ols?
I was under the impression that a copy stgpool was something you wanted
when you wanted to copy a primary stgpool so that you could send it to
another stgpool when ready (based on whatever trigger...space, date),
such as in a disaster recovery scenario?
-Dan Foster
IP Systems Engineering (IPSE)
Global Crossing Telecommunications
send the OFFSITE tapes and the database backup offsite
> 6. during the day run reclamation on each storage pool
Makes sense.
Hmm, I saw a suggestion in the TSM 4.2 admin guide to disable reclamation
for the copy stgpool (specifically) to avoid a situation where tapes gets
sent off site and then it wants them for the reclamation.
But of course, for the other stgpools, reclamation does make sense.
Much appreciated the pointers...big help, thanks!
-Dan Foster
IP Systems Engineering (IPSE)
Global Crossing Telecommunications
b) logfiles are least likely to ever get backed up if on a busy server
Is there any way to deal with this in a reasonable way, short of quiescing
the application? (Quiescing = downtime, which we can't quite do...)
-Dan Foster
IP Systems Engineering (IPSE)
Global Crossing Telecommunications
one pile for on-site, and one pile for off-site.
That makes more sense. Don't know why that didn't come across so clearly
in the documentation. ;)
I guess the docs talked more about how to do things rather than what/why,
or glossed over the latter. Not uncommon for authors tha
ey...". It sucks
to be the one that's right ;) And the ones who warns well before a
nasty event occurs may also be the first one to be fired out of spite
after something happens and gets the blame for not having prevented it.
-Dan Foster
IP Systems Engineering (IPSE)
Global Crossing Telecommunications
t here. So it's definitely not going to be
enabled. (But I appreciate the TSM folks having made that an available option.
Options are always great to have, even if not used.)
-Dan Foster
IP Systems Engineering (IPSE)
Global Crossing Telecommunications
Internet: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
7;serialization=dynamic'. This will cause TSM to read the file once
Groovy, thanks. (Also appreciated the other poster whom also suggested
looking at the serialization options.)
-Dan Foster
IP Systems Engineering (IPSE)
Global Crossing Telecommunications
ds on the machine. Hard part is when not every place has that luxury,
especially at smaller places where end users may be configuring everything
on their own.
Anyway, the overall education/training approach is definitely cheaper than
having to save everything on the HD, I do agree. ;)
-Dan
ending on level of need and impact, etc.
Still, I resolve to do my best to do whatever I can realistically do. :)
With that said, I now return you to the normal *SM discussions. ;)
(with the reason for copy stgpools driven home ;) )
-Dan Foster
IP Systems Engineering (IPSE)
Global Crossing Telecommunications
mpletely bypasses the
double-buffering, which gives you the same performance as raw logical
volumes, but with all the integrity protections of ufs.
May be worth investigating if you'd like the best of both worlds.
-Dan Foster
IP Systems Engineering (IPSE)
Global Crossing Telecommunications
Does anyone know where I can get a SNMP MIB definition file for TSM 4.2?
I know it's capable of SNMP support, but in order to meaningfully use it,
need a MIB to plug into the monitoring system and I don't seem to be able
to find a MIB anywhere.
-Dan
I've got a question.
One 3584-L32 with 6 drives and one 3584-D32 with 6 drives.
Is it possible to have a logical library that covers 4 drives in
the L32, and a second logical library that covers last 2 drives
in the L32 and all 6 drives in the D32?
Or is that not a valid configuration -- ie, do
Hot Diggety! Mark Stapleton was rumored to have written:
> From: ADSM: Dist Stor Manager [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of
> Dan Foster
> > Does anyone know where I can get a SNMP MIB definition file for TSM 4.2?
> > I know it's capable of SNMP support, but in order
Hot Diggety! Don France was rumored to have written:
> Yep (to the last question); you cannot span multiple physical libraries to
> make a single logical. You can define multiple logicals within a single
> physical; that is a common thing I've done, for various reasons.
