Re: [Networker] Tapes are labelled but not used, 0% appendable
2008-09-05 12:58:49
Thats a good point I will look into it, btw we don't eject these tapes to send
offsite Alphastor does ;-)
savegrp parallelism is 16, client parallelism is default 4, Server parallelism
is 96, each savegrp writes to a different pool, total 24 Tape drives in
library. We only backup specific mountpoints and drives (about 50 GB or more)
so these saveset usually don't finish quickly.
Windows environment shows this behavior during backups (no cloning there) and
Solaris environemnt shows it while cloning from the CDL to tape.
--- On Fri, 9/5/08, Davina Treiber <Davina.Treiber AT PEEVRO.CO DOT UK> wrote:
From: Davina Treiber <Davina.Treiber AT PEEVRO.CO DOT UK>
Subject: Re: [Networker] Tapes are labelled but not used, 0% appendable
To: NETWORKER AT LISTSERV.TEMPLE DOT EDU
Date: Friday, September 5, 2008, 9:17 PM
Ali wrote:
> Hi NW Gurus,
>
> We find a number of Tapes (5 to 10 each day) in the library
> that are labelled by NW but never written to. We noticed this recently and
looks
> like this has been happenning for quite sometime and we have been shipping
0%
> appendable tapes offsite for 30 days upto 7 years . (I recommend you
should also
> keep an eye on it).
>
> has anyone seen this ? our group parallelism is set
> to 16 and Tape drives are LTO2 in ADIC i2K library on a NW 7.3.3 running
on
> Soalris 10 and another environment is Windows 2003 with same issue.
I can guess why NetWorker does this. It issues a mount request based on
the number of streams outstanding. It kicks of label/mount operations
for the appropriate number of tapes, but some operations take longer
than others. Before all the operations have completed some of the
smaller save sets have already finished so not all the tapes are needed.
These tapes get labelled and never used.
This should not cause a problem, as next time a tape is needed, the 0%
tape will get mounted, probably the next day. However if your procedures
for offsiting are so badly broken that they call for empty tapes to be
offsited this will never happen.
NetWorker is not at fault in this case, your procedures are. I suggest
you fix them, and also recall all the 0% tapes you have previously offsited.
To sign off this list, send email to listserv AT listserv.temple DOT edu and
type
"signoff networker" in the body of the email. Please write to
networker-request AT listserv.temple DOT edu if you have any problems with this
list.
You can access the archives at
http://listserv.temple.edu/archives/networker.html or
via RSS at http://listserv.temple.edu/cgi-bin/wa?RSS&L=NETWORKER
To sign off this list, send email to listserv AT listserv.temple DOT edu and
type "signoff networker" in the body of the email. Please write to
networker-request AT listserv.temple DOT edu if you have any problems with this
list. You can access the archives at
http://listserv.temple.edu/archives/networker.html or
via RSS at http://listserv.temple.edu/cgi-bin/wa?RSS&L=NETWORKER
|
<Prev in Thread] |
Current Thread |
[Next in Thread>
|
- [Networker] Multiple AFTD's -limitations?, N.J.Tustain
- Re: [Networker] Multiple AFTD's -limitations?, Preston de Guise
- Re: [Networker] Multiple AFTD's -limitations?, N.J.Tustain
- Re: [Networker] Multiple AFTD's -limitations?, Eugene Vilensky
- [Networker] Tapes are labelled but not used, 0% appendable, Ali
- Re: [Networker] Tapes are labelled but not used, 0% appendable, Goslin, Paul
- Re: [Networker] Tapes are labelled but not used, 0% appendable, Davina Treiber
- Re: [Networker] Tapes are labelled but not used, 0% appendable,
Ali <=
- Re: [Networker] Tapes are labelled but not used, 0% appendable, Preston de Guise
Re: [Networker] Multiple AFTD's -limitations?, Francis Swasey
|
|
|