Tivoli Packet sizes..
I am trying to get some networking information in order to tune the through-put on our firewalls that handle TSM backup traffic. I vaguely remember seeing an option to tune the packet size, but I thought I would throw this out to the list for comment. How big are typical TSM packet size? Is there an option to set this size? What is the maximum size for a TSM packet? thanks in advance. Peter Stentor, Inc. [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.stentor.com
Re: Tivoli Packet sizes..
-Original Message- From: Richard Sims [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, September 19, 2003 11:25 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: Tivoli Packet sizes.. If the context is TCP/IP, then it may be mean much... TCP/IP has architecturally limited MTU sizes, where the standard Ethernet MTU size is 1500. Jumbo Frames with gige boost that to 9000, but from what I've read Jumbo Frames is non-standard. And you may be cut down anyway by the Path MTU Discovery. Larger packets need to be subdivided to be transmitted, then be reassembled at their destination, in the right order, after receiving all. We really need as large a packet size as possible. Will TSM send the at the largest possible MTU by default? As you pointed out Richard, we want to pack as much data into the fewest number of packets to increase throughput. Thanks. Peter
Re: Non-IBM LTO tapes in a 3584
-Original Message- From: Mark Ferraretto [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, September 10, 2003 9:31 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Non-IBM LTO tapes in a 3584 But I'm wondering if there are any quality issues with either of these brands. Also, I'm wondering if running non-IBM tapes in a 3584 might raise any issues. Can anyone help? We have 3 IBM LTO libraries in which we have a few IBM tapes, but primarily use Sony and Imation. There was a recall of Imation tapes a short while ago, due to a problem with IBM drives, but the problem has apparently been fixed (I have been assured by Imation). We have had no problems with the Sony tapes. Peter
Re: Problem with a library
-Original Message- From: GUILLAUMONT Etienne [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, March 19, 2003 1:57 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Problem with a library The manuals say to issue an audit library but if I try it, I still get the same messages. I tried to halt and restart TSM but it changed nothing. I also tried to checkout some libvolumes but even with the remove=no option, it didn't change anything. I also removed manually the LOTA03 tape but still nothing changes. What can I do to rebuild the content of my library and what does that message mean ? I had this problem recently on a different library (Adic Scalar 100), and opened a ticket with TSM support. We were informed that it was due to the fact that we added new hardware to the system (we had added 2 drives) and that the paths from the server to the library were now incorrect. We were instructed to remove the drives and all of their paths from the system, and to re-add them. Unfortunately, now we are running into a problem with the library as well. If a simple audit library doesn't work, you might try removing the drive definitions and redefining them. Then try your audit again. If anyone has any reason why this would not be a good idea, please let me know! Thanks. Peter Peter Ford System Engineer Stentor, Inc. 5000 Marina Blvd, Brisbane, CA 94005-1811 Main Phone: 650-228- Fax: 650 228-5566 http://www.stentor.com [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Tape Reliability Recommendations
-Original Message- From: Kelly J. Lipp [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, February 18, 2003 10:32 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: Tape Reliability Recommendations As for reliability. That turns out to be a very mixed bag. ...snip... For instance, we have a site with a large fiber channel and LTO configuration. No end to the problems so far and they are very serious problems. Is this a result of the tape technology? I doubt it, but one never knows, do one?\ I would be very curious to hear what type of reliability problems you have seen with LTO. I have posted here before, but we have been experiencing an incredibly high number of read errors with our 3584 LTO library. We regularly see errors when trying to restore data from tapes. We have been auditing volumes recently and have seen errors on a tape during one audit, and then audit again, with no errors. There is no discernable pattern to these errors (across multiple tapes and multiple drives). Due to the nature of the data we are backing up, the data does not change often (and therefore the tapes are generally written to once, and the data stays there), so over-used tapes should not be an issue. Anything that you could share with the list, or me directly, would be greatly appreciated. Thanks. Peter Peter Ford System Engineer Stentor, Inc. 5000 Marina Blvd, Brisbane, CA 94005-1811 Main Phone: 650-228- Fax: 650 228-5566 http://www.stentor.com [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Tape question
-Original Message- From: Remeta, Mark [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, February 11, 2003 9:14 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Tape question I know this has been covered before but I can't find it. Does anyone have a sql query that will tell me what tapes a particular nodes particular archive is on? select volume_name,filespace_name from volumeusage where node_name='NODE NAME' Throwing in the file space name allows you to see what specific file space is stored on each tape. Hope this helps. Peter Peter Ford System Engineer Stentor, Inc. 5000 Marina Blvd, Brisbane, CA 94005-1811 Main Phone: 650-228- Fax: 650 228-5566 http://www.stentor.com [EMAIL PROTECTED]
volume won't mount
I have a volume that won't mount in my library. TSM seems to think that it knows the volume as q vol, q libvol, and show slots all return the same information about the volume, with it in our 3584 library. The volume is ReadOnly and not in an error state. However, when I try to restore data from the volume, it will not mount and I get the error: 01/16/2003 12:02:20 ANR8304E Time out error on drive GENDRV_TAPE3 (\\.\TAPE3) in library LB0.1.0.2. 01/16/2003 12:02:46 ANR1401W Mount request denied for volume XX - mount failed. Does anyone know why this would not be able to mount, despite TSM appearing to have the volume in the library? Why is this request denied? Thanks! Peter Peter Ford System Engineer Stentor, Inc. 5000 Marina Blvd, Brisbane, CA 94005-1811 Main Phone: 650-228- Fax: 650 228-5566 http://www.stentor.com [EMAIL PROTECTED]