Darn. ;) But makes sens
Hot Diggety! Mark D. Rodriguez was rumored to have written:
>
> Judging by your configuration I beleive that you have just one physical
> library. I beleive the L32 is the base unit and the D32 is an expansion
> cabinet, i.e. the 2 of them are physicaly attached to one another and
> share the sam
Couple unrelated questions:
1. When I query a 3570 library, there's one tape that baffles me:
adsm> q libvol 3570lib1
Library NameVolume NameStatus Last Use Home Element
-----
3570LIB113306
Hot Diggety! David Longo was rumored to have written:
> My experience with tapes in this condition is that the "write protect" tab
> was set on by accident. AS Dwighty check the tape out. Then check
> the Write Protect. If it is on, then set it off and check the tape back
> in as scratch.
Looks
Hot Diggety! Koen Willems was rumored to have written:
>
> Maybe that the access state is "unavaileble" try "q vol f=d"
> look at the access state if it is not in a readw state use
> "update vol access=readwrite"
> Then do a move data on the volume to see if the remaining data moves
> Do a de
Hot Diggety! David Longo was rumored to have written:
> For question 2, on my 3584 drives I have the FORMAT=ULTRIUMC and
> it uses comperssion. I'm getting about 275GB average on my tapes
> (IBM tapes), have gotten nearly 400GB on some!
Niiice! Sounds like bulk of data must be ASCII or something
Hot Diggety! Zlatko Krastev/ACIT was rumored to have written:
>
> David already answered to question 2 but as an additional remark - when
> TSM started to write a tape volume uncompressed the tape has to become
> back scratch to start write on it with compression.
Very interesting tidbit. I'll no
The other possibility is that since the 2108 was replaced, there may
be a small chance the /dev/rmtX mapping no longer matches what the
previously assigned rmtX-to-element ID mapping was.
Which conceivably could produce this sort of error, if TSM and
the library disagreed about what logical/physi
I've finally got the new 3584 library up and worked through all hardware
and TSM issues, and just finished with the first round of successful tests.
Looks sharp! Currently tuning the setup (disk, memory, network, TSM, etc).
Environment: AIX 4.3.3 ML10, pSeries 660-6H1, TSM 4.2 (5.1 next week)
to
Hot Diggety! Seay, Paul was rumored to have written:
>
> Suppose when the tapes were labeled the drive that labeled them was bad and
> now none of the drives can read them.
I had that issue pop up while setting up the 3584, and the culprit
was when the /dev/rmtX and element ID mappings had fallen
Hot Diggety! Coats, Jack was rumored to have written:
> Try 3 minute :( to get a LTO loaded and started spinning ... great for bulk
> store, but not up to 'interactive' response needs :( ... Using LTO for HSM
> would seem counterproductive IMHO.
3 minutes?! Something sounds wrong there. I've got
Hot Diggety! Emil S. Hansen was rumored to have written:
>
> How about setting the mount retention for the devclass to something like
> 10 to 30 mins? That will keep the tape mounted for at least 10 mins
> after the last access, so that if the tape is needed by the client it
> will likely still be
Hot Diggety! Dan Foster was rumored to have written:
> Hot Diggety! Emil S. Hansen was rumored to have written:
> >
> > How about setting the mount retention for the devclass to something like
> > 10 to 30 mins? That will keep the tape mounted for at least 10 mins
> >
I'm stumped by something (simple?) relating to TSM licensing.
We've got a pretty plain vanilla TSM 5.1 setup with a 3584 tape library.
No additional features purchased or in use (SAN, TDP, NMDP, etc).
The 3584 requires a managed library license, as I understand it (has 12
drives and 610 tapes sp
Hot Diggety! Zlatko Krastev/ACIT was rumored to have written:
> - instead of grep-ping why you do not use `lslpp -L tivoli.tsm\*` or
> `tivoli.tsm\*license\*`. In this way you can see the version of filesets
> and ensure there is no one left from v4.2. You may also check "reverse
> lookup" - `lslp
Hot Diggety! Kilchenmann Timo was rumored to have written:
> I would vary much appreciate an answer to the question: Does TSM use all DB
> volumes for I/O (like round-robin) or does it fill a volume and then goes
> to the next one?
I do not know for sure, because I don't know of a TSM way to repo
Hot Diggety! Alexander Lazarevich was rumored to have written:
>
> 1) is there any scenareo where a tape is still good, yet the server sets
> it to READ ONLY?
