> On Thu, 04 Dec 2008 15:17:54 +0100, Julien Cigar said:
>
> On Thu, 2008-12-04 at 13:50 +, Martin Simmons wrote:
> > > On Thu, 04 Dec 2008 14:20:37 +0100, Julien Cigar said:
> > >
> > > On Thu, 2008-12-04 at 12:50 +, Martin Simmons wrote:
> > > > > On Thu, 04 Dec 2008 12:04:3
> From: Julien Cigar <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> - 2008-12-04 16:14
>
> On Thu, 2008-12-04 at 15:44 +, Alan Brown wrote:
>> On Wed, 3 Dec 2008, Julien Cigar wrote:
>>
>> > > Which model and revision?
>> >
>> > I posted the full output on the FreeBSD ML some times ago :
>> > http://lists.freebsd.org
On Thu, 4 Dec 2008, Julien Cigar wrote:
> I think it's an Ultra, there are only two connectors on it (plus one to
> connect to the SCSI card). Actually it's configured as this :
> SCSI CARD == TAPE DRIVE == TERMINATOR
Is the scsi car internally terminated and is the terminator enabled?
T
On Thu, 2008-12-04 at 15:44 +, Alan Brown wrote:
> On Wed, 3 Dec 2008, Julien Cigar wrote:
>
> > > Which model and revision?
> >
> > I posted the full output on the FreeBSD ML some times ago :
> > http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-scsi/2008-November/003706.html
>
> Is that Ultra or L
On Wed, 3 Dec 2008, Julien Cigar wrote:
> > Which model and revision?
>
> I posted the full output on the FreeBSD ML some times ago :
> http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-scsi/2008-November/003706.html
Is that Ultra or LVD?
Ultra 160/320 single-ended scsi have maximum cable lengths in th
On Thu, 2008-12-04 at 13:50 +, Martin Simmons wrote:
> > On Thu, 04 Dec 2008 14:20:37 +0100, Julien Cigar said:
> >
> > On Thu, 2008-12-04 at 12:50 +, Martin Simmons wrote:
> > > > On Thu, 04 Dec 2008 12:04:34 +0100, Julien Cigar said:
> > > >
> > > > On Thu, 2008-12-04 at 11:33 +
> On Thu, 04 Dec 2008 14:20:37 +0100, Julien Cigar said:
>
> On Thu, 2008-12-04 at 12:50 +, Martin Simmons wrote:
> > > On Thu, 04 Dec 2008 12:04:34 +0100, Julien Cigar said:
> > >
> > > On Thu, 2008-12-04 at 11:33 +0100, Ralf Gross wrote:
> > > > Julien Cigar schrieb:
> > > >
> > >
On Thu, Dec 04, 2008 at 02:08:38PM +0200, Pasi Kärkkäinen wrote:
> On Thu, Dec 04, 2008 at 11:22:32AM +0200, Pasi Kärkkäinen wrote:
> > On Wed, Dec 03, 2008 at 11:26:40PM +0100, Arno Lehmann wrote:
> > >
> > > After I had a look at the release notes for 2.4.4-b1 and the bug
> > > tracker I sugges
On Thu, 2008-12-04 at 12:50 +, Martin Simmons wrote:
> > On Thu, 04 Dec 2008 12:04:34 +0100, Julien Cigar said:
> >
> > On Thu, 2008-12-04 at 11:33 +0100, Ralf Gross wrote:
> > > Julien Cigar schrieb:
> > >
> > > Are you sure you need these additional options?
> > >
> > > > Hardware En
> On Thu, 04 Dec 2008 12:04:34 +0100, Julien Cigar said:
>
> On Thu, 2008-12-04 at 11:33 +0100, Ralf Gross wrote:
> > Julien Cigar schrieb:
> >
> > Are you sure you need these additional options?
> >
> > > Hardware End of Medium = no
> > > Backward Space Record = no
> > > Backward Spa
On Thu, Dec 04, 2008 at 11:22:32AM +0200, Pasi Kärkkäinen wrote:
> On Wed, Dec 03, 2008 at 11:26:40PM +0100, Arno Lehmann wrote:
> >
> > After I had a look at the release notes for 2.4.4-b1 and the bug
> > tracker I suggest you try the 2.4.4-b1 SD - as far as I can see, bug
> > 1192 *could* be w
On Thu, 2008-12-04 at 11:33 +0100, Ralf Gross wrote:
> Julien Cigar schrieb:
>
> Are you sure you need these additional options?
>
> > Hardware End of Medium = no
> > Backward Space Record = no
> > Backward Space File= no
> > Fast Forward Space File = no
> > BSF at EOM = yes
> >
Julien Cigar schrieb:
Are you sure you need these additional options?
> Hardware End of Medium = no
> Backward Space Record = no
> Backward Space File= no
> Fast Forward Space File = no
> BSF at EOM = yes
> Two EOF = yes
I remember that there has been some discussion on the lis
Hi Ralf, here is my config :
Device {
Name = "Sony SDX-700C"
Media Type = "AIT"
Archive Device = "/dev/nsa0"
Device Type = tape
Autochanger = no
Always Open = yes
Volume Poll Interval = 1 hour
Removable Media = yes
Random Access = no
Requires Mount = no
Hardware End of Medium
Julien Cigar schrieb:
> ...
