Mark, I have not seen ANY problems with tape retention etc. as a result of
this error message. I didn't get a response from support either about what
affect I could expect as a result of this. I was told that if I ever had to
reload the DB, that I might get a problem with this table, but of course,
the fix is to reload the table,,,, so it seems to be some kind of support
loop,,,, :)
I'll do the dry-run soon,,, I'll let you know the results,,,,,
Dave Sanders
Sr. Technical Consultant
DSanders AT massmutual DOT com
MassMutual / The Blue Chip Company
1295 State St, E060, Springfield, MA 01111
413-744-5095
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Mapes, Mark [SMTP:MWM4 AT PGE DOT COM]
> Sent: Wednesday, October 14, 1998 10:41 AM
> To: ADSM-L AT VM.MARIST DOT EDU
> Subject: Re: Errors: ANR0104E and ANR9999D
>
> David,
>
> thanks for the response. It is always nice to know that someone, even
> though not an IBMer, is reading this stuff. It is disheartening to know
> that you been "suffering" from this error for a long time. Other than the
> messages, have you noticed any adverse effects, like tapes never expiring?
> Since the messages don't tell me what tapes are having a problem, I not
> sure
> what I should be looking at, and there are many normal messages of tapes
> going into pending status and then subsequently being deleted from the
> pool.
> After a week or so, I have not noticed a significant change to these
> processes, but we have been doing a lot of work on some clients that have
> been deleting old filespaces and adding new ones, and thus our tape
> pending
> and expiring messages have been heavier than normal. Maybe, someday, we
> can
> get an official response from IBM that will give us a warm fuzzy that this
> issue will be resolved.
>
> Mark
>
> > ----------
> > From: Sanders, David[SMTP:DSanders AT INTERNAL.MASSMUTUAL DOT COM]
> > Reply To: ADSM: Dist Stor Manager
> > Sent: Wednesday, October 14, 1998 6:58AM
> > To: ADSM-L AT VM.MARIST DOT EDU
> > Subject: Re: Errors: ANR0104E and ANR9999D
> >
> > Mark, we've had that same error outstanding for a long time. I'm on MVS
> > V2
> > but the same context of the message. I've asked several times about
> other
> > folks and how they've dealt with the problem (reorg the table vs. the
> db)
> > but have never gotten a response. I'm in the process of having a
> totally
> > isolated environment (a Y2K isolated MVS-LPAR) that I'm going to use for
> > experimentation. I can't take an outage without having a high degree of
> > confidence or time estimate. I can't get either from support.
> >
> > Dave Sanders
> > Sr. Technical Consultant
> > DSanders AT massmutual DOT com
> > MassMutual / The Blue Chip Company
> > 1295 State St, E060, Springfield, MA 01111
> > 413-744-5095
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: Mapes, Mark [SMTP:MWM4 AT PGE DOT COM]
> > > Sent: Monday, October 12, 1998 10:37 AM
> > > To: ADSM-L AT VM.MARIST DOT EDU
> > > Subject: Errors: ANR0104E and ANR9999D
> > >
> > > Hello,
> > >
> > > We just started getting these error last Thursday, and now get many a
> > day.
> > >
> > >
> > > ANR0104E asvolut.c(2225): Error 2 deleting row from table
> > > "AS.Volume.Assignment".
> > >
> > >
> > > ANR9999D afmigr.c(517): Error checking pending volumes for completion
> of
> > > reuse delay period.
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > We upgrade our AIX/ADSM from 3.1.1.3 to 3.1.2 last Monday (and before
> > that
> > > we applied a patch last Spring and upgraded from 2.1 to 3.1 and AIX
> 3.2
> > to
> > > 4.2 in January and sometime before that we went from v1.x to v2.1).
> > >
> > > In IBMLink, I could not find a direct hit on these messages. The
> > closest
> > > I
> > > found was APAR II08975, dated 02/13/97 and refers to V1 to V2
> migration.
> > > It
> > > suggests that the AS.Volume.Assignment table be reorganized. Is that
> > what
> > > I
> > > want to do? Should I follow the instructions that are specified in
> that
> > > APAR, which is just the reorg of that on table or do I want to do an
> > > entire
> > > reorg of the ADSM database (perhaps fixing other problems and/or
> > achieving
> > > some performance gains)?
> > >
> > > How serious is this problem? Is there something else that can be
> done,
> > > such
> > > as an AUDIT LIBRARY command.
> > >
> > > Thanks for you help.
> > >
> > > Mark Mapes
> > > PG&E
> >
|
