Richard,
Here is the Q OCC result.
The Q OCC shows all the data for FSID 86 is in VMCTLMC (seq disk), SLOWDEDUP
(seq disk) or the COPYPOOL (tape COPY pool).
But when the customer tries a restore, the tapes getting mounted are from
primary pool TAPEPOOL2.
How can a restore be calling for tapes in
Hi Wanda,
Identify one of the tapes being mounted from TAPEPOOL2, then do a QUERY
CONTENT on it. See if there is anything for DC1. There has to be
*something* even if we haven't yet put our finger on it.
Best regards,
- Andy
__
To go along with Andy's recommendations I've seen in TSM server 6.2.3.0
where a query occupancy and a select from occupancy don't match up. Might
be worthwhile to do a:
select * from occupancy where node_name='DC1' and
filespace='\VMFULL-HWDDMZOCULARX1'
See how they compare
-Original Messa
Out of curiosity, had the data been DeDuped when it was on the Disk, before it
was migrated to tape, and then moved back to disk?
We saw many problems with data corruption and damaged files when this was done
with a TSM server prior to 6.3.3.
Ray
On Jun 19, 2013, at 11:20 AM, Andrew Raibeck wro
All
Got a new LAN Free client, nothing out of the ordinary, but LAN Free perf
is slower than I'd hope.
I'm going to a ProtecTier VTL and have 20 sessions going.
Not started doing any fault finding yet, but the one big difference with
this client is that the tape HBA's are virtual ones (NPIV).
H
What speed are you getting?
What OS? (AIX?)
Poor performance vs a real tape drive or vs other streams to the VTL?
In my DataDomain world the DD is always slower than a 3592 or LTO-4 drive when
looking at a single stream. Together the streams do make a river in the 1,400
MB/sec range.
Andy Hueb
