Troy,
we have 15 drives in a 3494, so I don't believe it's a lack of drives.
The server has an ADMIN volume in addition to Vol1 and SYS, however we only
backup Vol1 and SYS.
The resourceutilization setting is interesting - I'll reset it to 4 (we
used to have it at 3 - I only changed it to try a
All,
TSM Server 5.2.4.0 (AIX 5.3)
3494 library w/ (15) 3590E
Suddenly (I think) I am getting a LOT of ANR8447E messages. A "q
mount" shows several drives in an "idle" state. My mount retention is set
to '3'. I thought that the mount retention would be preempted if there
was a need to
Mount retention is pre-empted to gain access to a drive, providing that
no process or session is engaged to use the drive and media.
See that msg in http://people.bu.edu/rbs/ADSM.QuickFacts for reasons we
have experienced. Check your Devclass MOUNTLimit as the most common
cause, plus your Activity
Thanks for the reply Rich...
I am curious about the following from Quick Facts
In a library shared by multiple servers, you need to define the
number
of drives actually allocated to each server; otherwise, if you let
DRIVES prevail, each server may think it should have acc
Hi all,
Just as an update it turns out that the 3623 Tape Drive and the 3581
tape library are NOT the same library as I thought. Seems to be the same
all the way down except the firmware. A 3623 is just plainly not
supported under AIX so my atape issues were legit.
Now for a new question:
Is it pos
Did you check the mountlimit in the Device Class for the Storage Pool your using?
Shannon Bach
Madison Gas & Electric Co
Operations Analyst -Data Center Services
Information Management Systems
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Phil Jones <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent by: "ADSM: Dist Stor Manager"
04/05/20
Hi, David -
That QuickFacts entry harks back to sharing via physical library
partitioning. I'll update that to be more in tune with current
regimens.
Looking through various TSM manuals and redbooks over time shows them
generally recommending not using MOUNTLimit=DRIVES; rather, the number
of drive
Thanks Jurjen, that is good news. It looks like IBM is slowly fixing
this. We will look into re-enabling the Tape Alert messages once we get
to the higher microcode.
And to answer the other question, I think that most of the messages did
indeed occur on a drive that was a control port.
Thanks,
T
Shannon - Yes that's also set at 5.
This only appears to have happened since the install of 5.3 client.
Maybe I'll rollback to 5.1.5 and see what happens.
Thanks for the ideas,
Regards
Phil Jones
Technical Specialist
United Biscuits
e-mail: phil_jones at biscuits dot com
|-+-
Am I correct that there is still (even in V5.3) no method to move all data
from one copypool to another ?
I have a need to move all copypool data from a 3590 pool to an LTO2 pool !
IIRC, unless things have changed, the only choice I have is to re-backup
the primary pool to the new copypool and th
On Apr 5, 2005, at 11:22 AM, Zoltan Forray/AC/VCU wrote:
Am I correct that there is still (even in V5.3) no method to move all
data
from one copypool to another ?
I have a need to move all copypool data from a 3590 pool to an LTO2
pool !
IIRC, unless things have changed, the only choice I have is t
Is there any reason why you can't drain to the next pool? That makes
the most sense to me. It will increase tape activity for awhile and if
you don't slot offsite it might make things screwy. I suppose if you
didn't slot you could also do move data's from one copyopol to another.
Becky
>>> [EM
Richard. Where do you find the time to remember all this !
A very interesting idea/process. Would work great for small amounts of
data !
Unfortunately, I have 20TB to move/recopy !
Thanks for the pointer, though !
Richard Sims <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent by: "ADSM: Dist Stor Manager"
04/05/2
Hi,
I have
- two identical autoloaders HP C5713A
- cleaning tape checked in into both
- cleanfreq=30G on both drives
- same throughput on both drives
(one contains primary pool,
other contains related copy pool,
pools are synced)
One drive gets automatically cleaned - the other not. No atte
I don't know if there is a change in 5.3 as we have not upgraded yet, but I
just went through this process in November/December when we upgraded our tape
environment. The only option was to backup data from the primary pool to the
new copypool, just like you stated. The good/bad news(depends o
I am in dire need of slots in my TSM AIX managed IBM 3583-L72 library.
Currently, the default configuration came with 12-I/O slots in the door.
The book says I can configure those 12-slots as STORAGE vs I/O, making the
L72 actually have 72-storage slots.
My questions:
1. How do you do this ?
On Tuesday 05 April 2005 18:12, Zoltan Forray/AC/VCU wrote:
> I am in dire need of slots in my TSM AIX managed IBM 3583-L72 library.
>
> Currently, the default configuration came with 12-I/O slots in the door.
>
> The book says I can configure those 12-slots as STORAGE vs I/O, making the
> L72 actu
Seems to me this process does not guarantee you have everything.
Hypothetical situation:
File A gets backed up from client to Pool A.
File A gets backed up to Copypool B.
FIle A becomes inactive.
Primary tape (in Pool A) gets destroyed, and does not get restored. now
the only copy is in Copypool
Robin,
I am not sure your concern is valid. Why wouldn't the destroyed tape or
for that matter even a single bad file on an otherwise good tape be
caught (and resolved either automatically or manually) during the move
data phase for the primary pool. If there was a bad tape it would
report it and
Thanks for the confirmation. That is kinda what I guessed !
What a restrictive non-option.I was hoping to at least use 6-of the 12
slots !
Stef Coene <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent by: "ADSM: Dist Stor Manager"
04/05/2005 12:51 PM
Please respond to
"ADSM: Dist Stor Manager"
To
ADSM-L@VM.MAR
Well, if Richard Sims' QuickFacts lists the following for this error,
then I'm not sure where else to turn:
ANS2820E An interrupt has occurred. The current operation will end and
the
client will shut down.
Mystery message in TSM 5.3. Reported to occur in the
dsmserror.log and
On Tuesday 05 April 2005 19:57, Zoltan Forray/AC/VCU wrote:
> Thanks for the confirmation. That is kinda what I guessed !
>
> What a restrictive non-option.I was hoping to at least use 6-of the 12
> slots !
You can also put a 1-slot version in it. But I don't think if you can use the
freed sp
Maybe there was a mystery reboot. :-)
Regards,
Andy
Andy Raibeck
IBM Software Group
Tivoli Storage Manager Client Development
Internal Notes e-mail: Andrew Raibeck/Tucson/[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Internet e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
The only dumb question is the one that goes unasked.
The command line
Nope - not a mystery reboot, just a user killing the backup.
:-)
Richard, for your QuickFacts:
ANS2820E An interrupt has occurred. The current operation is interrupted
by a break signal such as CTRL-BREAK or CTRL-C.
System Action: The TSM operation and process are ended immediately.
User Reponse
From: ADSM: Dist Stor Manager [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Becky Davidson
>Is there any reason why you can't drain to the next pool? That makes
>the most sense to me. It will increase tape activity for awhile and if
>you don't slot offsite it might make things screwy. I suppose if you
I will be out of the office starting 04/05/2005 and will not return until
04/11/2005.
If you need immediate attention please contact 514-394-4797.
Thank you!
Salutations à tous/toutes,
Je serai absent du bureau du Mercredi 6 avril 2005 jusqu'au Lundi 11 avril
2005. Si vous avez besoin d'assistan
Hi there
We have a small test environment running 5.3.0 on Windows 2003.
Below is a copy a devconfig.out. The server has a tape library defined which
appears in the bottom section of the file âDEFINE LIBRARY TAPELIB
LIBTYPE=SCSIâ
I donât understand why the âdefine devclassâ statements are at th
27 matches
Mail list logo
