I've got a Solaris Networker server and I'm trying to set up a Windows storage node that will share the same tape library. So, I want the each system to be able to read/write tapes written by the oth
Author: "Ruzza, Claudio" <claudio.ruzza AT HP DOT COM>
Date: Fri, 8 Aug 2003 14:53:55 +0200
Teresa, Needless to say, the variable name should be modified according to your drives technology. Example: assuming you have SDLT drives, the variable name will become NSR_DEV_BLOCK_SIZE_SDLT In win
Author: Jose Quinteiro <jquintei AT LEGATO DOT COM>
Date: Fri, 8 Aug 2003 07:39:22 -0700
Block size is set automagically by Networker based on device type. As long as the devices are configured to be the same type, the block size should be the same regardless of platform. The environment
We have not made any changes to block size and the defaults are: Solaris Networker host block size of 192KB Windows storage node block size of 128KB Any suggestions? -Teresa Block size is set automag
So, I set the environment variable on the Solaris server to lower the block size to 128KB so that Windows and UNIX agree. I added the following to the top of the networker start up script: NSR_DEV_BL
Author: Jose Quinteiro <jquintei AT LEGATO DOT COM>
Date: Fri, 8 Aug 2003 08:12:39 -0700
Hello Teresa, There is a registry key that you need to change to get some HBAs to write blocks larger than 128K in Windows. I'm racking my feeble brain to try to remember the details. Google search w
Jose, Please let me know what you find out about setting the Windows box to a higher block size. Based on what I found in the admin guide and the knowledge base, I've been assuming that I'd need to r
Author: "Fowler, Carter" <CFowler AT LONDON DOT CA>
Date: Fri, 8 Aug 2003 11:23:05 -0400
On our Windows system we had to change the following registry key: HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE\SYSTEM\CurrentControlSet\Services\{hostadapter} For us we had to check both aic78xx (SCSI) and CPQKGPSA (HBA). We
Author: Matt Temple <mht AT RESEARCH.DFCI.HARVARD DOT EDU>
Date: Fri, 8 Aug 2003 11:05:08 -0400
This sounds very much like the trouble I cause myself after changing the block size via "stinit" on my Linux machine. Shortly after I did this, I needed to recover a file on a tape that was created b
Author: Yura Pismerov <ypismerov AT TUCOWS DOT COM>
Date: Fri, 8 Aug 2003 13:20:49 -0400
Isn't it recommended to keep the default block size 0 (variable length) in Linux ? -- Yuri Pismerov, Sr. System Administrator, TUCOWS.COM INC. (416) 535-0123 ext. 1352 -- Note: To sign off this list,
Author: Matt Temple <mht AT RESEARCH.DFCI.HARVARD DOT EDU>
Date: Fri, 8 Aug 2003 13:34:34 -0400
Yes, I think it is. I was merely pointing out what happened because of the change in blocksize that I put in place after I'd already made tapes with a different setup. It looks to me that without run
Is the block size for the system determined by the st.conf information for the tape device? Thanks. Teresa Hi Teresa, Setting the block size by environment variables in startup scripts is not the bes
My experince is windows2k networker uses the variable setting for writing only and the registry change for writing/reading. I do not know why. Thus if you only set the variable you cant read the tape
Author: "Ruzza, Claudio" <claudio.ruzza AT HP DOT COM>
Date: Mon, 11 Aug 2003 09:55:26 +0200
My experience is Win2k networker uses the registry variable to set the MAXIMUM block size allowed to read/write the tapes. Any block size lower than the maximum value set in the registry is fully sup
Author: Davina Treiber <treiber AT HOTPOP DOT COM>
Date: Mon, 11 Aug 2003 05:15:20 -0400
Oh dear, so much misinformation in one thread. This subject has been covered so many times before, yet people are still posting stuff that is plain wrong. Let's try to set the record straight. Jose Q
Author: Jose Quinteiro <jquintei AT LEGATO DOT COM>
Date: Tue, 12 Aug 2003 11:41:33 -0700
Jose Quinteiro <jquintei AT LEGATO DOT COM> from Legato, who should know better and should have read the release notes and been on all the training posted: Please forgive me. I thought looking at the
Author: Matt Temple <mht AT RESEARCH.DFCI.HARVARD DOT EDU>
Date: Tue, 12 Aug 2003 23:04:19 -0400
Since I've spent a good bit of time trying to deal with some of these issues, I'd appreciate some reduction in the sparring. Also, I think it's nice to have Legato employees reading and responding to
Author: Davina Treiber <Treiber AT HOTPOP DOT COM>
Date: Wed, 13 Aug 2003 11:08:08 +0100
I thought looking at the source was sufficient. Nice if you have it. Generally most of us don't. And probably not sufficient in a lot of cases. The only such limitation I am aware of is the one I men
Author: George Sinclair <George.Sinclair AT NOAA DOT GOV>
Date: Wed, 13 Aug 2003 10:08:55 -0400
Try creating a tar archive on a blank tape and then try re-labeling that tape using NetWorker. You will see the "not enough space" message. Can't recall if you also receive an I/O error as with a bla
Author: Matt Temple <mht AT RESEARCH.DFCI.HARVARD DOT EDU>
Date: Wed, 13 Aug 2003 11:20:16 -0400
Do I take it from this that once a tape is used in this way that labeling from the Legato side will fail and so the tape isn't reusable.? Matt Temple Try creating a tar archive on a blank tape and th