Re: Tape Drive Serial #'s (WAS: Adding 3592's to a 3494)

2004-10-28 Thread Jim Sporer
ather "I/O, I/O, It's all about I/O" -(me) . -Original Message- From: ADSM: Dist Stor Manager [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Robert Clark Sent: Wednesday, October 27, 2004 5:22 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: Adding 3592's to a 3494 We're running a

Re: Tape Drive Serial #'s (WAS: Adding 3592's to a 3494)

2004-10-27 Thread Ben Bullock
EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: Tape Drive Serial #'s (WAS: Adding 3592's to a 3494) You're using SAN attachment though correct? (So it should work for us too.) But, what does it buy you? (TSM will now notice when the paths are stewed? Can storage agent detect this problem as well?)

Re: Tape Drive Serial #'s (WAS: Adding 3592's to a 3494)

2004-10-27 Thread Robert Clark
t by: "ADSM: Dist cc: Stor Manager" Subject: Re: Tape Drive Serial #'s (WAS: Adding 3592's to a 3494) <[EMAIL PROTECTED] > 10/27/2004 03:13 PM Plea

Re: Tape Drive Serial #'s (WAS: Adding 3592's to a 3494)

2004-10-27 Thread Ben Bullock
: Wednesday, October 27, 2004 3:57 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Tape Drive Serial #'s (WAS: Adding 3592's to a 3494) Yes, for SCSI libraries, TSM now records the serial # of the tape drives. If you have a SCSI library, look at your devconfig file. (EVERYBODY: You DO know where your devc

Re: Adding 3592's to a 3494

2004-10-27 Thread Ben Bullock
, Ben -Original Message- From: ADSM: Dist Stor Manager [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Kauffman, Tom Sent: Wednesday, October 27, 2004 3:46 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: Adding 3592's to a 3494 Ben -- No *real* idea on the 3592 hard/soft addressing -- but the LTO2 driv

Tape Drive Serial #'s (WAS: Adding 3592's to a 3494)

2004-10-27 Thread Prather, Wanda
r [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Robert Clark Sent: Wednesday, October 27, 2004 5:22 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: Adding 3592's to a 3494 We're running a similar config, so I'm curious about the list response on this one as well. One additional question: I think I saw

Re: Adding 3592's to a 3494

2004-10-27 Thread Kauffman, Tom
llock Sent: Wednesday, October 27, 2004 3:56 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: Adding 3592's to a 3494 Matthew (and others in the group), Just this week we put in our 2 test 3592 drives and started playing with them. These are sweet. So far they are running a little over 2X

Re: Adding 3592's to a 3494

2004-10-27 Thread Ben Bullock
tober 27, 2004 3:22 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: Adding 3592's to a 3494 Ben, I will answer this question according to my knowledge of SANs which I am sure someone on this list is much more adapt than myself. I like soft zoning because (AFAIK) hard zoning is on a per port basis. ie.. po

Re: Adding 3592's to a 3494

2004-10-27 Thread CORP Rick Willmore
4) R. -Original Message- From: Ben Bullock [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, October 27, 2004 1:56 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: Adding 3592's to a 3494 Matthew (and others in the group), Just this week we put in our 2 test 3592 drives and started pl

Re: Adding 3592's to a 3494

2004-10-27 Thread Robert Clark
aveats are, if any? Thanks, [RC] "Ben Bullock" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent by: "ADSM: Dist cc: Stor Manager" Subjec

Re: Adding 3592's to a 3494

2004-10-27 Thread Ben Bullock
--Original Message- From: ADSM: Dist Stor Manager [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Matthew Glanville Sent: Thursday, September 30, 2004 11:34 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: Adding 3592's to a 3494 When we upgraded we needed a new library defined in TSM to use the 3592&#

Re: Adding 3592's to a 3494

2004-10-01 Thread asr
==> In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Ben Bullock <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > Won't I be OK having the 3590 and 3592 drives in the same scratch and > private categories? The TSM server is smart enough to know which scratch > tapes can go in which drives... No? Is that a wrong assumption on my par

