Networker

Re: [Networker] Block size errors on Win2003

2008-03-12 09:53:07
Subject: Re: [Networker] Block size errors on Win2003
From: MIchael Leone <Michael.Leone AT PHA.PHILA DOT GOV>
To: NETWORKER AT LISTSERV.TEMPLE DOT EDU
Date: Wed, 12 Mar 2008 09:45:00 -0400
"Matthew Huff" <mhuff AT ox DOT com> wrote on 03/12/2008 08:50:34 AM:

> I have seen this error when there are I/O errors on the device, 
> either media problems or SCSI issues. Personally, I'd take a shotgun
> to any SCSI tape drives, but I've been doing this too long so I no 
> longer sacrifice chickens to the SCSI gods. Thank god for native FC 
> tape drives.

These are FC drives. Well, the library is FC-attached; the drives in the 
library are SCSI-attached, I think ...

> Check the obvious things, look in the event logs for scsi or other 
> errors, check the legato logs carefully, clean the drives, etc.... 

I'll look into it, thanks

> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: EMC NetWorker discussion [mailto:[email protected].
> EDU] On Behalf Of MIchael Leone
> Sent: Wednesday, March 12, 2008 8:38 AM
> To: NETWORKER AT LISTSERV.TEMPLE DOT EDU
> Subject: [Networker] Block size errors on Win2003
> 
> I got a couple of these errors the last couple nights. We use Win2003, 
NW 
> 7.4 SP1, and always have. All the media therefore has always been 
written 
> to by Win2003, it's not like we're mixing media that had been written by 
a 
> Unix system.
> 
> NetWorker media: (notice) Volume "910088" on device "\\.\Tape3": Block 
> size is 32768 bytes not 131072 bytes. Verify the device configuration. 
> Tape positioning by record is disabled.
> 
> Now, I did have to delete and re-add the library, because the device 
name 
> changed (see recent thread on this topic). However, NW automatically 
> configured the drive; I never specified anything about blocksize. And 
the 
> Windows blocksize shouldn't change - it should be the same as it was in 
> the past. I ahve other tapes of this same vintage that are not reporting 

> this problem (i.e., these are all tapes that came back into rotation 
after 
> our standard 2 month cycle). So the block size on all 10 tapes that were 

> used last night should have been the same, yet only 2 tapes are the ones 

> complaining.
> 
> Since these were clone jobs, it meant I had to manually start a couple 
> clone jobs before I went to bed last night, which is not exactly what I 
> wanted to do with my evening. :-) 
> 
> Thoughts? Causes, preventative measures for future?
> 
> Thanks
> 
> -- 
> Michael Leone
> Network Administrator, ISM
> Philadelphia Housing Authority
> 2500 Jackson St
> Philadelphia, PA 19145
> Tel:  215-684-4180
> Cell: 215-252-0143
> <mailto:michael.leone AT pha.phila DOT gov>
> 
> To sign off this list, send email to listserv AT listserv.temple DOT edu 
> and type "signoff networker" in the body of the email. Please write 
> to networker-request AT listserv.temple DOT edu if you have any problems 
> with this list. You can access the archives at http://listserv.
> temple.edu/archives/networker.html or
> via RSS at http://listserv.temple.edu/cgi-bin/wa?RSS&L=NETWORKER

To sign off this list, send email to listserv AT listserv.temple DOT edu and 
type "signoff networker" in the body of the email. Please write to 
networker-request AT listserv.temple DOT edu if you have any problems with this 
list. You can access the archives at 
http://listserv.temple.edu/archives/networker.html or
via RSS at http://listserv.temple.edu/cgi-bin/wa?RSS&L=NETWORKER

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>