Ok, and now here’s a mystery, I changed the mountlimit from 20 to 4 and the
value goes to 0 (and thus the warning goed away).
> Op 28 mei 2015, om 09:10 heeft Remco Post <r.post AT PLCS DOT NL> het
> volgende geschreven:
>
> Hi,
>
> nice query, thanks for the hints, both Rick and Chavdar. Seem to me that
> there is some bug in the code, based on the thresholds and the technote, with
> 0 pools associated, the devclass should always be ’green’, but, for one
> server:
>
> Server Name: TSMOGACM00
> Activity Date: 28-05-2015 08:50:06
> Activity Name: NON-SHARED FILE DEV PERCENTAGE SCRATCH VOLUMES
> UNALLOCATABLE
> Element Name: DC_DBB
> Element Numeric Value: 45
> Element String Value:
> Element State: WARNING
>
> so, this means that the filesystem is only able to host 55% of the potential
> scratch volumes that could land on the file system, except that there are 0
> pools, and thus 0 potential scratch volumes… My guess is that somebody
> thought infinite is somehow not the right answer and fixed a dev/0 error in
> the wrong way.
>
> Or, if the technote incomplete and is there some other calculation also
> involved?
>
>
>> Op 27 mei 2015, om 20:26 heeft Rick Adamson <RickAdamson AT SEGROCERS DOT
>> COM> het volgende geschreven:
>>
>> If I remember correctly it has been historically listed as a known issue
>> since v6.x.
>>
>> But in version 7.1 this was released on the warning status.....
>> http://www-01.ibm.com/support/docview.wss?uid=swg21696240
>>
>> -Rick Adamson
>> Jacksonville, FL.
>>
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: ADSM: Dist Stor Manager [mailto:ADSM-L AT VM.MARIST DOT EDU] On Behalf
>> Of Remco Post
>> Sent: Wednesday, May 27, 2015 11:01 AM
>> To: ADSM-L AT VM.MARIST DOT EDU
>> Subject: [ADSM-L] OC device class state
>>
>> Hi All,
>>
>> I’ve just recently upgraded my TSM configuration manager server to 7.1.1.100
>> and installed and configured OC. One thing I noticed that out of the two TSM
>> servers now at 7.1.1.100 and monitored by OC, two report an issue with a
>> file device class that is only used for database backups. One server reports
>> that device class with a status of ’warning’ and the other with a status of
>> ’critical’. I can’t figure out why the OC reports these device classes as
>> not healthy. There are no events, and there is no indication of why OC
>> thinks there is something wrong. At least, not that I can find. Anyone got
>> any hints as to what could be ’wrong’?
>>
>> --
>>
>> Met vriendelijke groeten/Kind Regards,
>>
>> Remco Post
>> r.post AT plcs DOT nl
>> +31 6 248 21 622
>
> --
>
> Met vriendelijke groeten/Kind Regards,
>
> Remco Post
> r.post AT plcs DOT nl
> +31 6 248 21 622
--
Met vriendelijke groeten/Kind Regards,
Remco Post
r.post AT plcs DOT nl
+31 6 248 21 622
|
