to the dsm.opt file
> but it's still taking long. Does anyone have any suggestions
> on what else I might take a look at or do that would help improve
> the backup time. The backup starts around midnight.
>
> Here is the DSM.OPT file
>
> * Setting Options for the TCP/IP Communication Method
>
> TCPCLIENTADDRESS xx.xx.xx.xx
> TCPSERVERADDRESS xx.xx.xx.xx (tsm server ip)
> TCPPORT 1500
> HTTPPORT 1581
>
> errorlogretention 14
> schedlogretention 7
> Setting Nodename
>
> NODENAME X
> ERRORLOGNAME SYS:Tivoli\TSM\CLIENT\BA\dsmerror.log
> SCHEDLOGNAME SYS:Tivoli\TSM\CLIENT\BA\dsmsched.log
> PASSWORDDIR SYS:Tivoli\TSM\CLIENT\BA\password
>
> * EXCLUDE directory:.O=TIVOLI.*
> * INCLUDE directory:.O=TIVOLI.OU=Development.*
>
> DOMAIN ALL-LOCAL -NDS -SYS: -VOL1:
> * DOMAIN ALL-LOCAL
>
> * NetWare general excludes
> * -
> * EXCLUDE sys:\system\secaudit.log
> * EXCLUDE sys:\system\events.log
> * EXCLUDE sys:\system\system.log
> * EXCLUDE sys:\system\btrieve.trn
> * EXCLUDE SYS:\system\tsa\err$hst.*
> * EXCLUDE sys:\system\tsa\err$log.*
> * EXCLUDE sys:\system\tsa\skip$log.*
> * EXCLUDE sys:\system\tsa\tsa$temp.*
> * EXCLUDE sys:\system\sys$log.err
> * EXCLUDE sys:\_swap_.mem
> * EXCLUDE sys:\vol$log.err
> * EXCLUDE sys:\tts$log.err
>
> exclude.dir poa:RESTORE
> exclude.dir nvol1:RESTORE
> exclude.dir mta:RESTORE
> exclude.dir gwia:RESTORE
>
> * NetWare Memory management option
>
> MEMORYEFFICIENTBACKUP YES
>
> * NWEXITNLMP NO
>
> managedservices schedule webclient
> * managedservices schedule
>
> schedmode prompted
>
> passwordaccess generate
>
> * NWUSER server_1_name\user\:password
> * NWUSER server_2_name\user:password
> * NWUSER nds_tree_name\user:password
>
> NWPWFILE YES
>
> * Resouce Utilization specifies the number of back end connections
> resourceutilization 8
>
> Quiet
> * VERBOSE
>
> Thanks for any help, suggestions or advice!
>
> Novell Client 5.2.2
> TSM Server 5.3.1.4
> AIX RS/6000



Confidentiality Notice follows:

The information in this message (and the documents attached to it, if any)
is confidential and may be legally privileged. It is intended solely for
the addressee. Access to this message by anyone else is unauthorized. 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. If you have received this message in
e

Re: Novell backup performance

[Kathleen M Hallahan]

Kurt,

I sent this information off to our Netware admin as a possible fix for
some issues we're having, and she cannot even locate the setting.  I tried
a Google search with no luck, and a search of Novell's website didn't
return anything to me.  I'm not a Netware person at all so I have no idea
what to even suggest to her.  The systems in question are on Netware
6.5--do you know if the option still exists there, and if so, how I can
guide her to it?

Thanks much!

Kathleen



_

Kathleen Hallahan
Freddie Mac
Distributed Backups
703-450-3317




   "Timothy Hughes" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
   Sent by: "ADSM: Dist Stor Manager" 
   09/16/2005 08:05 AM
   Please respond to
"ADSM: Dist Stor Manager" 


To
ADSM-L@VM.MARIST.EDU
cc

Subject
Re: Novell backup performance






Thanks Again! Kurt and David

Kurt Beyers wrote:

