As noted it does occur on rare occasion that an update has a fix for the issue
you're experiencing. The point in my email was that most of time it does not
and is simply suggested to avoid actual work by the vendor in troubleshooting
your issue.
While you've seen "inadvertent" fixes of side issues I can say I've also seen
"inadvertent" side breaks. Years ago during regular patching of systems one
vendor introduced a patch the broke how later patches got applied. We ended
up having to back out all patches in that set and introduce them one by one to
try to figure out which patch broke it because the vendor didn't know. Since
the bad patch was actually the one BEFORE the one that we saw an error on we
had to prove it was that patch by NOT applying the next one but instead
applying others in the set AFTER applying the bad one so we could show any new
patch applied after the bad one gave an error. From that point on there, and
everywhere I've been since, the rule is we don't apply any update that is less
than 30 days old and hasn't already been applied at other of the vendors'
clients previously.
As I noted patching/updating is important but unless there is a specific fix
for your issue it almost always is unhelpful and in fact muddies the water
because once you do actually resolve your problem you're never really sure if
the final fix was the fix or if it was a combination of patches and other
changes.
One thing that NetBackup is good for in this regard is usually if they tell you
to apply a new patch/binary they've made it IS specifically related to the
problem you're experiencing. They actually go the opposite way in
troubleshooting often and it sometimes takes a while for you to find out they
have such a patch/binary.
-----Original Message-----
From: veritas-bu-bounces AT mailman.eng.auburn DOT edu
[mailto:veritas-bu-bounces AT mailman.eng.auburn DOT edu] On Behalf Of Iverson,
Jerald
Sent: Tuesday, December 13, 2011 10:23 AM
To: veritas-bu AT mailman.eng.auburn DOT edu
Subject: Re: [Veritas-bu] IBM LTO-5 Drive Question (8.0gbps FC, FW: B5BF)
i use the "get on the latest firmware first" option as an easy way to get on
the latest firmware without having to do all of the paperwork for planned
upgrades. "it's broke and needs patching now!"
when they correct a known issue (bug), the fix could also inadvertantly fix a
different issue, the issue that you are experiencing. if it doesn't fix your
issue, then it forces them to now look at it much more closely.
i had an issue a couple of weeks ago where we've been using lto5 drives for 8
months with no issues, but we are only writing to lto4 media. we put on our
first batch of lto5 media and all tapes gave us errors and went to a partially
written FROZEN state:
/var/log/messages:
Nov 17 19:12:40 tldd[18902]: TLD(0) MountTape L50000 on drive 1, from slot 51
Nov 17 19:12:41 tldcd[18908]: Processing MOUNT, TLD(0) drive 1, slot 51,
barcode L50000 , vsn L50000
Nov 17 19:42:19 bptm[9924]: TapeAlert Code: 0x03, Type: Warning, Flag: HARD
ERROR, from drive lto5_drv1 (index 1), Media Id L50000
Nov 17 19:42:19 bptm[9924]: TapeAlert Code: 0x06, Type: Critical, Flag: WRITE
FAILURE, from drive lto5_drv1 (index 1), Media Id L50000
Nov 17 19:42:19 bptm[9924]: TapeAlert Code: 0x14, Type: Critical, Flag: CLEAN
NOW, from drive lto5_drv1 (index 1), Media Id L50000
Nov 17 19:42:19 bptm[9924]: TapeAlert Code: 0x27, Type: Warning, Flag:
DIAGNOSTICS REQ., from drive lto5_drv1 (index 1), Media Id L50000
Nov 17 19:42:20 tldd[18902]: TLD(0) DismountTape L50000 from drive 1
~netbackup/db/media/errors:
11/17/11 19:42:08 L50000 1 WRITE_ERROR lto5_drv1
11/17/11 19:42:18 L50000 1 POSITION_ERROR lto5_drv1
11/17/11 19:42:19 L50000 1 TAPE_ALERT lto5_drv1 0x24001000 0x02000000
ouch! so i opened a support ticket and they thought it could be bad tapes (all
of them?), but suggested a firmware upgrade. how could that fix it? lto5
drives should be able to write to lto5 media. would we have had this issue if
we had used lto5 media 8 months ago with the firmware that was on the drives
when they were new? so i upgraded the drives to B6W0 and it fixed the issue.
