Mail Archive Search: <+subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*\[Networker\]\s+my\s+FC\-attached\s+sdlt320\s+drives\s+can\'t\s+properly\s+restore\s+tapes\s+they\s+wrote\s+previously\s*$/>

Results:

References: [ +subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*\[Networker\]\s+my\s+FC\-attached\s+sdlt320\s+drives\s+can\'t\s+properly\s+restore\s+tapes\s+they\s+wrote\s+previously\s*$/: 7 ]

Total 7 documents matching your query.

1. [Networker] my FC-attached sdlt320 drives can't properly restore tapes they wrote previously (score: 1): Author: Ty Young <Phillip_Young AT I2 DOT COM>; Date: Wed, 17 May 2006 23:01:26 -0500; All, I just made the cut-over from a SCSI-attached L180 (4 x SDLT320) library connected to a Solaris 8 host, to a FC-attached L500 (4 x LTO3) into 2 x T2000 hosts. I now want to continue using my L18; /usr/local/webapp/mharc-adsm.org/html/Networker/2006-05/msg00276.html (14,638 bytes)
2. Re: [Networker] my FC-attached sdlt320 drives can't properly restore tapes they wrote previously (score: 1): Author: Jim Ruskowsky <jimr AT JEFFERIES DOT COM>; Date: Thu, 18 May 2006 09:55:02 -0400; Ty, I think you are on the right track looking at block sizing. Here are some ideas of where to look, but if it ends up you need to have different block sizes on different devices, I don't know how t; /usr/local/webapp/mharc-adsm.org/html/Networker/2006-05/msg00284.html (14,522 bytes)
3. [Networker] my FC-attached sdlt320 drives can't properly restore tapes they wrote previously (score: 1): Author: Fazil Saiyed <fazil.saiyed AT ANIXTER DOT COM>; Date: Fri, 19 May 2006 09:20:29 -0400; Looks like when you moved from SCSI to FC drives, your privious Block size on the drive was lower ( or heigher) then now, this would be a problem, check and see if you could lower the block size on o; /usr/local/webapp/mharc-adsm.org/html/Networker/2006-05/msg00287.html (12,873 bytes)
4. Re: [Networker] my FC-attached sdlt320 drives can't properly restore tapes they wrote previously (score: 1): Author: Ty Young <Phillip_Young AT I2 DOT COM>; Date: Fri, 19 May 2006 08:47:29 -0500; Thanks Fazil for your input. I'm inclined to agree with you but I'm confused by the fact that scanner -v is showing the block size as 131072, or 128K. -ty Phillip T. ("Ty") Young, DMA Manager, Data C; /usr/local/webapp/mharc-adsm.org/html/Networker/2006-05/msg00288.html (15,849 bytes)
5. Re: [Networker] my FC-attached sdlt320 drives can't properly restore tapes they wrote previously (score: 1): Author: Davina Treiber <DavinaTreiber AT PEEVRO.CO DOT UK>; Date: Fri, 19 May 2006 15:44:00 +0100; Ty, In this case the reference to block size is almost certainly a red herring. The message quotes 32768, well that wouldn't have been the block size used on your previous drives anyway. You are basi; /usr/local/webapp/mharc-adsm.org/html/Networker/2006-05/msg00289.html (15,385 bytes)
6. Re: [Networker] my FC-attached sdlt320 drives can't properly restore tapes they wrote previously (score: 1): Author: rader AT GINSENG.HEP.WISC DOT EDU; Date: Fri, 19 May 2006 10:16:31 -0500; I can verify Davina's claim: we have SDLT600s and get "Block size is 65538 bytes not 131072 bytes" msgs, but we do not have problems with restores. steve - - - systems & network manager high energy p; /usr/local/webapp/mharc-adsm.org/html/Networker/2006-05/msg00291.html (17,105 bytes)
7. [Networker] my FC-attached sdlt320 drives can't properly restore tapes they wrote previously (score: 1): Author: Fazil Saiyed <fazil.saiyed AT ANIXTER DOT COM>; Date: Mon, 22 May 2006 08:56:34 -0400; One thing i would question is if the currently written Tapes with existing block sizes is being read\restored correctly without errors, then there is no reason to doubt that FC setup\errors, this err; /usr/local/webapp/mharc-adsm.org/html/Networker/2006-05/msg00317.html (12,564 bytes)

Current List: 1 - 7
Page: [1]