Re: multiple tape processes for offsite volumes

2006-04-27 Thread Bos, Karel
, Geoffrey L. Sent: woensdag 26 april 2006 21:10 To: ADSM-L@VM.MARIST.EDU Subject: Re: multiple tape processes for offsite volumes To explain further. If a single node has backed up 700GB it looks to me like it is impossible to force multiple processes to an offsite pool unless somehow part of the data

multiple tape processes for offsite volumes

2006-04-26 Thread Gill, Geoffrey L.
One of the issues I have had with TSM is the inability for it to run multiple processes from a single disk storage pool to a pool designated to go offsite. With 5.3 out I was wondering if that has changed, haven't seen anything yet to think not but maybe I missed it, or if we're still stuck with

Re: multiple tape processes for offsite volumes

2006-04-26 Thread David E Ehresman
backup stgpool has had the maxprocess parm for some time now. Now sure which release it came in at but it was certainly there at 5.2 and is still there at 5.3. David Ehresman University of Louisville [EMAIL PROTECTED] 4/26/2006 11:23:41 AM One of the issues I have had with TSM is the

Re: multiple tape processes for offsite volumes

2006-04-26 Thread Schaub, Steve
: ADSM: Dist Stor Manager [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Gill, Geoffrey L. Sent: Wednesday, April 26, 2006 11:24 AM To: ADSM-L@VM.MARIST.EDU Subject: [ADSM-L] multiple tape processes for offsite volumes One of the issues I have had with TSM is the inability for it to run multiple processes from

Re: multiple tape processes for offsite volumes

2006-04-26 Thread Richard Sims
On Apr 26, 2006, at 1:13 PM, David E Ehresman wrote: backup stgpool has had the maxprocess parm for some time now. ... Indeed so. The fly in the ointment is that you don't necessarily get the number of processes you specify, for architectural reasons. See contemporary IBM Technote 1234463.

Re: multiple tape processes for offsite volumes

2006-04-26 Thread Gill, Geoffrey L.
: Dist Stor Manager [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Schaub, Steve Sent: Wednesday, April 26, 2006 10:16 AM To: ADSM-L@VM.MARIST.EDU Subject: Re: multiple tape processes for offsite volumes Geoff, Which specific process are you referring to? I'm assuming you arent talking about backup stg

Offsite volumes

2003-12-05 Thread Kevin Godfrey
What happens to data on offsite volumes when the time has come to expire the data from TSM? Does TSM delete the entry from the database even though the offsite volume is unavailable, thus rendering the file on the offsite volume as unrecoverable even though the file still exists on the offsite

Fw: Offsite volumes

2003-12-05 Thread Kevin Godfrey
Is there a way to search in the client or the server to obtain a list of all the different versions of a certain file stored in TSM? When I search using the search function in the client I can only see the latest version of a file, or by using a point-in-time date an older version. I can't find a

Re: Fw: Offsite volumes

2003-12-05 Thread Richard Sims
Is there a way to search in the client or the server to obtain a list of all the different versions of a certain file stored in TSM? When I search using the search function in the client I can only see the latest version of a file, or by using a point-in-time date an older version. I can't find a

Re: Offsite volumes

2003-12-05 Thread Richard Sims
What happens to data on offsite volumes when the time has come to expire the data from TSM? Does TSM delete the entry from the database even though the offsite volume is unavailable, thus rendering the file on the offsite volume as unrecoverable even though the file still exists on the offsite

Re: Offsite volumes

2003-12-05 Thread Tom Kauffman
on the offsite volume. Tom Kauffman NIBCO, Inc -Original Message- From: Kevin Godfrey [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, December 05, 2003 5:11 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Offsite volumes What happens to data on offsite volumes when the time has come to expire the data from TSM

Re: SQL to determine what offsite volumes are needed for move data

2003-10-28 Thread William F. Colwell
- access mode is set to offsite. - this tells me which additional copy pool volume needs to be brought onsite in order to make a move data process treat the original volume to be emptied as an onsite volume - go get the additional offsite volumes needed, load them into the library, update