Yes, there is. It can happen if you have a drive whose element ID mapping
to rmt device name has gotten out of sync with each other. More
Hot Diggety! Zlatko Krastev/ACIT was rumored to have written:
>
> look out carefully in 'q lic' output:
> Number of Managed System for LAN in use: 1
> Number of Managed System for LAN licensed: 0
> This ought to explain everything. Try 'reg lic file=mgsyslan.lic number=<#
> of nodes you expect>'
Hot Diggety! Seay, Paul was rumored to have written:
> Is anyone using the TDP for SAP R/3 3.2.0.11 on Solaris 2.8 with Oracle
> 8.1.7 at SAP 4.6c2?
Not I, unfortunately.
> No matter what we do we seem to have serious problems with restores and
> difficulty implementing the TDP in production. T
Hot Diggety! Mavis Jenkins was rumored to have written:
>
> So far, we've installed the server & client on an RS6000 running AIX 4.3.3
> The server is working fine if I use a 4.2 client from another server but
> if I use the 5.1 client installed on the same box as the TSM server, I get
> the foll
Hot Diggety! Murthy V Gongala was rumored to have written:
>
> I have a 3583 LTO library with 2 drives. TSM Server v4.2 on AIX.
>
> I have been running Scheduled backups without any problems so far.
>
> Yesterday the server started reclamation process for one of the Storage
> pools as shown below.
Hot Diggety! Murthy V Gongala was rumored to have written:
>
> Level indicated by "lslpp -l bos.rte.libc" - 5.1.0.25
That sounds like 5.1 ML02 -- latest major patch set collection, very good.
> TSM shows the volumes as - Private.
Ouch. Ok, the basic problem you're running in is that the TSM s
ly disable paging (ie, to continue)
within dsmadmc when wanting to gather data for easy copy-n-paste? At least
one command's output looks very poor when done in batch mode with stdout
redirected to a file.
Thanks for any suggestions, pointers, or information!
-Dan Foster
IP Sy
tudy those some more for the more
interesting (and pathological, heh) cases.
-Dan Foster
IP Systems Engineering (IPSE)
Global Crossing Telecommunications
Internet: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
e per storage unit, so that will help, also.
-Dan Foster
IP Systems Engineering (IPSE)
Global Crossing Telecommunications
Internet: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
om/pubs/pdfs/redbooks/sg246141.pdf
or
http://www.redbooks.ibm.com/redbooks/SG246141.html
Is what you seek? :)
TSM 4.1.2 client for Win2000 is what that redbook covers.
-Dan Foster
IP Systems Engineering (IPSE)
Global Crossing Telecommunications
Internet: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
ar. It's especially not fun
getting realy angry calls from execs. :)
And then you've got some sites that runs call centers, and so forth.
(24x7 operations, essentially.)
-Dan Foster
IP Systems Engineering (IPSE)
Global Crossing Telecommunications
do:
DELETE FILESPACES * TYPE=ANY
-Dan Foster
IP Systems Engineering (IPSE)
Global Crossing Telecommunications
rom a total SP node system failure,
rather than migrating to or from the SP, though.
-Dan Foster
IP Systems Engineering (IPSE)
Global Crossing Telecommunications
Hot Diggety! Tom Tann{s was rumored to have written:
> Hello *SM'ers!
>
> Is there a problem/bug in the libPiSNAP.so and/or libPiIMG.so?
>
> We don't use the default installation-path, but DSM_DIR, DSMI_DIR etc are
> set to the right paths.
>
> dsmc generated these entries in dsmerror.log:
>
>
Howdy -
I seem to be having some sort of timing issues with the checkin
process via an automated script. The procedure:
1. Fill the I/O station(s) with brought back tapes to be checkin'd
2. Issue a 'checkin libvol search=bulk status=scratch
checklabel=barc
Hot Diggety! GUILLAUMONT Etienne was rumored to have written:
>
> You didn't say in what type of OS you where. If it is unix, no problem, you
Oops! I'm normally good about that. Server is AIX 5.1 on pSeries 660 model
6H1 server.
I do have some sleeps, but it's still running too fast or not exactl
Thanks for all the comments, suggestions, ideas, and code examples.