> Check as well that the parameter TCP_DELAYED_ACKNOWLEDGEMENT=OFF on the
Novell server.
>
> Switching it from the default 'ON' to OFF improved the backups times
with a factor of 3 at a customer.
>
> best regards;
> Kurt
>
> 
>
> Van: ADSM: Dist Stor Manager namens David E Ehresman
> Verzonden: do 15/09/2005 20:25
> Aan: ADSM-L@VM.MARIST.EDU
> Onderwerp: Re: [ADSM-L] Novell backup performance
>
> When we had a similar problem Servergraph/TSM told us the bottleneck was
the network I/O.  Upgrading the TSM server to a gig ethernet card and
switch dramatically improved the backup times of our Novel clients.
>
> >>> [EMAIL PROTECTED] 09/12/05 1:43 PM >>>
> Hello,
>
> We have a Novell client who's backup is taking to long
> We added the Resourceutilization line (8) to the dsm.opt file
> but it's still taking long. Does anyone have any suggestions
> on what  else I might take a look at or do that would help improve
> the backup time. The backup starts around midnight.
>
> Here is the DSM.OPT file
>
> *  Setting Options for the TCP/IP Communication Method
>
>  TCPCLIENTADDRESSxx.xx.xx.xx
>  TCPSERVERADDRESSxx.xx.xx.xx  (tsm server ip)
>  TCPPORT 1500
>  HTTPPORT1581
>
>   errorlogretention 14
>   schedlogretention 7
>   Setting Nodename
>
> NODENAME  X
> ERRORLOGNAME   SYS:Tivoli\TSM\CLIENT\BA\dsmerror.log
> SCHEDLOGNAME   SYS:Tivoli\TSM\CLIENT\BA\dsmsched.log
> PASSWORDDIRSYS:Tivoli\TSM\CLIENT\BA\password
>
> * EXCLUDE  directory:.O=TIVOLI.*
> * INCLUDE  directory:.O=TIVOLI.OU=Development.*
>
> DOMAIN ALL-LOCAL -NDS -SYS: -VOL1:
> * DOMAIN ALL-LOCAL
>
> *  NetWare general excludes
> *  -
> * EXCLUDE  sys:\system\secaudit.log
> * EXCLUDE  sys:\system\events.log
> * EXCLUDE  sys:\system\system.log
> * EXCLUDE  sys:\system\btrieve.trn
> * EXCLUDE  SYS:\system\tsa\err$hst.*
> * EXCLUDE  sys:\system\tsa\err$log.*
> * EXCLUDE  sys:\system\tsa\skip$log.*
> * EXCLUDE  sys:\system\tsa\tsa$temp.*
> * EXCLUDE  sys:\system\sys$log.err
> * EXCLUDE  sys:\_swap_.mem
> * EXCLUDE  sys:\vol$log.err
> * EXCLUDE  sys:\tts$log.err
>
> exclude.dir poa:RESTORE
> exclude.dir nvol1:RESTORE
> exclude.dir mta:RESTORE
> exclude.dir gwia:RESTORE
>
> *  NetWare Memory management option
>
>  MEMORYEFFICIENTBACKUP YES
>
> * NWEXITNLMP NO
>
> managedservices schedule webclient
> * managedservices schedule
>
>  schedmode prompted
>
> passwordaccess generate
>
> * NWUSER server_1_name\user\:password
> * NWUSER server_2_name\user:password
> * NWUSER nds_tree_name\user:password
>
> NWPWFILE YES
>
> *  Resouce Utilization specifies the number of back end connections
> resourceutilization 8
>
>  Quiet
> * VERBOSE
>
> Thanks for any help, suggestions or advice!
>
> Novell Client 5.2.2
> TSM Server 5.3.1.4
> AIX  RS/6000

Re: firewall backup oddity

[Kathleen M Hallahan]

Should one of those tcpport settings actually be a tcpclientport?

We've been through this with firewalls and now just use tcpclientport in
the default configuration, using the same port number as tcpport.

Kathleen




 "Steve Schaub"
 <[EMAIL PROTECTED]
 ST.COM>To
   ADSM-L@VM.MARIST.EDU
  Sent by : "ADSM: Dist Storcc
  Manager"
 Subject
   firewall backup oddity

 06/23/2005 07:42
 AM


 Please respond to
  "ADSM: Dist Stor
  Manager"
  <[EMAIL PROTECTED]
   T.EDU>






All,

I have a windows 5.3.0.5 client behind a firewall that wont backup via it's
tsm scheduled backup to my aix 5.2.2.0 server, yet works ok when I initiate
a manual backup via the native gui or command line on the client itself.
It
sometimes even  works when I kick off an immediate action schedule.  I
thought I had gone through the correct steps to make this work, so I'm
stumped.  The network guys assure me that port 1500 is open in both
directions for the client & server ip addresses.  Any pointers in the right
direction would be appreciated.
-steve schaub


Date/Time Message


--
06/23/05 00:04:05 ANR2716E Schedule prompter was not able to contact
client
SHADRACH using type 1 (10.151.4.66 1068). (SESSION:
496)
06/23/05 01:00:01 ANR2578W Schedule SHADRACH in domain NT_WEBSERVERS
for
no
   de SHADRACH has missed its scheduled start up
window.

