Hi Andy (and of course Richard!)!
Thank you very much for your reply!
I thought that all parameters were equal across all clients, but I was
wrong.
The VIRTUALNODE parameter appears to do exactly what I want, but now
another issue arises. I would like to create a single line command to do
a cross client restore and my clients are spread across two TSM servers.
So I thought of using the -TCPSERVERADDRESS parameter to cover this.
I issue the following command:
Dsmc -virtualnode=<sourcenode> -tcpserveradddress=<TSM source server>
This results in a:
ANS1108E Invalid option (-TCPSERVERADDRESS) for the LOOP command
The manual GC32-0789-05 states that it is a valid option...
Thank you very much for your help!
Kindest regards,
Eric van Loon
-----Original Message-----
From: Andrew Raibeck [mailto:storman AT US.IBM DOT COM]
Sent: woensdag 18 januari 2006 14:50
To: ADSM-L AT VM.MARIST DOT EDU
Subject: Re: -nodename no longer there for UNIX...
Hi Eric,
Of course, NODENAME remains a valid option for the dsm.sys file. It has
never been valid from the command line. IC46024 seems to refer to only a
doc error.
You can try -VIRTUALNODENAME from the command line
Regards,
Andy
Andy Raibeck
IBM Software Group
Tivoli Storage Manager Client Development
Internal Notes e-mail: Andrew Raibeck/Tucson/IBM@IBMUS
Internet e-mail: storman AT us.ibm DOT com
IBM Tivoli Storage Manager support web page:
http://www-306.ibm.com/software/sysmgmt/products/support/IBMTivoliStorag
eManager.html
The only dumb question is the one that goes unasked.
The command line is your friend.
"Good enough" is the enemy of excellence.
"ADSM: Dist Stor Manager" <ADSM-L AT VM.MARIST DOT EDU> wrote on 01/18/2006
06:32:15 AM:
> Hi *SM-ers!
> Does anybody know why IBM decided to drop the -nodename parameter for
> the UNIX clients?
> I discovered that this parameter no longer works in 5.3. It's
documented
> in the manuals but that's not correct (IC46024).
> I'm trying to find a way to give our standby a way to restore data
from
> another node, without the help of a TSM admin. I know there is a
> -fromnode parameter, but that requires a lot of extra work (accessing
> the source node, updating the node access list, restoring the file on
> the target server, again accessing the source server, removing the
node
> from the access list). It would be so much easier when one could use
the
> -nodename parameter! And I really cannot think of any reason why it
was
> dropped!
> I would like to know how other people solve this. Thanks in advance
for
> any reply!
> Kindest regards,
> Eric van Loon
>
>
> **********************************************************************
> For information, services and offers, please visit our web site:
> http://www.klm.com. This e-mail and any attachment may contain
> confidential and privileged material intended for the addressee
> only. If you are not the addressee, you are notified that no part of
> the e-mail or any attachment may be disclosed, copied or
> distributed, and that any other action related to this e-mail or
> attachment is strictly prohibited, and may be unlawful. If you have
> received this e-mail by error, please notify the sender immediately
> by return e-mail, and delete this message. Koninklijke Luchtvaart
> Maatschappij NV (KLM), its subsidiaries and/or its employees shall
> not be liable for the incorrect or incomplete transmission of this
> e-mail or any attachments, nor responsible for any delay in receipt.
> **********************************************************************
**********************************************************************
For information, services and offers, please visit our web site:
http://www.klm.com. This e-mail and any attachment may contain confidential and
privileged material intended for the addressee only. If you are not the
addressee, you are notified that no part of the e-mail or any attachment may be
disclosed, copied or distributed, and that any other action related to this
e-mail or attachment is strictly prohibited, and may be unlawful. If you have
received this e-mail by error, please notify the sender immediately by return
e-mail, and delete this message. Koninklijke Luchtvaart Maatschappij NV (KLM),
its subsidiaries and/or its employees shall not be liable for the incorrect or
incomplete transmission of this e-mail or any attachments, nor responsible for
any delay in receipt.
**********************************************************************
|
