Yea, it does seem a little odd. And, you didn't mention tape errors and stuck processes. I've had those a time or two and they're no fun at all. But, I think their problem is related to what I was saying. They don't want a "cancel proc" normally killing out a process by force. However, I would think they could institute a switch to the command (like force=yes) that would shut a stuck process down in its tracks. And, they could have you type some long response to a statement of ' "This could cause problems are you sure?" If so, enter "I'm Sure": '. Or else, have TSM able to realize that something isn't working sooner, and shut it down itself.
See Ya' Howard > -----Original Message----- > From: ADSM: Dist Stor Manager [mailto:ads...@vm.marist.edu] On Behalf > Of Kauffman, Tom > Sent: Monday, March 30, 2009 12:01 PM > To: ADSM-L@VM.MARIST.EDU > Subject: Re: [ADSM-L] Question for the TSM 6.1 beta testers > > Your "if it can" is my point. It's NOT copying data anymore, it is > continuously reporting tape read errors, and it won't quit. The > resulting output file will NOT be usable, and a process that normally > takes an hour stretches into seven, eight, nine hours because of failed > retries on a dirty drive. > > I want a clean process termination, and so far the developers haven't > been able to figure this out - so I can either stop TSM or kill TSM to > get the process to go away. I don't understand how the devolpers can > put code together to handle incomplete processes at shutdown or > termination but can't figure out how to use the same recovery for a > forced process termination. > > Tom > > -----Original Message----- > From: ADSM: Dist Stor Manager [mailto:ads...@vm.marist.edu] On Behalf > Of Howard Coles > Sent: Monday, March 30, 2009 11:18 AM > To: ADSM-L@VM.MARIST.EDU > Subject: Re: Question for the TSM 6.1 beta testers > > Well, actually it does "work". A "command" in TSM at the admin console > is more of a "suggestion" with TSM. When you request a cancel of a > process it wants to finish what it's doing if it can so as not to have > a > partially processed file. Killing out a process in the middle of a > file > transfer messes up the tape by creating fragmented space. > > Not only that, but I wouldn't get that worked up over a tape drive > claiming to need cleaning. Unless you start seeing tape errors, you're > not going to suffer from that nearly as much as you are going to suffer > by killing TSM in the middle of a process. > > See Ya' > Howard > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: ADSM: Dist Stor Manager [mailto:ads...@vm.marist.edu] On Behalf > > Of Kauffman, Tom > > Sent: Monday, March 30, 2009 10:07 AM > > To: ADSM-L@VM.MARIST.EDU > > Subject: [ADSM-L] Question for the TSM 6.1 beta testers > > > > If you're allowed to answer it. > > > > With the new database design and the new architecture, is it possible > > to terminate a process before it finishes the file it is processing? > > > > Explicityly, can I kill a reclaim or storage pool backup immediately, > > without waiting for the current file to be finished. This comes up > ont > > or two times a month, where a tape drive indicates it needs cleaning > - > > and I've only got another 200 GB to process on the current file. The > > current workaround is to shut TSM down. I'd rather kill the process, > > but it doesn't work currently. > > > > Thanks - > > > CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: This email and any attachments are for the > exclusive and confidential use of the intended recipient. If you are > not > the intended recipient, please do not read, distribute or take action > in > reliance upon this message. If you have received this in error, please > notify us immediately by return email and promptly delete this message > and its attachments from your computer system. We do not waive > attorney-client or work product privilege by the transmission of this > message.
