>Steve Harris wrote: >>updating the drive mid transaction to online=no does it for me. From: Paul Ripke [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] >Sneaky! Since TSM *has* to be able to cope with this scenario >gracefully, it does surprise me somewhat that there isn't a >"cleaner" way of doing this - something like "cancel process >123 immediate=y".
As I've said before, there's a good reason why many processes can't stop on a dime. Example: You're running space reclamation. The server is finished copying a 1GB file from one tape volume to another. The pointer in the TSM database to the old copy gets updated, but you *stop* the process before the pointer for the new copy gets written. Oops. There's a reason for rollback, and for finishing a process. Sometimes you've got wait; that's the price you pay for db integrity. -- Mark Stapleton ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
