ADSM-L

Re: TSM v4.2.1

2001-10-22 11:44:41
Subject: Re: TSM v4.2.1
From: Neil Schofield <Neil.Schofield AT YORKSHIREWATER.CO DOT UK>
Date: Mon, 22 Oct 2001 16:39:13 +0100
I can only endorse Geoff, Henk and Tom's views.

I upgraded two servers from TSM v3.7.5 to TSM v4.2.1 last week - both on
NT. I too discovered processes and sessions failing with ANR4887E. On one
server, I also saw the TSM server process frequently drop out with a Dr
Watson error.

I logged a priority 1 PMR but after two days bit the bullet and sacraficed
48 hours worth of backups by restoring the system back to its state prior
to the upgrade. You can guess what the business thought about that.

Other than the major failings above, I also saw a few other things that
concerned me:
RECONCILE VOLUMES processing again reports spurious ANR4358W errors on
multiple virtual volumes. This was a problem in 3.7.4 but had been fixed in
3.7.5.
The output of QUERY PROCESS during a MOVE DATA for a virtual volumes
showed a massive number of unreadable bytes. This was even though the
unreadable file count was zero. Funnily enough all such concurrent
processes showed the same value for unreadable bytes.
The performance of the MOVE DATA process for virtual volumes was less
than 10% of the performance of all previous versions I've seen.

The problem we all have is that 3.7 is unsupported next week. However I
would now be very reluctant to go through the upgrade again without some
very strong assurances for fear of how things might look if I have to
regress again.

The fact that others are experiencing identical problems at least gives me
some hope of a resolution.

Neil Schofield



The information in this e-mail is confidential and may also be legally
privileged. The contents are intended for recipient only and are subject
to the legal notice available at http://www.keldagroup.com/email.htm
Yorkshire Water Services Limited
Registered Office Western House Halifax Road Bradford BD6 2SZ
Registered in England and Wales No 2366682
<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>