06/23/05 06:25:03 ANR2017I Administrator S42919S issued command: QUERY
ACTL
   OG begind=-1 begint=17:00 s=shadrach  (SESSION:
6099)



q node shadrach f=d

 Node Name: SHADRACH
  Platform: WinNT
   Client OS Level: 5.00
Client Version: Version 5, Release 3, Level 0.5
Policy Domain Name: NT_WEBSERVERS
 Last Access Date/Time: 06/22/05 16:43:53
Days Since Last Access: 1
Password Set Date/Time: 12/17/02 16:08:24
   Days Since Password Set: 919
 Invalid Sign-on Count: 0
   Locked?: No
   Contact: Len Starnes
   Compression: Client
   Archive Delete Allowed?: Yes
Backup Delete Allowed?: No
Registration Date/Time: 09/04/01 14:54:55
 Registering Administrator: MELINDA
Last Communication Method Used: Tcp/Ip
   Bytes Received Last Session: 3,788.75 M
   Bytes Sent Last Session: 12,063
  Duration of Last Session: 10,601.94
   Pct. Idle Wait Last Session: 53.52
  Pct. Comm. Wait Last Session: 36.96
  Pct. Media Wait Last Session: 0.00
 Optionset: WINDOWS
   URL: http://shadrach:1581
 Node Type: Client
Password Expiration Period: 9,999 Day(s)
 Keep Mount Point?: No
  Maximum Mount Points Allowed: 2
Auto Filespace Rename : No
 Validate Protocol: No
   TCP/IP Name: SHADRACH
TCP/IP Address: x.x.x.x
Globally Unique ID:
30.c8.92.41.11.db.11.d7.a5.e4.00.03.47.4d.37.7a
 Transaction Group Max: 0
   Data Write Path: ANY
Data Read Path: ANY
Session Initiation: ClientOrServer
High-level Address: x.x.x.x
 Low-level Address: 1500



dsm.opt on shadrach

*==*
* Tivoli Storage Manager - BCBST Win Servers Backup-Archive Clients*
*==*

*==*
* Identification Section   *
*==*
nodename   SHADRACH
tcpserveraddress   x.x.x.x
tcpport1500
tcpclientaddress   x.x.x.x
tcpport1500
*==*
* Communication Section*
*==*
commmethod TCPIP
tcpbuffsize512
tcpwindowsize  1024
httpport   1581

*==*
* CAD/Schedule Settings Section*
*==*
passwordaccess generate
managedservicesschedule webclient
errorlogretention  90
schedlogretention  14

*=

Re: running 3494 in MANUAL mode - URGENT!! (Please?)

[Kathleen M Hallahan]

Have you been in touch with IBM support on this?  This happened to us once, and
it turned out that the problem was not in the robot itself, but that a board
needed to be replaced.  I can't tell you exactly what was replaced because I'd
been relieved by the time the fix was worked out.  I'd be interested in knowing
what yours turns out to be (because it could happen to us if it hasn't
already... : }  )

Good luck!

Kathleen



|+--->
||  William Boyer|
||  <[EMAIL PROTECTED]|
||  ET>  |
||   |
||  04/09/2001   |
||  11:22 AM |
||  Please   |
||  respond to   |
||  "ADSM: Dist  |
||  Stor Manager"|
||   |
|+--->
  >|
  ||
  |   To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]     |
  |   cc: (bcc: Kathleen M Hallahan/ISS/HQ/FHLMC)  |
  |   Subject: running 3494 in MANUAL mode - URGENT!! (Please?)|
  >|






AIX 4.3, TSM 3.7.2.0 and an IBM 3494 library L-14 and D12 with 4-drives.

After more than 3-years, the robot/gripper in our library died. We do not
have the dual robot feature. The library manager is now configured for
online manual mode, but even though TSM processes are showing as waiting for
tape mounts, the drive display doesn't show any tape volsers to be mounted.
A Q ACT on TSM doesn't show any messages about tapes expecting to be mounted
on drive. I did a SHOW LIBRARY and 2 of my drives show RESERVED with no
volser showing. I mounted 1 of the tapes the Q PRO says it's waiting for and
... nothingnada! The drive comes ready at mount point, but TSM never
recognizes that I've mounted a tape.

How can I operate the library in manual mode until IBM can get the needed
parts onsite??? That'll take a  few more hours and I"m already behind in my
storage pool backups.