They were very invaluable! I also found expect to be an interesting
approach that I hadn't considered, but makes sense.
Looks like I'm on the right track now; thanks again!
-Dan
Hot Diggety! Richard Sims was rumored to have written:
> >After a reboot yesterday tsm doesnt start. ...
> ...
> >ANR0900I Processing options file dsmserv.opt.
> >ANR000W Unable to open default locale message catalog, /usr/lib/nls/msg/C/.
> >ANR0990I Server restart-recovery in progress.
> >ANRD
Hot Diggety! Levinson, Donald A. was rumored to have written:
> has anyone deployed TSM from a B50 or a 43p 140 ?
> I need to back up about 4 GB a night on a local network from 2 clients and
> maintain a total tape pool of about 2.5 TB on about 100,000 objects or less.
A B50 is just a repackaged 4
Also, is there a diskpool? ie:
client->server[diskpool]->server[tapes]
If there's no diskpool in between the client and the tape drives, will be a
lot of stop/go writes to tape, resulting in about 1 MB/sec vs 10-25 MB/sec.
At least, that's true for LTO-1 drives. I've heard that LTO-2 drives bett
Hot Diggety! Colby Morgan was rumored to have written:
> The SCSI adapter is a 2940UW. It does run great with large files, so if we
> had an adapter hardware bottleneck file size shouldn't make a difference.
> We are running the v5.0.2183.1 of the Microsoft drivers. I also opened a
> call with IB
Hot Diggety! Scott Figgins was rumored to have written:
> I'm getting this error in my Server log on AIX 5.1 with TSM 5.1.6.5 after
> defining a 7336-205 4mm Tape library. Any ideas? IBM says this library is
> supported in the BASE codeset.
1. What is the output of:
# lsdev -Cc tape
2. W
Hot Diggety! Dan Foster was rumored to have written:
> Hot Diggety! Scott Figgins was rumored to have written:
> > I'm getting this error in my Server log on AIX 5.1 with TSM 5.1.6.5 after
> > defining a 7336-205 4mm Tape library. Any ideas? IBM says this library is
>
Hot Diggety! Gordillo, Silvio was rumored to have written:
> TSM Staffing Level Question:
>
> I'm searching for documentation, industry best practised, bench marks,
> etc... on recommended staffing levels for our TSM Environment. Need to
> get pointed in the right direction to provide management w
Another comment... LTO numbers should probably be reported as being
LTO-1 or LTO-2.
LTO-1 max uncompressed is 15 MB/sec, max compressed is 30 MB/sec; LTO-2 max
uncompressed is 35 MB/sec, max compressed is 70 MB/sec. This assumes a
typical average compression ratio of 2:1, of course.
We use tapeut
Hot Diggety! Karel Bos was rumored to have written:
>
> On both sites we had some problems with tapes stuck in drives. On both sites
> we had to do audit libraries to get TSM in synch with the libraries. While
> the tapes were stuck in the drive, the audit library failes and now one of
> the slots
You bring up a good point - these two folks are posting here because they
genuinely want to help out and willing to tolerate the flak and other
divergent opinions at times. For having gone so far beyond the official
duty requirements, I think it'd be nice to give them due recognition and a
big roun
Hot Diggety! Tom Tann{s was rumored to have written:
>
> I was about to upgrade the firmware on the drives this morning.
> All I could find in the download-area was 34X0L2F.ro.
> 34X0L2F is the right level, but what about the .ro-extension?
That's right, too.
http://www-1.ibm.com/support/docview.
Hot Diggety! Lambelet,Rene,VEVEY,GL-CSC was rumored to have written:
> Eric, following some unmount failures, IBM recommended to install 36U3 (36U5
> was chosen because it appeared on the IBM ftp site the day before).
I noticed that several people installed 36U5 but it does not appear to be
on eit
2 PB is 2,048 TB, or 2,097,152 GB.
A fun thought exercise:
http://www.cnn.com/2002/TECH/biztech/11/19/ibm.supercomputerr.ap/index.html
Well, assuming several things:
1. Using LTO (just because I know the numbers for this best off
the top of my head) -- a 3584 library
Hot Diggety! Orville Lantto was rumored to have written:
> A 72 drive, 10 I/O slot 3584 library will hold 2207 cartridges. with 175
> GB/cartridge that works out to 6 libraries.