Re: SQL to determine what offsite volumes are needed for move data

2003-10-20 Thread Zlatko Krastev
to determine what offsite volumes are needed for move data ... Our tape copy pools are kept offsite. Reclamation for these pools is handled by leaving the TSM reclamation threshhold at 100% so that he never does reclaims on his own. On a regular basis, we run a job that queries the server

Re: SQL to determine what offsite volumes are needed for move dat a

2003-10-17 Thread Johnson, Milton [IT]
] Subject: SQL to determine what offsite volumes are needed for move data Hi, We're running TSM server 5.1.6.2 on z/OS. One of the (many) resources we're short on is tape drives. Consequently, I'm always looking to streamline processes that use these drives. Here's the problem I'm currently looking

SQL to determine what offsite volumes are needed for move data

2003-10-16 Thread Bill Kelly
offsite volumes needed, load them into the library, update their access to readwrite, and issue move data commands for the original volumes being treated as offsite by TSM Then, of course, the entire process has to be repeated because the 'audit volume' command will only tell me *one* offsite volume

Re: SQL to determine what offsite volumes are needed for move data

2003-10-16 Thread Richard Sims
... Our tape copy pools are kept offsite. Reclamation for these pools is handled by leaving the TSM reclamation threshhold at 100% so that he never does reclaims on his own. On a regular basis, we run a job that queries the server for copy pool tapes with a reclamation threshhold greater than

Re: SQL to determine what offsite volumes are needed for move data

2003-10-16 Thread Bill Kelly
On Thu, 16 Oct 2003, Richard Sims wrote: Now the problem. Some of these 'move data' processes treat the volume that is being emptied as 'offsite', even though the volume has been loaded into the library and its access updated to readwrite. I'm pretty sure the reason for this is that the

Re: Offsite Volumes

2003-03-11 Thread Nicholas Cassimatis
: Sent by: ADSM: Subject: Offsite Volumes Dist Stor Manager [EMAIL PROTECTED] .EDU 03/10/2003 04:17 PM Please respond

Offsite Volumes

2003-03-10 Thread Mahesh Tailor
Hello! TSM 5.1.6.2 on AIX 4.3.3.10 I am running DRM and I am seeing large discrepancies in what I have offsite and what TSM reports as being offsite. I run a q drm wherest=vault [or a select statement] and compare the list to the physical tapes offsite and they don't match. About 8 weeks ago,

Re: Offsite Volumes

2003-03-10 Thread Davidson, Becky
Do you include the database tapes in reporting and bringing back? -Original Message- From: Mahesh Tailor [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, March 10, 2003 3:18 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Offsite Volumes Hello! TSM 5.1.6.2 on AIX 4.3.3.10 I am running DRM and I am seeing

Re: Offsite Volumes

2003-03-10 Thread David Longo
Yes, I have seen this and there are a number of reasons that can cause this. 1. Are you using DRM to expire the DB tape? You should be, if not that can be a cause. 2. How detailed are your operations people and your tape return procedure? Example: if ops is using the Move DRM command to

Re: Offsite Volumes

2003-03-10 Thread Mahesh Tailor
Message- From: Mahesh Tailor [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, March 10, 2003 3:18 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Offsite Volumes Hello! TSM 5.1.6.2 on AIX 4.3.3.10 I am running DRM and I am seeing large discrepancies in what I have offsite and what TSM reports as being offsite. I run

Re: Offsite Volumes

2003-03-10 Thread Marcel J.E. Mol
We see the same thing. Last week we took all ofsite tapes for a disaster test and found 18 out of 50 were not listed in q drme. I cannot guarantee that the tape operators did not make mistakes and we will double check in the coming weeks but it sure sound as a lot of lost tapes. I suspect that it

Re: Offsite Volumes

2003-03-10 Thread Muthyam Reddy
** High Priority ** we too facing same problem and recently we did manual volume inventory, recoverd 300tapes. please provide if anyone got solution. thanks /mani Marcel J.E. Mol [EMAIL PROTECTED] 03/10/03 05:23PM We see the same thing. Last week we took all ofsite tapes for a disaster test

