I have seen this error on 2 of our NT client nodes (V3.7.2) where the
server (V3.7.4) reports the event as having failed but investigation of
the client's dsmsched.log has shown that the backup worked.  In our case I
have noticed that the ADSM server never receives the results of the event
completing as there is a reconnect message occurs between "Sending
results" & "Results sent"
eg:
....
15-05-2001 01:35:01 Aggregate data transfer rate:      3,437.03 KB/sec
15-05-2001 01:35:01 Objects compressed by:                    0%
15-05-2001 01:35:01 Elapsed processing time:           04:16:19
15-05-2001 01:35:01 --- SCHEDULEREC STATUS END
15-05-2001 01:35:01 --- SCHEDULEREC OBJECT END NOTESINC 14-05-2001
21:00:00
15-05-2001 01:35:01 Scheduled event 'NOTESINC' completed successfully.
15-05-2001 01:35:01 Sending results for scheduled event 'NOTESINC'.
15-05-2001 01:35:03 Session established with server QUEEG: AIX-RS/6000
15-05-2001 01:35:03   Server Version 3, Release 7, Level 4.0
15-05-2001 01:35:03   Server date/time: 15-05-2001 01:35:02  Last access:
15-05-
2001 01:03:44

15-05-2001 01:35:03 Results sent to server for scheduled event 'NOTESINC'.

15-05-2001 01:35:03 ANS1483I Schedule log pruning started.

Mavis
IP Australia

>------------------------------
>Date:    Mon, 14 May 2001 10:46:09 -0400
>From:    Lindsay Morris <lmorris AT SERVERGRAPH DOT COM>
>Subject: Re: TSM 4.1 bug???
>
>TSM is liable to report a client "command"-type schedule (as opposed to
an
>incremental-backup) as completed, when in fact the command failed
dismally,
>and even returned an error status into the client's dsmsched.log.
>
>The logic is (I guess) that dsmc succesfully issued the command, so the
>client schedule completed "successfully".
>
>
>
>>-----Original Message-----
>>From: ADSM: Dist Stor Manager [mailto:ADSM-L AT VM.MARIST DOT EDU]On Behalf Of
>>Joseph Dawes
>>Sent: Monday, May 14, 2001 10:41 AM
>>To: ADSM-L AT VM.MARIST DOT EDU
>>Subject: TSM 4.1 bug???
>>
>>Does anyone have a problem with tsm reporting events inaccurately i.e.
>>saying it failes when it completed and the reverse??
>>
>>please advise
>>
>>Joe