Aye, in terms of tape capacity. However, if you have a requirement that
it finish an entire full backup in a single day
Hot Diggety! David Longo was rumored to have written:
> 5.1.5.2 has been out about a month or so now.
> Also that something else isn't broke?
There was a major performance bug fixed in 5.1.5.3; we had a really
nasty situation where a west coast client was sending data at only 2 Mbps
to the east co
Hot Diggety! Matthew Glanville was rumored to have written:
> But, I have found bulk loading tapes with the door open on the 3584 is a
> problem when tapes are in the drives. I had to figure out which slots NOT
> to put tapes into because those are the slots that the tapes in the drives
> use. Whe
Hot Diggety! Joshua Bassi was rumored to have written:
>
> Does anybody know offhand the estimated number of cleanings an IBM LTO
> cleaning cartridge supports before it should be disposed of? Thanks in
> advance.
Exactly 50. ;) It's got a built-in counter on the tape, and the IBM
libraries will
I have the 5.1.6.1 server code but that apparently requires 5.1.6.0
code be installed...and I can only find 5.1.5.4 and 5.1.6.1, but no
5.1.6.0 on the FTP site...?
Is 5.1.6.0 supposed to be for-pay software for existing v5 customers?
I know they yanked 5.1.6.0 due to serious QA issues, but it see
Hot Diggety! [EMAIL PROTECTED] was rumored to have written:
>
>[1]ftp://service.boulder.ibm.com/storage/tivoli-storage-management/mai
>ntenance/server/v5r1/AIX/LATEST/
Ahh! No wonder -- thanks! (I was looking at patches rather than maintenance
tree.)
Got it now.
-Dan
I've got:
TSM 5.1.9.6 server on AIX 5.2-ML7
TDP 5.2 for MSSQL (Windows 2003 Server running MS SQL Server 2000)
The strange thing is:
tsm: SERVER>q lic
[...]
Number of TDP for MS SQL Server in use: 3
[...]
But I only have two TDP 5.2 clients.
How can I determine a list of all 3 reg
Hot Diggety! Stef Coene was rumored to have written:
> > tsm: SERVER>q lic
> > [...]
> > Number of TDP for MS SQL Server in use: 3
> > [...]
> >
> > But I only have two TDP 5.2 clients.
> >
> > How can I determine a list of all 3 registered TDP clients?
> select LICENSE_NAME, NODE_NAME
Hot Diggety! Mario Behring was rumored to have written:
>
> I´ve started a backup operation at a Linux client using CENT OS
> (similar to RHat). The operation took 1 hour and 59 minutes to finish,
> and backed up 5.45GB of data.I think this is kind of
> slow..considering that the
Hot Diggety! Richard Sims was rumored to have written:
>
> Go to
> http://www.rz.uni-karlsruhe.de/rz/docs/TSM/WORKSHOPS/3rd/handouts/
>
> "Handouts I of Andrew Raibeck" is the online version.
> "Handouts II of Andrew Raibeck" is the PostScript version,
Very nice stuff, that's for sure (as are the
Hot Diggety! TSM User was rumored to have written:
>
> ./domdsmc: Error while loading shared libraries: libnotes.so: cannot
> open shared object file: No such file or direcotry.
> I made sure that libnotes.so exists in the correct direcroty that I
> specified while running dominstall.
> I am havi
Hot Diggety! Mike was rumored to have written:
> I have a program that compiles properly, and connects, but when
> querying (I'm testing managemt classes first) it gets an error:
>
> ANS0245E (RC2065) The caller's structure version is different than the
> TSM library version.
>
> The version of the
Hot Diggety! Mike was rumored to have written:
>
> tivoli.tsm.client.api.32bit
> 5.3.2.2 COMMITTED TSM Client - Application
> Programming Interface 32bit
That looks correct.
Do you have VisualAge C/C++ installed? It
Hot Diggety! Mike was rumored to have written:
>
> The file (tsm.so) compiles great and connects to the tsm server just fine.
