ADSM-L

Re: First questions on 3584

2004-08-11 17:52:51
Subject: Re: First questions on 3584
From: "Kauffman, Tom" <KauffmanT AT NIBCO DOT COM>
To: ADSM-L AT VM.MARIST DOT EDU
Date: Wed, 11 Aug 2004 16:52:25 -0500
Fred --

Which 3584? And tape drives?

>From the sound of it, your library is currently configured as six
logical libraries with one drive each (the smcx is the library control
-- on a 3584, this will be on the lowest-numbered tape drive as lun 1).

OTOH, if you have the new L52/D52 with either LTO-2 or 3592 drives, this
MAY be what things look like if you purchased the control path failover
feature (we didn't, so I have no clue :-)

In any case -- try defining all six drives and just /dev/smc0 to TSM --
and make sure that the element numbers match to the correct rmt numbers.
The fiber-attach LTO drives get a wwn based on serial number of the
3584, the frame, and the drive number or slot within the frame. 

I cabled (fibered?) my odd-numbered drives to one switch and the
even-numbered drives to the other - with the result that rmt1 is drive
1, rmt 2 is drive 6, rmt 3 is drive 2, and so on. Drove me nutz until I
figured out what happened. Use 'lsattr -El rmtx' to get the wwn for the
remote.

I don't see why TSM shouldn't be able to run as non-root; the device
files are all rw-rw-rw (on my system -- "crw-rw-rwT root system") so
anyone should be able to scribble on them.

Some examples from defining my system:

Def libr alex libt=scsi       (basic library def)
Def path adsm alex srct=serv dest=libr device=/dev/smc0   (path from
'adsm' to 'alex' -- we adopted the default for our server name long ago)

Def dr alex drive_01 elem=257 (drive_01 in alex is element 257, drive
1 in the 3584)

Def path adsm drive_01 srct=serv destt=drive libr=alex device=/dev/rmt1
(from 'adsm' to 'drive_01' in 'alex' is by way of '/dev/rmt1')

Def dr alex drive_02 elem=258
Def path adsm drive_02 srct=serv destt=drive libr=alex device=/dev/rmt3
(that's the funky numbering from my switch cabling coming into play)

Try plugging that much into TSM and see if he can find the library ond
both drives. 

Another thought -- you HAVE installed the Atape device driver, haven't
you? Here's what I've got from lsdev -Cc tape:

rmt1  Available 91-08-01     IBM 3580 Ultrium Tape Drive (FCP)
smc0  Available 91-08-01     IBM 3584 Library Medium Changer (FCP)
rmt2  Available 91-08-01     IBM 3580 Ultrium Tape Drive (FCP)
rmt3  Available 91-08-01     IBM 3580 Ultrium Tape Drive (FCP)
rmt4  Available 91-08-01     IBM 3580 Ultrium Tape Drive (FCP)
rmt5  Available 91-08-01     IBM 3580 Ultrium Tape Drive (FCP)
rmt6  Available 91-08-01     IBM 3580 Ultrium Tape Drive (FCP)
rmt7  Available 91-08-01     IBM 3580 Ultrium Tape Drive (FCP)
rmt8  Available 91-08-01     IBM 3580 Ultrium Tape Drive (FCP)
rmt9  Available 91-08-01     IBM 3580 Ultrium Tape Drive (FCP)
rmt10 Available 91-08-01     IBM 3580 Ultrium Tape Drive (FCP)
rmt11 Available 7D-08-01     IBM 3580 Ultrium Tape Drive (FCP)

Hope this gives you a starting point -- 

Tom Kauffman
NIBCO, Inc

> -----Original Message-----
> From: ADSM: Dist Stor Manager [mailto:ADSM-L AT VM.MARIST DOT EDU] On Behalf
> Of Fred Johanson
> Sent: Tuesday, August 10, 2004 8:38 PM
> To: ADSM-L AT VM.MARIST DOT EDU
> Subject: First questions on 3584
> 
> Last week, my new 3584 was installed, which is to be the dedicated
> library for
> a closed TSM system running on a P615 with the latest version of AIX,
> Atape,
> and TSM 5.2.2.5.  As of Friday afternoon, AIX could mount a tape, via
> tapeutil.  But as of 5 this afternoon, TSM will not talk to the
> library.  The
> documentation is sketchy, to be generous, so I look for aid.
> 
> My first two questions are that the OS sees, via lsdev -Cc tape, a
> one-to-one
> relationship between /dev/rmtx and /dev/scmx.  Does this mean that i
> define one
> library, or six?  If one, which scmx to use?  Or is there a problem in
> the way
> the library is configured?  Whether or not we have the configuration
> right, to
> keep the security guys happy, we've installed TSM to run under its own
> ID
> instead of root.  Is there some problem with this, like the TSM user
> id not
> having access to the drives?
> 
> Having grown considerably greyer today, I knew there was a reason I
> wanted
> another 3494.
> 
> 
> Fred Johanson
CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE:  This email and any attachments are for the exclusive 
and confidential use of the intended recipient.  If you are not the intended 
recipient, please do not read, distribute or take action in reliance upon this 
message. If you have received this in error, please notify us immediately by 
return email and promptly delete this message and its attachments from your 
computer system. We do not waive attorney-client or work product privilege by 
the transmission of this message.

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