Networker

Re: [Networker] LTO drive problems after upgrade to NW 7.1

2004-08-04 13:57:17
Subject: Re: [Networker] LTO drive problems after upgrade to NW 7.1
From: "Reed, Irene" <Irene.Reed AT TEA.STATE.TX DOT US>
To: NETWORKER AT LISTMAIL.TEMPLE DOT EDU
Date: Wed, 4 Aug 2004 12:56:28 -0500
I am finding that this is true in our environment as well.  I am
removing the tapes with media errors and we don't seem to get them on
the new media I add.  I think this may be the case.  I will soon have
all the "bad" media removed and will then be better positioned to see if
this is the real problem.

Irene

-----Original Message-----
From: Legato NetWorker discussion [mailto:NETWORKER AT LISTMAIL.TEMPLE DOT EDU]
On Behalf Of Robert Maiello
Sent: Wednesday, August 04, 2004 12:46 PM
To: NETWORKER AT LISTMAIL.TEMPLE DOT EDU
Subject: Re: [Networker] LTO drive problems after upgrade to NW 7.1

Hmm,  I did notice after we upgraded to 7.1.1 with SDLT that we seem to
be
have more write failures.  This was with no SAN however.  On our storage
node it turned out to be a combination of drives and a batch of tapes.
On the main server several tapes were removed from rotation.

It seemed, at the time, that 7.1.1 was more "sensitive" to media errors,
or
perhaps it was CDI.  Another thought was that perhaps the media errors
were
always there and 7.1.1 was reporting them better.  Problem was, the
errors
were physical scsi read/write errors..they should have been there before
also.   Getting rid of quite a bit of media seemed to curtail the media
errors.

Sorry, could not be of more help.

Robert Maiello
Pioneer Data Systems


On Wed, 4 Aug 2004 19:01:08 +0300, Itzik Meirson <imeirson AT MBI.CO DOT IL>
wrote:

>It seems that we are experiencing som LTO instability after upgrading
from
Networker 6.1.x to 7.1.x.
>It seems as if after the upgrade we are getting very sporadic tape I/O
errors that are causing premature tape closure. We have tried to disable
CDI but that did not realy solve the problem.
>I wonder if any of you have seen such problems and could recommend a
procedure to solve the problem.
>Itzik
>
>
>
>***********************************************************************
****
***********************
>The contents of this email and any attachments are confidential.
>It is intended for the named recipient(s) only.
>If you have received this email in error please notify the system
manager
or  the
>sender immediately and do not disclose the contents to any one or make
copies.
>
>MBI - System Team
>***********************************************************************
****
***********************
>
>--
>Note: To sign off this list, send a "signoff networker" command via
email
>to listserv AT listmail.temple DOT edu or visit the list's Web site at
>http://listmail.temple.edu/archives/networker.html where you can
>also view and post messages to the list.
>=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=

--
Note: To sign off this list, send a "signoff networker" command via
email
to listserv AT listmail.temple DOT edu or visit the list's Web site at
http://listmail.temple.edu/archives/networker.html where you can
also view and post messages to the list.
=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=

--
Note: To sign off this list, send a "signoff networker" command via email
to listserv AT listmail.temple DOT edu or visit the list's Web site at
http://listmail.temple.edu/archives/networker.html where you can
also view and post messages to the list.
=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=