ADSM-L

Re: more to mountwait than devclass definition??

2003-05-22 07:36:28
Subject: Re: more to mountwait than devclass definition??
From: Lisa Cabanas <cabanl AT MODOT DOT NET>
To: ADSM-L AT VM.MARIST DOT EDU
Date: Thu, 22 May 2003 06:46:16 -0500
If that's the case, is there a way to define this on a 3590 drive or on the
3494 library itself?



             Bill Boyer
             <bill.boyer@VERIZ
             ON.NET>                                                    To
             Sent by: "ADSM:           ADSM-L AT VM.MARIST DOT EDU
             Dist Stor                                                  cc
             Manager"
             <[email protected]                                     Subject
             .EDU>                     Re: more to mountwait than devclass
                                       definition??

             05/21/2003 02:59
             PM


             Please respond to
             "ADSM: Dist Stor
                 Manager"
             <[email protected]
                   .EDU>






I thought the MOUNWAIT time was for when a tape mount was needed that
couldn't be performed by a library robotics. Like in a MANUAL library,
stand-alone tape drive. Or if you have a tape as READWRITE/READONLY, but
not
in the library. Then I see the request (QUERY REQUEST) counting down from
MOUNTWAIT to zero by 1 minute intervals. I've seen sessions in MediaW and
processes waiting for mount points for a  lot longer than my devclass
MOUNTWAIT time.

Bill Boyer
DSS, Inc.

-----Original Message-----
From: ADSM: Dist Stor Manager [mailto:ADSM-L AT VM.MARIST DOT EDU]On Behalf Of
Prather, Wanda
Sent: Wednesday, May 21, 2003 10:56 AM
To: ADSM-L AT VM.MARIST DOT EDU
Subject: Re: more to mountwait than devclass definition??


Lisa,

FWIW, I haven't seen this behavior on my 5.1 server yet, but I have seen it
frequently on my 4.2 server.

Just from observation (I know it's not what the doc says), the mountwait
will cancel the process if it is waiting for a mount POINT OK, but doesn't
when the mount is needed in the middle of a process that already has the
drive.

When I have seen this, it's always been a problem with the tape robot.


-----Original Message-----
From: Lisa Cabanas [mailto:cabanl AT MODOT DOT NET]
Sent: Wednesday, May 21, 2003 8:36 AM
To: ADSM-L AT VM.MARIST DOT EDU
Subject: more to mountwait than devclass definition??


I am wondering if I missed something in the upgrade to 5.1, but is there
somewhere else other than the devclass definition where I would define the
mountwait?

I ask because 140340 seconds is a lot more than 5 minutes!

thanks
lisa



 Process Process Description  Status
  Number
-------- --------------------
-------------------------------------------------
      13 Space Reclamation    Offsite Volume(s) (storage pool BACKUPCOPY),
                               Moved Files: 117371, Moved Bytes:
                               101,969,883,939, Unreadable Files: 0,
Unreadable
                               Bytes: 0. Current Physical File (bytes):
                               606,188~Waiting for mount of input volume
771191
                               (140340 seconds).~Current output volume:
                               831191.\



             Device Class Name: 3590TAPE
        Device Access Strategy: Sequential
            Storage Pool Count: 4
                   Device Type: 3590
                        Format: DRIVE
         Est/Max Capacity (MB):
                   Mount Limit: DRIVES
              Mount Wait (min): 5
         Mount Retention (min): 0
                  Label Prefix: ADSM
                       Library: MODOT3494B
                     Directory:
                   Server Name:
                  Retry Period:
                Retry Interval:
                        Shared:
 Last Update by (administrator): CABANL

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