> (sa0:isp0:0:5:0): REWIND. CDB: 1 0 0 0 0 0
> (sa0:isp0:0:5:0): CAM Status: SCSI Status Error
> (sa0:isp0:0:5:0): SCSI Status: Check Condition
> (sa0:isp0:0:5:0): MEDIUM ERROR asc:52,0
> (sa0:isp0:0:5:0): Cartridge fault
> (sa0:isp0:0:5:0): Retrying Command (per Sense D
On Wed, Dec 03, 2008 at 11:26:40PM +0100, Arno Lehmann wrote:
>
> After I had a look at the release notes for 2.4.4-b1 and the bug
> tracker I suggest you try the 2.4.4-b1 SD - as far as I can see, bug
> 1192 *could* be what you found. It should be sufficient to ./configure
> and make the 2.4.4
On Wed, Dec 03, 2008 at 01:06:47PM +0200, Pasi Kärkkäinen wrote:
> On Wed, Dec 03, 2008 at 10:37:05AM +, Alan Brown wrote:
> > On Tue, 2 Dec 2008, Julien Cigar wrote:
> >
> > > Yes the SCSI card is an Adaptec
> >
> > Which model and revision?
> >
> > Several older Adaptec scsi HBAs are _very
Hello,
as I said some times ago I tested with a QSI card :
[EMAIL PROTECTED]:0:7:0:class=0x01 card=0x53492050 chip=0x10201077
rev=0x05 hdr=0x00
vendor = 'QLogic Corporation'
device = 'QLA1020/104x Fast-Wide-SCSI "Fast!SCSI IQ" Host
Adapter'
class = mass storag
Hi,
03.12.2008 17:28, Bob Hetzel wrote:
> Previously, From: Arno Lehmann <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said...
>
>>> Thread 26 (Thread -1215112304 (LWP 5413)):
#0 0xb7f6a410 in __kernel_vsyscall ()
#1 0xb7adba41 in ___newselect_nocancel () from /lib/libc.so.6
#2 0x080a99b9 in bnet_thread_
Previously, From: Arno Lehmann <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said...
>> Thread 26 (Thread -1215112304 (LWP 5413)):
>> > #0 0xb7f6a410 in __kernel_vsyscall ()
>> > #1 0xb7adba41 in ___newselect_nocancel () from /lib/libc.so.6
>> > #2 0x080a99b9 in bnet_thread_server (addrs=0x80f9860, max_clients=20,
>>
On Wed, 2008-12-03 at 10:37 +, Alan Brown wrote:
> On Tue, 2 Dec 2008, Julien Cigar wrote:
>
> > Yes the SCSI card is an Adaptec
>
> Which model and revision?
>
I posted the full output on the FreeBSD ML some times ago :
http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-scsi/2008-November/003706.h
On Wed, Dec 03, 2008 at 10:37:05AM +, Alan Brown wrote:
> On Tue, 2 Dec 2008, Julien Cigar wrote:
>
> > Yes the SCSI card is an Adaptec
>
> Which model and revision?
>
> Several older Adaptec scsi HBAs are _very_ sensitive to scsi bus
> termination and length issues.
>
Hmm.. I have pretty
On Tue, 2 Dec 2008, Julien Cigar wrote:
> Yes the SCSI card is an Adaptec
Which model and revision?
Several older Adaptec scsi HBAs are _very_ sensitive to scsi bus
termination and length issues.
AB
-
This SF.Net email is
On Thu, Nov 27, 2008 at 05:53:41PM +0100, Arno Lehmann wrote:
> Hi,
>
> 27.11.2008 15:10, Pasi Kärkkäinen wrote:
> > On Thu, Nov 27, 2008 at 08:14:45AM +0100, Arno Lehmann wrote:
> >> Hi,
> >>
> >> 26.11.2008 21:22, Bob Hetzel wrote:
> >>> I've got bacula currently in a hung state with the followi
On Tue, Dec 02, 2008 at 08:25:32PM +0100, Nils Blanck-Wehde wrote:
> Julien, hi Pasi,
>
> it looks like we have similar problems. But to be honest I have no real
> clue whats causing them. Right now it could be anything from a HBA
> driver problem to a bug in bacula.
>
> I will just give you so
On Tue, Dec 02, 2008 at 06:56:34PM +0100, Julien Cigar wrote:
> Yes the SCSI card is an Adaptec (I replaced it today with a QSI Logic to
> see if I have better results).
> The OS is FreeBSD 7.0-p6 (32 bits) with the ahc driver.
> What's strange is that I can write many jobs without any problems, bu
Julien, hi Pasi,
it looks like we have similar problems. But to be honest I have no real
clue whats causing them. Right now it could be anything from a HBA
driver problem to a bug in bacula.
I will just give you some details about our setup so maybe we can find
similarities.
