The reason I started the audit was because TSM was not reporting the tape
in the library, yet the library knew the tape was inserted. I could see
the tape in the library (with my own eyes). Using the manual operations |
move tape functions from the LCD display on the library, the library was
able to move the tape out and back into the library. But Query LIBVolume
did not show the tape in the library.
I thought Audit Library with checklabel=barcode should fix it, but after 2
hours, the process hadn't ended. So I cancelled it.
What I ended up doing was manually removed the tape (via the move tape
functions from the LCD panel of the library), and then turned around and
did a Checkin process for the tapes in the Bulk I/O slots. After that, the
query libvolume command reported the tape in the library.
This tells me that there is/was no problem with the barcode, or the reader,
and possibly even the library memory (since the library knew it had the
tape all along). Something funky going on with the Audit Library process,
for sure.
|--------+------------------------------>
| | David Longo |
| | <David.Longo@HEALTH-|
| | FIRST.ORG> |
| | Sent by: "ADSM: Dist|
| | Stor Manager" |
| | <[EMAIL PROTECTED]|
| | U> |
| | |
| | |
| | 10/22/2002 01:02 PM |
| | Please respond to |
| | "ADSM: Dist Stor |
| | Manager" |
| | |
|--------+------------------------------>
>-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
|
|
| To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
|
| cc:
|
| Fax to:
|
| Subject: Re: Audit Library question.
|
>-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
I imagine the checkl=barocde was introduced to shorten audit, without
it you would have to mount every tape in library - which would take
some considerable time with some libraries! What you are doing is
checkinbg the barcode label in library memory as opposed to checking
the
magnetic tape label header.
The ideal short way is to have the library do it's inventory, which
reads
barcodes and is quick, then do audit with checkl=barcode. Whole
process shouldn't take more than a few minutes - there may be some
library units that take longer. This complete process should take
care
of anything that has gotten out of sync. I have had a few cases where
there was still something out of sync and had to do detailed
examination
to correct.
It can have a problem reading the barcode if the laser scanner
couldn't
read the label. That can happen some times - especially if you don't
use
original manufacturers labels. If you have AIX server and use
tapeutil
with inventory action, it will show the slot status for tapes like
these
in "abnormal" status. When the audit with checkl=barcode runs it
finds
this and no barcode label for that slot and mounts the tape in that
slot
to read the magnetic label and update TSM's inventory.
A brief overview as I have seen it in action many times.
David B. Longo
System Administrator
Health First, Inc.
3300 Fiske Blvd.
Rockledge, FL 32955-4305
PH 321.434.5536
Pager 321.634.8230
Fax: 321.434.5509
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>>> [EMAIL PROTECTED] 10/22/02 01:44PM >>>
At 11:29 AM -0400 10/22/02, David Longo said:
>With checklabel=barcode, what happens is that TSM reads the internal
>memory of the library as to what the library's inventory says is
>where.
So checklabel=barcode doesn't really mean read the barcodes? It just
means check the library's internal memory? I guess that's still
useful in some circumstances, if there'e a possibility that TSM and
the library have gotten out of sync.
But it would be nice if things mean what they say. Suppose I really
want it to read the barcodes? Suppose I think the library's internal
memory has gotten confused somehow, and I want to do a physical
audit of barcode locations to compare with the internal memory? Is
this possible? Or is it a function of the library (which I guess
might make more sense).
>So generally that won't take long. And a drive needs to be available
>for
>the case where library had a problem reading a barcode label, that
>tape
>can be mounted in a tape drive to verify - even if using checkl=b.
But how can it have a problem reading the barcode label if check-=b
doesn't even try to read the labels?
--
Matt Simpson -- OS/390 Support
219 McVey Hall -- (859) 257-2900 x300
University Of Kentucky, Lexington, KY 40506
<mailto:msimpson@;uky.edu>
mainframe -- An obsolete device still used by thousands of obsolete
companies serving billions of obsolete customers and making huge
obsolete
profits for their obsolete shareholders. And this year's run twice as
fast
as last year's.
"MMS <health-first.org>" made the following
annotations on 10/22/2002 02:04:16 PM
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
This message is for the named person's use only. It may contain
confidential, proprietary, or legally privileged information. No
confidentiality or privilege is waived or lost by any mistransmission. If
you receive this message in error, please immediately delete it and all
copies of it from your system, destroy any hard copies of it, and notify
the sender. You must not, directly or indirectly, use, disclose,
distribute, print, or copy any part of this message if you are not the
intended recipient. Health First reserves the right to monitor all e-mail
communications through its networks. Any views or opinions expressed in
this message are solely those of the individual sender, except (1) where
the message states such views or opinions are on behalf of a particular
entity; and (2) the sender is authorized by the entity to give such views
or opinions.
==============================================================================