TIA,
Bill Boyer
"Some days you are the bug, some days you are the windshield." - ??

Re: AIX Server - What's Stable?

[Kathleen M Hallahan]

Has anyone noticed anything like this happening with regular backups?  We
recently upgraded our server code to 4.1.2, and while the vast majority of our
backups are running faster, there are a couple of Sun Solaris clients out there
whose backups are running much more slowly.  None of the clients have been
upgraded yet; the two that stand out as being especially slow are on 3.1.0.5 and
3.1.0.8.  Most of our other clients are also on these code levels.

It would seem on the surface that there must be something different with these
particular nodes; discussions with the sysadmins haven't turned up anything as
yet, though.  In addition, the change in speed coincides exactly with our server
upgrade.  Does this match your experience at all (or anyone else's, for that
matter)?

Thanks!

Kathleen



|+>
||  Tab Trepagnier|
||  |
|||
||  03/26/2001 12:29  |
||  PM|
||  Please respond to |
||  "ADSM: Dist Stor  |
||  Manager"  |
|||
|+>
  >|
  ||
  |   To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]     |
  |   cc: (bcc: Kathleen M Hallahan/ISS/HQ/FHLMC)  |
  |   Subject: Re: AIX Server - What's Stable? |
  >|






David,

You stated:

"One archive job we did usually ran for 2 hours. When we went to 4.1.2 it
took over 15 hours... Not acceptable of course! So we went back to 4.1.0
and
the archive ran okay.  IBM Support is still working on this.  I seems that
no one else in the [EMAIL PROTECTED] <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
land
was having this trouble."

The statement about no one else having that problem is not accurate.

We have a large CAD server whose archive job normally runs for a couple of
hours and sends about 30 GB.

After upgrading to TSM 4.1.2, the last run of that job had sent only 1 GB
after running for over 30 hours.  Also, the DB cache hit percentage which
is normally in the 98.8%-99.1% range was driven down to less than 97.5%.

There is a problem there and it is on my list to call that in also.

Tab Trepagnier
TSM Administrator
Laitram Corporation

Re: 3590E

[Kathleen M Hallahan]

What server code are you using?  There has been some discussion over the last
couple of weeks about problems like this...one report of a microcode fix, which
we are i also in the process of trying out in our test environment and should
hopefully put into production soon.

Kathleen



|+-->
||  Debbie Lane |
|||
||  |
||  02/14/2001 04:40|
||  PM  |
||  Please respond  |
||  to "ADSM: Dist  |
||  Stor Manager"   |
||  |
|+-->
  >|
  ||
  |   To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] |
  |   cc:     (bcc: Kathleen M Hallahan/ISS/HQ/FHLMC)  |
  |   Subject: Re: 3590E   |
  >|






oops, The drive is a 3590-E1A.  The tapes in question are the "K" higher
capacity tapes.

-Original Message-
From: Richard Sims [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Wednesday, February 14, 2001 1:27 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: 3590E


>We recently started using 3590E tapes.  Several of them are damaged.  We
>talked to IBM support, and it sounds like other customers have had similar
>problems.  I am wondering if any of you have experienced 3590E damaged in
>shipment?   Have you had other problems with the 3590E?

I think you mean 3590E drives.  We had one upgrade kit damaged in shipment,
thanks to the trucking company.  One upgrade kit had a defective card pack,
and it took over three weeks for the replacement to arrive - from Mexico.
>From what I hear, the defect rate from that plant is pretty bad, with
drives misconfigured or otherwise inoperable, and has become an issue
within the company.

   Richard Sims, BU

ANR9999D Error Message

[Kathleen M Hallahan]

Has anyone ever seen the message "ANRD  smnode.c (6502) :  Cannot push
Normalized Insert Verb."?  This occurred when a restore session was kicked off
during the night, and it cancelled a backup in order to claim the tape drive.
Normally when that happens the backup cancels cleanly and restarts with a new
session; in this case the original session will not die, and it spawned two new
sessions (which did nothing because they were waiting for the tape that the
original session still has).  Any thoughts as to what might have caused this or
how it might be preventable?



Thanks!

Kathleen

Re: Problems after 4.1 Upgrade and Resolutions

[Kathleen M Hallahan]

Are the drives themselves showing errors?  That's one of the weird things we've
got...our CE has checked the drive logs and there are absolutely no errors to be
found.

I'm going to give our CE printed copies of all these emails so that he can pass
this along to Tuscon, unless anyone has any objections.  Diana, did you ever get
that microcode?  If you did, have you had the opportunity to see if it fixes the
problem?