> Only when I issue the management class query does it complain about the
> structure version number.
>
> I am using vac/cc. No need to copy the library to /usr/lib since th
Hot Diggety! Alexandr was rumored to have written:
> I`ve installed TSM sever and client (full pack) on the same
> server(AIX).
> Have registred client node on the server TSM.(input correct pwd for
> registred client node). All it was working well for long time.
> But after long off-working time wa
Hot Diggety! Gill, Geoffrey L. was rumored to have written:
> I'm bringing up a remote AIX system with a 3584. Seems as though IBM
> left it in an unusable state and I'm trying to figure out why. What I
> originally saw was the below output minus the 3584 info. I ran cfgmgr
> and now have the below
Hot Diggety! Christian Svensson was rumored to have written:
>
> Has anyone try to install ITSM BA/API on Gentoo?
Yes. The 5.1.5 client works well for me. I have not tried 5.2 or later.
> I can not even install ITSM on it because I don't have any RPM software.
# emerge rpm
# rpm -ivh --force .rp
Hot Diggety! Shawn Price was rumored to have written:
> For what it's worth, my boss cheaped out and got some non IBM tapes for
> our 3584, and I've had nothing but problems with them. Mostly Imation
> and a few Emtecs. We are running the first generation LTO 1 drives, so
> there might be an is
Hot Diggety! PINNI, BALANAND (SBCSI) was rumored to have written:
>
> Please excuse me for asking aix issue .But I think this was pressing issue
> for me right now.
>
> I use mkcd to backup AIX os to DVD . My question is what is equivalent to
> /etc/exclude.rootvg for mkcd compared to mksysb. I wan
1. Will that combination work?
2. Is that a supported combination? Or is only TSM 5.2 server on AIX 5.2
supported?
The docs I've seen to date hasn't directly addressed TSM 5.1 server on AIX
5.2 64 bit, and I don't have a spare 64-bit 5.2 machine to test with at the
moment. (Got plenty of 32-bi
Thanks to everyone who helped out!
We successfully migrated the AIX 5.1 server (6H1) to AIX 5.2 using
alt_disk_migration cloning and then doing a migration upgrade install on
hdisk1 (while preserving AIX 5.1 on hdisk0). We had also done a bootable
mksysb to DVD-RAM beforehand with mkcd.
Was trivi
Hot Diggety! Richard Sims was rumored to have written:
> >3. What does the rumor say - when can we expect a real DB2 ;-)
>
> Imagine what the licensing fee for TSM would be then!! ;-))
Might jack up the price quite a bit... but would likely still be several
orders of magnitude cheaper than licen
Hot Diggety! i love tsm was rumored to have written:
>
> The two 3584s that I run have both recently gone off the air,i.e I can't
> ping them. They both have green link lights on the NIC. They are set to
> 100/Full although I have tried Auto and 100/half.
3584 Operator Guide recommends they be s
Hot Diggety! Lambelet,Rene,VEVEY,GL-CSC was rumored to have written:
>
> we just upgraded the firmware for our LTO1 drives in the 3584. Version in
> now 36UC instead of 36U7. The bad bug (ask your CE about it please, if
> you are using 36U7) should be fixed now!! (Library is still at firmware
> lev
Hot Diggety! Deon George was rumored to have written:
> Has anybody got an SQL, that can list all VOLUMES, and highlight (either
> showing the element number or something) those that are in the library?
>
> This report would be useful to see quickly if a list of tapes are already
> in the library -
Hot Diggety! Prather, Wanda was rumored to have written:
> This always works for me:
>
> nohup dsmc sched 2>&1 >/dev/null /dev/null 2>&1
(It is usually preferrable to put this at or near the very end of the file)
Then do:
# kill -HUP 1
(to make inittab aware)
Subsequently, if you want to forc
Hot Diggety! Jolliff, Dale was rumored to have written:
> We are looking at an upgrade from 4.2.1.15 to some version that supports
> LTO Gen 2 drives, which I hear is 5.2 or later...
Nope, LTO-2 support arrived in 5.1.6.1. There are *serious* problems with
some of the 5.1.6 tree to the point where
Hot Diggety! Prather, Wanda was rumored to have written:
>
> You can go to www.storage.ibm.com and download the
> latest 3583 or LTO firmware any time.
