Upgrading a StorageTek L40 from LTO to LTO2

[lzotto]

Hello everybody out there



I need some help on upgrading a library from LTO to LTO2.



After some problems (Firmware ...) we managed to make TSM access the new drives (LTO2) without problem. Labeling the new LTO2 tapes worked but while accessing the tapes to write data on them the following message sequence came up:

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

08/28/2003 15:19:10 ANR8302E I/O error on drive DRVLTO1_2 (mt2.0.0.5)

(OP=READ, Error Number=23, CC=403, KEY=08, ASC=14,

ASCQ=03, SENSE=F0.00.08.00.00.00.50.0E.00.00.00.00.14.03-

.00.00.2C.7E.00.00.00.00., Description=Media failure).

Refer to Appendix D in the 'Messages' manual for

recommended action.

08/28/2003 15:19:10 ANR8355E I/O error reading label for volume LTO202 in

drive DRVLTO1_2 (mt2.0.0.5).

08/28/2003 15:19:44 ANR8778W Scratch volume LTO202 changed to Private Status

to prevent re-access.

08/28/2003 15:20:29 ANR8302E I/O error on drive DRVLTO1_2 (mt2.0.0.5)

(OP=READ, Error Number=23, CC=403, KEY=08, ASC=14,

ASCQ=03, SENSE=F0.00.08.00.00.00.50.0E.00.00.00.00.14.03-

.00.00.2C.7E.00.00.00.00., Description=Media failure).

Refer to Appendix D in the 'Messages' manual for

recommended action.

08/28/2003 15:20:29 ANR8355E I/O error reading label for volume LTO200 in

drive DRVLTO1_2 (mt2.0.0.5).

08/28/2003 15:21:03 ANR8778W Scratch volume LTO200 changed to Private Status

to prevent re-access.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~



Reading and writing to LTO1 tapes works fine.

The TSM Server is at version 5.1.6 based on Wondows 2000

The LTO deviceclass is defined with the format of DRIVE

The LTO Tape have labels ending in L1

The LTO2 Tapes have labels ending in L2



The LTO2 tapes were labelled using its barcode (so were the LTO tapes). The volumelabel in TSM show only the first 6 characters (without L1 or L2).



Where did we wrong?

Greeting

Laurent

 

[hogmaster]

Did you change the format parameter in the devclass?

regards /daniel

 

[lzotto]

We did not change the format paramater in the device class. As this paramater pointed to DRIVE we let it in this way.



We found one document saying to delete all the drives an reconfigure them to make TSM access the LTO2 drives.

BUT: The problem I described came up on the 3rd drive. This drive was added after the upgrade as there were only 2 LTO drives in the library. The customer wanted to add a 3rd LTO2 drive (what we did).



In principle is it possible to mix LTO and LTO2 cartridges in the same library?

Wouldn't it be better to checkout all the cartridges, delete the drives, device classes and library and reconfigure the whole tuff?



Greetings

Laurent

 

[run]

hmmm. let me think, this is the same problem when people were upgrading their libraries from 3590B to 3590E. I'm assuming you have both lto1 and lto2 drives associated with the same (single) library defintion and under the same device class...



if you associate all the different drives with the same library and checkin all the tapes (3590E and B) into the library definition, then do you notice anything in the "q libvol f=d" that says whether a tape is 3590E or B written. well, the answer is no.



So, if you put both tape drives into the same library definition and checkin a mix of lto2 and lto1 tapes into that same library defintion as all scratch, then TSM had no idea which tapes are lto1 or lto2. (someone can correct me if I'm wrong). Basically, I'd advice that you create a separate library definition (this is possible since it just two logical references to a single physical object and because I've done it before). In that new library defintion, let's just call it LT02 for this example, you'd then define and associate just the lto2 drive to it, and then checkin only the lto2 tapes into that drive. Then create a new device class...basically a whole new (separate) library to storage pool structure.



All because of the fact that a tape write by an lto2 drive (in lto2 format) can't be read by an lto1 drive. when you originally labelled the tapes, who know which tape drive that tape was put. Now, I can think of another way using private volumes that you could maybe get away with using a single library-device class definition but you'd still have separate storage pools for the lto1 verse lto2 tapes.



Maybe one of the IBMers could get you the official tsm answer, but in my experience, mixing different types of drives with the same tsm logical library definition is a no-no.



good luck

and may the swartz be with you.

 

[lzotto]

Hello



We got the solution to this case.



We did not mix different gen. Drives in the same library. All the drives were replaced and we just kept the LTO1 tape together with the LTO2 tapes.



In fact when upgrading the drives from LTO to LTO2 you must delete and reconfigure the drives and its pathes. And it works



Thank you all for giving me support to this case



Best regards

Laurent Zotto