Thanks all!

Kathleen



|+--->
||  "Short, Anne"|
||   |
||   |
||  02/05/2001   |
||  09:53 AM |
||  Please   |
||  respond to   |
||  "ADSM: Dist  |
||  Stor Manager"|
||   |
|+--->
  >|
  ||
  |   To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]         |
  |   cc: (bcc: Kathleen M Hallahan/ISS/HQ/FHLMC)  |
  |   Subject: Re: Problems after 4.1 Upgrade and Resolutions  |
  >|






We also get many ANR8302 errors.  We are W2K server with TSM 4.1.2 server
(before 4.1.2, we were 4.1.0).  Since this is a new server and never had
anything other than 4.1.x on it, and we have many other problems with the
tape drives, such as tapes getting stuck, we attributed these errors to bad
drives.  Though the drives have been replaced twice now and we are still
getting these same errors.  Maybe it's not the drives after all.


Anne Short
Lockheed Martin Enterprise Information Systems
Gaithersburg, Maryland
301-240-6184
CODA/I Storage Management

-Original Message-
From: Braich, Raminder [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Monday, February 05, 2001 9:31 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Problems after 4.1 Upgrade and Resolutions

I am aslo getting ANR8301E ANR8302E op=write errors. This started happening
after we upgraded to TSM 4.1. We are on WIN 2000 environment.
Raminder

> -Original Message-
> From: Kathleen M Hallahan [SMTP:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Friday, February 02, 2001 6:55 PM
> To:   [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject:  Re: Problems after 4.1 Upgrade and Resolutions
>
> I haven't heard back yet as to whether the code is available, or even if
> our
> problem is definitely the same problem.  Our CE mentioned her PMR number
> in our
> PMR, and he and I have both spoken to someone in Tuscon, so hopefully I'll
> have
> more data on that soon.  What error codes are you getting, and what is
> your
> environment?  Have you taken it up with IBM yet?  I'd love to know if
> there
> really are others seeing the same problems besides just a couple of
> us.
>
> Kathleen
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> "Braich, Raminder" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> on 02/02/2001 11:17:04 AM
>
> Please respond to "ADSM: Dist Stor Manager" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>
>
>
>   To:  [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
>   cc:  (bcc: Kathleen M Hallahan/ISS/HQ/FHLMC)
>
>
>
>   Subject  Re: Problems after 4.1 Upgrade and Resolutions
>   :
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Kathleen,
> I read your post on ADSM forum regarding the tape IO errors Diana
> Noble
> was having. I am also having the same errors. You mentioned they were
> working on some microcode and should be released soon. Did they ever
> release
> it, if so from where can I download it.
>
> Raminder

Re: Problems after 4.1 Upgrade and Resolutions

[Kathleen M Hallahan]

I haven't heard back yet as to whether the code is available, or even if our
problem is definitely the same problem.  Our CE mentioned her PMR number in our
PMR, and he and I have both spoken to someone in Tuscon, so hopefully I'll have
more data on that soon.  What error codes are you getting, and what is your
environment?  Have you taken it up with IBM yet?  I'd love to know if there
really are others seeing the same problems besides just a couple of us.

Kathleen








"Braich, Raminder" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> on 02/02/2001 11:17:04 AM

Please respond to "ADSM: Dist Stor Manager" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>



  To:      [EMAIL PROTECTED]

  cc:  (bcc: Kathleen M Hallahan/ISS/HQ/FHLMC)



  Subject  Re: Problems after 4.1 Upgrade and Resolutions
  :








Kathleen,
I read your post on ADSM forum regarding the tape IO errors Diana Noble
was having. I am also having the same errors. You mentioned they were
working on some microcode and should be released soon. Did they ever release
it, if so from where can I download it.

Raminder

Re: Problems after 4.1 Upgrade and Resolutions

[Kathleen M Hallahan]

Thanks for the info!








Diana Noble <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> on 01/30/2001 12:16:03 PM

Please respond to "ADSM: Dist Stor Manager" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>



  To:  [EMAIL PROTECTED]

  cc:      (bcc: Kathleen M Hallahan/ISS/HQ/FHLMC)



  Subject  Re: Problems after 4.1 Upgrade and Resolutions
  :








Our CE has been working with Hardware support on this issue.  The Hardware
PMR is 34925 Branch 422.  As of yesterday, the record still stated the fix
would be released by the end of the month per our CE.