> But it doesn't tell me what's CHANGED in each level of firmware.
The local IBM CE usually is able to get something for me if I make a
request
Hot Diggety! Nancy R. Brizuela was rumored to have written:
>
> 1) Right now we are backing up about 150 GB/ night, but we need to add
> Exchange and a new student information system (Banner) to this. We are
> estimating that we will soon grow to at least 500 -600 GB/night.
>
> 2) Workload consi
As per the TSM redbook at:
http://www.redbooks.ibm.com/redbooks/pdfs/sg245416.pdf
It suggests use of DISKDIRS and OFFDIRS to store directory information
to avoid restore-time directory reconstruction hits.
Everything makes sense, including the need to explicitly bind all
directories on a client
Hot Diggety! Johnson, Milton was rumored to have written:
> I got a call from a rep asking if I was interested in a Sepaton S2100
> VTL (Virtual Tape Library) (www.sepaton.com). It's billed as:
>
> My questions include where's the down side? What's the catch? If your
> choice is between expanding
Hot Diggety! Stef Coene was rumored to have written:
> Then use the website. Why don't you visit the homepage of your library:
> http://www-1.ibm.com/servers/storage/support/lto/3584.html
>
> There is a nice "Firmware" link and after 2 clicks you can download any
> firmware you want for your libra
Hot Diggety! Hart, Charles was rumored to have written:
> We are currently are running TSM 5.1.7.3 - 32bit on a p630 AIX 5.2.2.
> We would like to change the TSM from 32bit to 64bit during this
> upgrade. We ran a preview of the install choosing the 64bit rte and
> server code and lic filesets but
Hot Diggety! Muhammad Sadat was rumored to have written:
> I wonder if TSM supports Open VMS as server or client??
There's no TSM server software for OpenVMS BUT yes, OpenVMS can be a TSM
client if you purchase an additional commercial third party software
called ABC which uses the TSM API.
I do
Hot Diggety! Lawrence Clark was rumored to have written:
> We originally decided to put TSM 5.2 on the AIX 5.2 system for the
> migration because of a notice in the 5.2 install doc that said TSM 5.1
> would cause 5.2 to crash (at least the version that was on the Bonus
> disk.)
If my recollections
Hot Diggety! David Longo was rumored to have written:
> I have used only IBM LTO1 tapes in my 3584 Fibre drives.
> I did have a few (3 or 4 in a year or so.) As I slowly
> gathered over this time, there were two problems.
>
> 1. The cases on early LTO 1 tapes didn't have the halves
> "welded" tog
Hot Diggety! MC Matt Cooper (2838) was rumored to have written:
> I am not aware of a cancel all processes. However, you can write a
> script to do it. It would be based on the fact that TSM will tell you
> all the processes that are running.select process_num from processes
> will give you t
Hot Diggety! Ameerul Mazli was rumored to have written:
>
> Has anyone got any idea whether it is possible to execute dsmadmc with
> non-root id?
Sure, no problem.
You only need root privileges to start TSM and possibly for a few things
like creating/defining db/log volumes? (May not even need ro
TSM 5.4 added support for Solaris/x86... but what is the minimum server
version it will connect to? 5.1.5? 5.2? 5.3? 5.4?
I looked in the documentation and couldn't find that info. The FTP
server keeps disconnecting me while emulating the performance of an
Apple II running off floppies so I haven'
Hot Diggety! David McClelland was rumored to have written:
>
> Do you mean client or server here? TSM *client* on x86 Solaris has been
> available since 5.3:
Ah, right; duly corrected, thanks!
> Given that TSM 5.2 Server goes out of support next month, you'll only
> really want to be connecting i
Setup:
- TSM 5.4.1.1 server on IBM 7026-6H1 running AIX 5.2 TL10 SP3
- TDPO 5.4.1 client on Sun T2000/SPARC running Solaris 10 Update 3
- Oracle 10gR2 database - version 10.2.0.3
I've only previously set up TDP MS SQL 5.2? on a TSM 5.1.9.6 server.
We recently went to TSM
1 - 100 of 108 matches
Mail list logo