label/checkin libvolume
Last Friday, we upgraded our 3584 tape library with an expansion frame. After the expansion was installed, I loaded 220 new LTO tapes and ran a checkin libvol TSM tried to use these volumes over the weekend and couldn't read the labels (because they aren't labelled). Well, I should have run a label libvol ..., and now all of the new tapes have their status set to Private thanks to TSM. I tried to run label libvol ... this morning when I discovered the issue, but it didn't work due to the fact they are already in the library. My question is, how do I retroactively label these volumes? Is there some command that I could issue to update them all at one (ie: volrange=XXX,XXX)? Thanks in advance! Peter Peter Ford System Engineer Stentor, Inc. 5000 Marina Blvd, Brisbane, CA 94005-1811 Main Phone: 650-228- Fax: 650 228-5566 http://www.stentor.com [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: label/checkin libvolume
-Original Message- From: Cook, Dwight E [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Monday, January 13, 2003 11:58 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: label/checkin libvolume Well, TSM doesn't want to label them while they are PRIVATE and TSM doesn't really know what is going on... You might be able to do a del vol against them to get them back to scratch, then do your label libvol Dwight- Thank you for the reply. I did try deleting them, but they are not part of a storage pool, so they cannot be deleted (and there is no delete libvolume command). I updated a couple of the volumes to scratch, just as a test. After updating them, I tried: label libvol LIBNAME search=yes checkl=barcode checkin=scr overwrite=yes volrange=vol1,vol2. However, TSM reports 0 volumes labelled and exits with Success. The only other thing I can think to do is to go to the library and physically remove them. Once removed, audit the library to show TSM that they are no longer in the library. Then, load them back in and check them in correctly. Any other ideas? Thanks. Peter
Re: faulty media
-Original Message- From: Sal Mangiapane [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Thursday, January 09, 2003 6:32 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: faulty media Have you considered where you store the tapes? All the tapes stay online in our library. The library is housed in a data center (in a very controlled environment). Just FYI, I started auditing the tapes that showed errors and sure enough, there have been around 100 files deleted off about 5 volumes (audit vol XXX fix=yes). The whole tape does not seem to be affected, just certain files. Could there be something that is causing file corruption when the data is copied from the client machines? Should we move the data off these tapes and discard them, just to be sure? thanks. Peter
faulty media
Recently, we have been experiencing a high number of media errors (generally read errors with some locate errors) on our 3584 LTO library. A recent query of the volumes table shows that we have 37 tapes (out of 250) with read errors! We have had IBM out to inspect the library and drives, and they report that everything is fine. Is it normal to have this many errors? Could we have that many bad tapes? The tapes are not rewritten very often (the data being stored is for a long term and is generally very static). Has anyone else experienced these kind of media issues? We are running TSM 4.2.2.13 on Win2K, the library is connected via LVD SCSI, and all the firmware on the drives are up-to-date. Thanks in advance. Peter Peter Ford System Engineer Stentor, Inc. 5000 Marina Blvd, Brisbane, CA 94005-1811 Main Phone: 650-228- Fax: 650 228-5566 http://www.stentor.com [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Unmounting volumes...
I have two tapes that are mounted and In Use according to the q mount command. Both volumes were mounted by a reclamation process and both volumes encountered I/O errors while reclaiming their data. Once the I/O error happened, the drives were made Unavailable by TSM and the reclamation process moved on to the next tape. This left the tape with the error in the drive and still In Use. The reclamation process is no longer running, but these tapes not going Idle. My question is, how to I dismount these tapes (from within TSM) and set these drives back online? We are running TSM 4.2.2.13, on Windows 2K, with an IBM 3584 tape library. The web interface for the 3584 tape library is currently not accessible (due to another issue). Thanks in advance. Peter Peter Ford System Engineer Stentor, Inc. 5000 Marina Blvd, Brisbane, CA 94005-1811 Main Phone: 650-228- Direct Line: 650-228-5409 Fax: 650 228-5566 http://www.stentor.com [EMAIL PROTECTED]
tape length issues
A little while ago, there was a post regarding the physical length of LTO media (which I can no longer find on the ADSM.org website). The author mentioned that due to discrepancies in the physical length of tape, in an LTO cartridge, possible issues could arise when copying data from one volume to another. For example, assuming you had two 100GB LTO tapes, it would be possible to lose data when performing a Move Data from volume A to volume B, if volume B happened to be slightly shorter. My question is, has anyone ever experienced anything like this? Is this really an issue? Thanks. Peter Peter Ford System Engineer Stentor, Inc. 5000 Marina Blvd, Brisbane, CA 94005-1811 Main Phone: 650-228- Fax: 650 228-5566 http://www.stentor.com [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: TSM Presentation
if you like I can send you a PDF-File showing the difference between Veritas'/Legato's full/incremental and TSM's progressive incremental way of doing backups. It compares backup with the way you should (or shouldn't) wash your clothes. It helped me a lot to tell people how TSM works. It's about 1MB in size. Would it be possible to post this on a website somewhere? That way those who would like a copy could just download it. I am sure it would be easier to do that, than to send it to 100 people! I know I would like to see this as well. Thanks. Peter Peter Ford System Engineer Stentor, Inc. 5000 Marina Blvd, Brisbane, CA 94005-1811 Main Phone: 650-228- Fax: 650 228-5566 http://www.stentor.com [EMAIL PROTECTED]