At 11:54 AM 1/30/01 -0500, you wrote:
>Diana,
>
>Who are you working with on the I/O problems?  Is there a contact in
>Tuscon (or
>wherever) that you could give me?  We've got an open PMR on this issue
>right now
>and I'd like to be able to pass that info on to our CE so he can touch
>base with
>them.  And the end of the month is tomorrow...I sure hope they can have this
>ready soon!  This is causing us a lot of headaches!
>
>Good luck,
>
>Kathleen
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>Diana Noble <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> on 01/30/2001 11:22:46 AM
>
>Please respond to "ADSM: Dist Stor Manager" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>
>
>
>   To:  [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
>   cc:  (bcc: Kathleen M Hallahan/ISS/HQ/FHLMC)
>
>
>
>   Subject  Re: Problems after 4.1 Upgrade and Resolutions
>   :
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>We are running D25D.  This level of microcode ran fine prior to going to
>TSM 4.1.  We had never had an IO error before then.  Now we receive the
>errors on both our tape drives.
>
>At 08:43 AM 1/30/01 -0600, you wrote:
> >Diane,
> >
> >What level of microcode are you currently running on your 3590 tape drives.
> >We are running 3590E1A tape drives with a microcode level of D22E.  We have
> >been on this level of code for quite some time with no errors.  Our 3590's
> >are also house within a 3494.
> >
> >
> >-Original Message-
> >From: Diana Noble [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> >Sent: Tuesday, January 30, 2001 8:15 AM
> >To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> >Subject: Problems after 4.1 Upgrade and Resolutions
> >
> >
> >I had posted some questions last month regarding problems we encountered
> >after our upgrade to TSM 4.1 and thought I would pass along what we
> >found.  We are using AIX 4.3, 3590E's and a 3494.
> >
> >When issuing the dsmadmc command we received "ANS1033E An invalid TCP/IP
> >host name was specified".  Resolution was to edit
> >/usr/tivoli/tsm/client/ba/bin/dsm.sys and add a line for TCPServeraddress
> >which stated the tsm server name in full.  This was apparently not
> >necessary under 3.1.
> >
> >We could not label K tapes.  We had problems with this under 3.1, but it
> >turned out IBM needed to flick a switch on the drives.  We upgraded the
> >same day.  We would receive "ANR8750E Volume is incompatible with specified
> >device type".  IBM had defined the volume range for the K tapes as "K
> >extended" and should have been defined as just "K".
> >
> >We also started receiving IO errors on our 3590 tape drives.  This still
> >persists today, but a microcode fix for the problem is in test at IBM and
> >is suppose to be released by the end of the month (Hopefully!).  The error
> >we are receiving is "ANR8302E I/O error on drive RMT1 (/dev/rmt1)
> >(OP=WRITE, CC=0, KEY=0B, ASC=44, ASCQ=00".

Re: Problems after 4.1 Upgrade and Resolutions

[Kathleen M Hallahan]

Diana,

Who are you working with on the I/O problems?  Is there a contact in Tuscon (or
wherever) that you could give me?  We've got an open PMR on this issue right now
and I'd like to be able to pass that info on to our CE so he can touch base with
them.  And the end of the month is tomorrow...I sure hope they can have this
ready soon!  This is causing us a lot of headaches!

Good luck,

Kathleen








Diana Noble <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> on 01/30/2001 11:22:46 AM

Please respond to "ADSM: Dist Stor Manager" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>



  To:  [EMAIL PROTECTED]

  cc:      (bcc: Kathleen M Hallahan/ISS/HQ/FHLMC)



  Subject  Re: Problems after 4.1 Upgrade and Resolutions
  :








We are running D25D.  This level of microcode ran fine prior to going to
TSM 4.1.  We had never had an IO error before then.  Now we receive the
errors on both our tape drives.