Re: Offsite Volumes

2003-03-10 Thread Mahesh Tailor
David, thanks for the email. See my responses below. (Using caps to differentiate answers not to shout.) Mahesh Mahesh Tailor WAN/NetView/TSM Administrator Carilion Health System Voice: 540-224-3929 Fax: 540-224-3954 [EMAIL PROTECTED] 03/10/03 17:14 PM Yes, I have seen this and there are a

Re: Offsite Volumes

2003-03-10 Thread Peter Pijpelink - P.L.C.S. BV Storage Consultants
Hello Marcel, Please take a look here and select Media Manager, http://www-3.ibm.com/software/tivoli/products/tivoliready/storage.html greetings Peter At 23:23 10-3-2003 +0100, Marcel J.E. Mol wrote: We see the same thing. Last week we took all ofsite tapes for a disaster test and found 18 out

Re: Offsite Volumes

2003-03-10 Thread Steve Harris
One common cause for this is that you are running delete volhist on your db backups rather than letting DRM handle it (or with a shorter retention than DRM does). TSM then forgets about the DB backup tapes that are offsite. HTH Steve Harris AIX and TSM Admin Queensland Health, Brisbane

Re: offsite volumes

2001-10-01 Thread Mark Stapleton
On Thu, 27 Sep 2001 11:01:12 +0200, it was written: in the process of moving backup volumes offsite volume U11108 was successfully moved to VAULT 09/27/01 10:24:22 ANR6683I MOVE DRMEDIA: Volume U11108 was moved from NOTMOUNTABLE state to VAULT. however the reclamation

offsite volumes

2001-09-27 Thread Van Ruler, Ruud R SITI-ISES-31
Lg in the process of moving backup volumes offsite volume U11108 was successfully moved to VAULT 09/27/01 10:24:22 ANR6683I MOVE DRMEDIA: Volume U11108 was moved from NOTMOUNTABLE state to VAULT. however the reclamation process also selected this tape !?

Antwort: Re: *SMs Thinking of OFFSITE Volumes ?

2001-01-09 Thread Gerhard Wolkerstorfer
TED] Kopie: (Blindkopie: Gerhard Wolkerstorfer/DEBIS/EDVG/AT) Thema:Re: *SMs Thinking of OFFSITE Volumes ? It works the same without DRM. Lower the Reclamation value on the offsite pool. As a fresh version of the copypool is being created, the old one is going to empty. When you're thru

Antwort: Re: *SMs Thinking of OFFSITE Volumes ?

2001-01-09 Thread David Longo
s Thinking of OFFSITE Volumes ?

Re: *SMs Thinking of OFFSITE Volumes ?

2001-01-08 Thread David Longo
] [EMAIL PROTECTED] 01/08/01 05:25AM Hi *SMer, We are reclaiming OFFSITE-Volumes, when they reach a Reclamation Threshold of 60 Percent. Therefor following steps are being done: 1) All pertaining OFFSITE Volumes come in from the offsite Location. 2) Following SQL Stmt will be performed for each

Re: *SMs Thinking of OFFSITE Volumes ?

2001-01-08 Thread Fred Johanson
PROTECTED] 01/08/01 05:25AM Hi *SMer, We are reclaiming OFFSITE-Volumes, when they reach a Reclamation Threshold of 60 Percent. Therefor following steps are being done: 1) All pertaining OFFSITE Volumes come in from the offsite Location. 2) Following SQL Stmt will be performed for each Volume: (Setting

Re: Offsite volumes going to scratch

2000-08-12 Thread Leo Humar
[EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] Date: 10 August 2000 5:18 Subject: Offsite volumes going to scratch Hello All, I have recently upgraded from ADSM 3.1.2 to TSM 3.7. I do not use DSM, so I rely on offsite volumes going from pending to empty to determine which volumes