i now get twice as much data written per tape in each slot of the library.
jerald
-----Original Message-----
From: veritas-bu-bounces AT mailman.eng.auburn DOT edu
[mailto:veritas-bu-bounces AT mailman.eng.auburn DOT edu] On Behalf Of
Lightner, Jeff
Sent: Tuesday, December 13, 2011 8:31 AM
To: veritas-bu AT mailman.eng.auburn DOT edu
Subject: Re: [Veritas-bu] IBM LTO-5 Drive Question (8.0gbps FC, FW: B5BF)
A good thing to ask vendors when they suggest you patch software or update
firmware is for the documentation for that patch/firmware that shows where it
fixes your SPECIFIC issue.
Telling people to patch/update has always been viewed by me as just a vendor
stalling tactic for the most part. You should of course do planned
patching/updating as regular maintenance but usually when it is suggested
during troubleshooting it has little value and doesn't solve the issue. In
more than 20 years I can only think of 2-3 occasions where a vendor when so
challenged was actually able to show where the suggested patch/firmware
specifically mentioned the issue I was having.
-----Original Message-----
From: veritas-bu-bounces AT mailman.eng.auburn DOT edu
[mailto:veritas-bu-bounces AT mailman.eng.auburn DOT edu] On Behalf Of
WALLEBROEK Bart
Sent: Tuesday, December 13, 2011 7:12 AM
To: veritas-bu AT mailman.eng.auburn DOT edu; jpiszcz AT lucidpixels DOT com
Subject: Re: [Veritas-bu] IBM LTO-5 Drive Question (8.0gbps FC, FW: B5BF)
Make sure to run the latest firmware on the tape drives (B6W0). IBM 'claims'
that this will solve all media issues.
Best Regards,
Bart WALLEBROEK
Message: 1
Date: Mon, 12 Dec 2011 04:23:10 -0500
From: "Justin Piszcz" <jpiszcz AT lucidpixels DOT com>
Subject: [Veritas-bu] IBM LTO-5 Drive Question (8.0gbps FC, FW: B5BF)
To: <veritas-bu AT mailman.eng.auburn DOT edu>
Message-ID: <[email protected]>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Hi,
I read on this list awhile back there were some media issues others were
having with the IBM LTO-5 tape drives; after an update, things were better.
Currently running B5BF and notice a lot of '(86) - media read errors' on
separate drives in different locations, has anyone seen this, one could
chalk it up to some bad tape media but because it seems to occur across >2
drives in >1 location I was curious if anyone else had seen this issue and
if so, which F/W where they running that seemed to solve the issue?
Drive: IBM LTO-5 8.0gbps F/C
F/W: B5BF
**************************************
****************************************************************
Confidentiality Note: The information contained in this message, and any
attachments, may contain confidential and/or privileged material. It is
intended solely for the person(s) or entity to which it is addressed. Any
review, retransmission, dissemination, or taking of any action in
reliance upon this information by persons or entities other than the intended
recipient(s) is prohibited. If you received this in error, please contact the
sender and delete the material from any computer.
****************************************************************
_______________________________________________
Veritas-bu maillist - Veritas-bu AT mailman.eng.auburn DOT edu
http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/mailman/listinfo/veritas-bu
Athena(r), Created for the Cause(tm)
Making a Difference in the Fight Against Breast Cancer
---------------------------------
CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: This e-mail may contain privileged or confidential
information and is for the sole use of the intended recipient(s). If you are
not the intended recipient, any disclosure, copying, distribution, or use of
the contents of this information is prohibited and may be unlawful. If you have
received this electronic transmission in error, please reply immediately to the
sender that you have received the message in error, and delete it. Thank you.
----------------------------------
_______________________________________________
Veritas-bu maillist - Veritas-bu AT mailman.eng.auburn DOT edu
http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/mailman/listinfo/veritas-bu
|