At 08:43 AM 1/30/01 -0600, you wrote:
>Diane,
>
>What level of microcode are you currently running on your 3590 tape drives.
>We are running 3590E1A tape drives with a microcode level of D22E.  We have
>been on this level of code for quite some time with no errors.  Our 3590's
>are also house within a 3494.
>
>
>-Original Message-
>From: Diana Noble [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
>Sent: Tuesday, January 30, 2001 8:15 AM
>To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>Subject: Problems after 4.1 Upgrade and Resolutions
>
>
>I had posted some questions last month regarding problems we encountered
>after our upgrade to TSM 4.1 and thought I would pass along what we
>found.  We are using AIX 4.3, 3590E's and a 3494.
>
>When issuing the dsmadmc command we received "ANS1033E An invalid TCP/IP
>host name was specified".  Resolution was to edit
>/usr/tivoli/tsm/client/ba/bin/dsm.sys and add a line for TCPServeraddress
>which stated the tsm server name in full.  This was apparently not
>necessary under 3.1.
>
>We could not label K tapes.  We had problems with this under 3.1, but it
>turned out IBM needed to flick a switch on the drives.  We upgraded the
>same day.  We would receive "ANR8750E Volume is incompatible with specified
>device type".  IBM had defined the volume range for the K tapes as "K
>extended" and should have been defined as just "K".
>
>We also started receiving IO errors on our 3590 tape drives.  This still
>persists today, but a microcode fix for the problem is in test at IBM and
>is suppose to be released by the end of the month (Hopefully!).  The error
>we are receiving is "ANR8302E I/O error on drive RMT1 (/dev/rmt1)
>(OP=WRITE, CC=0, KEY=0B, ASC=44, ASCQ=00".

Re: Problems after 4.1 Upgrade and Resolutions

[Kathleen M Hallahan]

Are you running with K cartridges as well?  We've been seeing these errors also,
but only on the K cartridges.

Kathleen








"Michael, Monte" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> on 01/30/2001 09:43:28 AM

Please respond to "ADSM: Dist Stor Manager" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>



  To:  [EMAIL PROTECTED]

  cc:  (bcc: Kathleen M Hallahan/ISS/HQ/FHLMC)



  Subject  Re: Problems after 4.1 Upgrade and Resolutions
  :








Diane,

What level of microcode are you currently running on your 3590 tape drives.
We are running 3590E1A tape drives with a microcode level of D22E.  We have
been on this level of code for quite some time with no errors.  Our 3590's
are also house within a 3494.


-Original Message-
From: Diana Noble [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Tuesday, January 30, 2001 8:15 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Problems after 4.1 Upgrade and Resolutions


I had posted some questions last month regarding problems we encountered
after our upgrade to TSM 4.1 and thought I would pass along what we
found.  We are using AIX 4.3, 3590E's and a 3494.

When issuing the dsmadmc command we received "ANS1033E An invalid TCP/IP
host name was specified".  Resolution was to edit
/usr/tivoli/tsm/client/ba/bin/dsm.sys and add a line for TCPServeraddress
which stated the tsm server name in full.  This was apparently not
necessary under 3.1.

We could not label K tapes.  We had problems with this under 3.1, but it
turned out IBM needed to flick a switch on the drives.  We upgraded the
same day.  We would receive "ANR8750E Volume is incompatible with specified
device type".  IBM had defined the volume range for the K tapes as "K
extended" and should have been defined as just "K".

We also started receiving IO errors on our 3590 tape drives.  This still
persists today, but a microcode fix for the problem is in test at IBM and
is suppose to be released by the end of the month (Hopefully!).  The error
we are receiving is "ANR8302E I/O error on drive RMT1 (/dev/rmt1)
(OP=WRITE, CC=0, KEY=0B, ASC=44, ASCQ=00".

Re: Dropping pending tapes to scratch

[Kathleen M Hallahan]

As in fact they did--thanks to all for the replies!

Kathleen








Richard Sims <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> on 12/18/2000 02:41:18 PM

Please respond to "ADSM: Dist Stor Manager" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>



  To:  [EMAIL PROTECTED]

  cc:      (bcc: Kathleen M Hallahan/ISS/HQ/FHLMC)



  Subject  Re: Dropping pending tapes to scratch
  :








>When a storage pool contains tapes in pending status, and the pool is
>subsequently updated to "reusedelay=0 days," how long should it take before
>those tapes drop into scratch status?  I expected them to change status
>immediately, and they aren't.

Pending volumes are re-evaluated every hour, beginning 60 minutes
after the server is started.  At that time, the "reusedelay=0 days"
will be observed and the Pending volumes will go to Scratch.
   Richard Sims, BU

Dropping pending tapes to scratch

[Kathleen M Hallahan]

When a storage pool contains tapes in pending status, and the pool is
subsequently updated to "reusedelay=0 days," how long should it take before
those tapes drop into scratch status?  I expected them to change status
immediately, and they aren't.

Thanks!

Kathleen

Re: FW: Losing connection--help!

[Kathleen M Hallahan]

Meant to send this to the listI suspect I'm talking about a different
problem than the one(s) you all are discussing.

Further input is always appreciated...