I just looked in
Yes the SCSI card is an Adaptec (I replaced it today with a QSI Logic to
see if I have better results).
The OS is FreeBSD 7.0-p6 (32 bits) with the ahc driver.
What's strange is that I can write many jobs without any problems, but
then it suddenly fails, always with the same error (Error writing fi
On Tue, Dec 02, 2008 at 06:11:11PM +0200, Pasi Kärkkäinen wrote:
> On Tue, Dec 02, 2008 at 03:56:33PM +0100, Julien Cigar wrote:
> > Same problem here with a Sony SDX-700C
> >
>
> Thanks for the report. Do you also have Adaptec SCSI HBA?
>
And which OS?
I'm running CentOS 5.2 x86 32bit.
-- P
On Tue, Dec 02, 2008 at 03:56:33PM +0100, Julien Cigar wrote:
> Same problem here with a Sony SDX-700C
>
Thanks for the report. Do you also have Adaptec SCSI HBA?
-- Pasi
> On Tue, 2008-12-02 at 15:30 +0100, Nils Blanck-Wehde wrote:
> > Hi!
> >
> > Just wanted to let you know that I came acros
On Tue, Dec 02, 2008 at 04:48:24PM +0200, Pasi Kärkkäinen wrote:
> On Tue, Dec 02, 2008 at 03:30:06PM +0100, Nils Blanck-Wehde wrote:
> > Hi!
> >
> > Just wanted to let you know that I came across the exact same error
> >
> > Error writing final EOF to tape. This Volume may not be readable.
> >
Same problem here with a Sony SDX-700C
On Tue, 2008-12-02 at 15:30 +0100, Nils Blanck-Wehde wrote:
> Hi!
>
> Just wanted to let you know that I came across the exact same error
> Error writing final EOF to tape. This Volume may not be readable.
> a couple of times with 2.4.2 using a Quantum DLT
On Tue, Dec 02, 2008 at 03:30:06PM +0100, Nils Blanck-Wehde wrote:
> Hi!
>
> Just wanted to let you know that I came across the exact same error
>
> Error writing final EOF to tape. This Volume may not be readable.
>
> a couple of times with 2.4.2 using a Quantum DLT VS1 drive connected to
> Ada
Hi!
Just wanted to let you know that I came across the exact same error
Error writing final EOF to tape. This Volume may not be readable.
a couple of times with 2.4.2 using a Quantum DLT VS1 drive connected to
Adaptec 29160LP. I don't think that the tape is really defective as
bacula states. I c
On Thu, Nov 27, 2008 at 05:53:41PM +0100, Arno Lehmann wrote:
> Hi,
>
> 27.11.2008 15:10, Pasi Kärkkäinen wrote:
> > On Thu, Nov 27, 2008 at 08:14:45AM +0100, Arno Lehmann wrote:
> >> Hi,
> >>
> >> 26.11.2008 21:22, Bob Hetzel wrote:
> >>> I've got bacula currently in a hung state with the followi
On Thu, Nov 27, 2008 at 05:53:41PM +0100, Arno Lehmann wrote:
> Hi,
>
> 27.11.2008 15:10, Pasi Kärkkäinen wrote:
> > On Thu, Nov 27, 2008 at 08:14:45AM +0100, Arno Lehmann wrote:
> >> Hi,
> >>
> >> 26.11.2008 21:22, Bob Hetzel wrote:
> >>> I've got bacula currently in a hung state with the followi
Hello,
29.11.2008 19:45, Bob Hetzel wrote:
>
>> From: Arno Lehmann <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > Date: Thu, 27 Nov 2008 08:14:45 +0100
>> Hi,
> >
>> 26.11.2008 21:22, Bob Hetzel wrote:
I've got bacula currently in a hung state with the following interesting
info. When I run a status sto
> From: Arno Lehmann <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Date: Thu, 27 Nov 2008 08:14:45 +0100
> Hi,
>
> 26.11.2008 21:22, Bob Hetzel wrote:
>> > I've got bacula currently in a hung state with the following interesting
>> > info. When I run a status storage produces the following...
>
> Is your Bacula s
Hi,
27.11.2008 15:10, Pasi Kärkkäinen wrote:
> On Thu, Nov 27, 2008 at 08:14:45AM +0100, Arno Lehmann wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> 26.11.2008 21:22, Bob Hetzel wrote:
>>> I've got bacula currently in a hung state with the following interesting
>>> info. When I run a status storage produces the following.
On Thu, Nov 27, 2008 at 08:14:45AM +0100, Arno Lehmann wrote:
> Hi,
>
> 26.11.2008 21:22, Bob Hetzel wrote:
> > I've got bacula currently in a hung state with the following interesting
> > info. When I run a status storage produces the following...
>
> Is your Bacula still stuck? If so, and you
Hi,
26.11.2008 21:22, Bob Hetzel wrote:
> I've got bacula currently in a hung state with the following interesting
> info. When I run a status storage produces the following...
Is your Bacula still stuck? If so, and you have gdb installed, and a
Bacula with debug symbols, now might be a good t
41 matches
Mail list logo