Re: Adding 3592's to a 3494

2004-10-01 Thread asr
==> In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, "Prather, Wanda" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > We have a 3494 with 3 3590 tape drives, TSM 5.2.2 on AIX 5. > We will be adding 5 new 3592 tape drives to the 3494, also for use with TSM. > To implement those new 3592 tape drives with TSM, is it sufficient to j

Re: Adding 3592's to a 3494

2004-09-30 Thread Ben Bullock
to a 3494 Bingo - just what I needed! Thanks Jonathan! -Original Message- From: ADSM: Dist Stor Manager [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Jonathan Siegle Sent: Thursday, September 30, 2004 3:33 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: Adding 3592's to a 3494 Ben Bul

Re: Adding 3592's to a 3494

2004-09-30 Thread Prather, Wanda
Bingo - just what I needed! Thanks Jonathan! -Original Message- From: ADSM: Dist Stor Manager [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Jonathan Siegle Sent: Thursday, September 30, 2004 3:33 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: Adding 3592's to a 3494 Ben Bullock wrote: >

Re: Adding 3592's to a 3494

2004-09-30 Thread Jonathan Siegle
Ben Bullock wrote: Hmm... Another "new library definition" vote. Oh and IBM votes yes too.. http://ftp.cac.psu.edu/pub/tivoli-storage-management/maintenance/server/v5r2/AIX/5.2.1.0/TSMSRVAIX5210.README.SRV . Look for the section on "3494 library particulars/changes" . -Jonathan smi

Re: Adding 3592's to a 3494

2004-09-30 Thread Richard Sims
On Sep 30, 2004, at 2:36 PM, Ben Bullock wrote: ... Won't I be OK having the 3590 and 3592 drives in the same scratch and private categories? The TSM server is smart enough to know which scratch tapes can go in which drives... No? Is that a wrong assumption on my part? Watch out for compute

Re: Adding 3592's to a 3494

2004-09-30 Thread Ben Bullock
: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: Adding 3592's to a 3494 When we upgraded we needed a new library defined in TSM to use the 3592's with different private/scratch categories, and device class's, drives, etc.. Not a different 'logical' library defined on the 3494 library mana

Re: Adding 3592's to a 3494

2004-09-30 Thread Ben Bullock
D] On Behalf Of Jonathan Siegle Sent: Thursday, September 30, 2004 11:50 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: Adding 3592's to a 3494 Prather, Wanda wrote: > We have a 3494 with 3 3590 tape drives, TSM 5.2.2 on AIX 5. > > We will be adding 5 new 3592 tape drives to the 3494, als

Re: Adding 3592's to a 3494

2004-09-30 Thread Jonathan Siegle
Prather, Wanda wrote: We have a 3494 with 3 3590 tape drives, TSM 5.2.2 on AIX 5. We will be adding 5 new 3592 tape drives to the 3494, also for use with TSM. To implement those new 3592 tape drives with TSM, is it sufficient to just define new drives & device classes pointing to the same TSM libra

Re: Adding 3592's to a 3494

2004-09-30 Thread Matthew Glanville
When we upgraded we needed a new library defined in TSM to use the 3592's with different private/scratch categories, and device class's, drives, etc.. Not a different 'logical' library defined on the 3494 library manager. That may have worked too, but it depends on how particular you want to be as

Re: Adding 3592's to a 3494

2004-09-30 Thread Ben Bullock
10:17 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Adding 3592's to a 3494 We have a 3494 with 3 3590 tape drives, TSM 5.2.2 on AIX 5. We will be adding 5 new 3592 tape drives to the 3494, also for use with TSM. To implement those new 3592 tape drives with TSM, is it sufficient to just define new

Adding 3592's to a 3494

2004-09-30 Thread Prather, Wanda
We have a 3494 with 3 3590 tape drives, TSM 5.2.2 on AIX 5. We will be adding 5 new 3592 tape drives to the 3494, also for use with TSM. To implement those new 3592 tape drives with TSM, is it sufficient to just define new drives & device classes pointing to the same TSM library definition? Or d