Kathleen


-- Forwarded by Kathleen M Hallahan/ISS/HQ/FHLMC on
09/13/2000 05:16 PM ---


Kathleen M Hallahan
09/13/2000 04:49 PM

To:   "Fujikawa, Walt" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
cc:

Subject:  Re: FW: Losing connection--help!  (Document link not converted)


In our case, it's a whole group of servers in a single location.  It's an
intermittent problem that may not happen for several weeks, and then will recur
without warning.  Oddly enough, it did just start happening again the other
night.  I think it's been kicked back to the networking people, but no one has
quite gotten a handle on what's causing it yet.  In our case it becomes visible
during regularly scheduled backups.

One of these days someone will solve itwe hope.

Thanks for the thoughts (and if you have any more I'm always open to them)!

Kathleen







"Fujikawa, Walt" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> on 09/13/2000 04:34:50 PM



  To:  Kathleen M Hallahan/ISS/HQ/FHLMC@FHLMC

  cc:



  Subject  FW: Losing connection--help!
  :








I didn't realize this was such an old message when I responded.  Any
resolution yet?

-Original Message-
From: Fujikawa, Walt [SMTP:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
<mailto:[SMTP:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]>
Sent: Wednesday, September 13, 2000 1:31 PM
To:  [EMAIL PROTECTED] <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject:  FW: Losing connection-help!

Yes.  I get this during restores of large .ppt files.  I've yet to open a
PMR with Tivoli because of a backlog, and I have a workaround.  It happened
when restoring a large directory (1.5 gb), with hundreds of files.  The
restore was choking on .ppt files in the 20mb range.  When I restored the
.ppt files only (1st), then went over the top of it skipping the already
restored .ppt files, I was successful.  So, yours may be choking on a
particular file.  You may want to make sure you are scheduling the job so
you can see the dsmsched.log and see where it's stopping.  A call to Tivoli
is probably in order and you will need to run a trace.

Walt Fujikawa
East Bay Water Systems Programming
[EMAIL PROTECTED] <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>  <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
<mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >



-Original Message-
From: Kathleen M Hallahan [SMTP:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
<mailto:[SMTP:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]>
<mailto:[SMTP:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
<mailto:[SMTP:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]> >
Sent: Thursday, July 13, 2000 11:31 AM
To:  [EMAIL PROTECTED] <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
<mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >
Subject:  Losing connection-help!

We've been having a problem for the last three nights, and again about 2
weeks ago, with the same few servers.  They start to back up according to
their schedule, and after a certain point (the same point every time,
generally) the connection gets dropped.  It reestablishes successfully, but
the process repeats itself ad infinitum, unless I manually cancel the active
sessions.  We're running ADSM 3.1.0.5 on AIX 4.2; the servers include six NT
boxes at level 4.00 and ADSM 3.1.0.3, and one Novell server at 4.11 on ADSM
3.1.0.8.  There are two other NT servers at that same location that back up
successfully, and several Novell servers.  The network people were out there
and couldn't find anything.
I've got bits of logs below:
ADSM Server Log:



07/12/00   18:00:06  ANR2561I Schedule prompter contacting BC1NTSPB (session
  13136) to start a scheduled operation.
07/12/00   18:00:08  ANR0406I Session 13139 started for node BC1NTSPB
(WinNT)
 (Tcp/Ip 161.107.157.166(1622)).
07/12/00   18:09:33  ANR0480W Session 13139 for node BC1NTSPB (WinNT)
  terminated - connection with client severed.
07/12/00   18:09:48  ANR0406I Session 13155 started for node BC1NTSPB
(WinNT)
 (Tcp/Ip 161.107.157.166(1802)).
07/12/00   18:19:06  ANR0480W Session 13155 for node BC1NTSPB (WinNT)
  terminated - connection with client severed.
07/12/00   18:19:21  ANR0406I Session 13174 started for node BC1NTSPB
(WinNT)
 (Tcp/Ip 161.107.157.166(1966)).
07/12/00   18:28:34  ANR0480W Session 13174 for node BC1NTSPB (WinNT)
  terminated - connection with client severed.
07/12/00   18:28:49  ANR0406I Session 13181 started for node BC1NTSPB
(WinNT)
 (Tcp/Ip 161.107.157.166(2142)).
07/12/00   18:38:02  ANR0480W Session 13181 for node BC1NTSPB (WinNT)
  terminated - connection with client severed.
07/12/00   18:38:17  ANR0406I Session 13191 started for node BC1NTSPB
(WinNT)
more...   ( to continue, 'C' to cancel)

Novel