ADSM-L

Re: Errors: ANR0104E and ANR9999D

1998-10-14 10:41:21
Subject: Re: Errors: ANR0104E and ANR9999D
From: "Mapes, Mark" <MWM4 AT PGE DOT COM>
Date: Wed, 14 Oct 1998 07:41:21 -0700
David,

thanks for the response.  It is always nice to know that someone, even
though not an IBMer, is reading this stuff.  It is disheartening to know
that you been "suffering" from this error for a long time.  Other than the
messages, have you noticed any adverse effects, like tapes never expiring?
Since the messages don't tell me what tapes are having a problem, I not sure
what I should be looking at, and there are many normal messages of tapes
going into pending status and then subsequently being deleted from the pool.
After a week or so, I have not noticed a significant change to these
processes, but we have been doing a lot of work on some clients that have
been deleting old filespaces and adding new ones, and thus our tape pending
and expiring messages have been heavier than normal.  Maybe, someday, we can
get an official response from IBM that will give us a warm fuzzy that this
issue will be resolved.

Mark

> ----------
> From:         Sanders, David[SMTP:DSanders AT INTERNAL.MASSMUTUAL DOT COM]
> Reply To:     ADSM: Dist Stor Manager
> Sent:         Wednesday, October 14, 1998 6:58AM
> To:   ADSM-L AT VM.MARIST DOT EDU
> Subject:      Re: Errors:  ANR0104E and ANR9999D
>
> Mark, we've had that same error outstanding for a long time.  I'm on MVS
> V2
> but the same context of the message.  I've asked several times about other
> folks and how they've dealt with the problem (reorg the table vs. the db)
> but have never gotten a response.  I'm in the process of having a totally
> isolated environment (a Y2K isolated MVS-LPAR) that I'm going to use for
> experimentation.  I can't take an outage without having a high degree of
> confidence or time estimate.  I can't get either from support.
>
> Dave Sanders
> Sr. Technical Consultant
> DSanders AT massmutual DOT com
> MassMutual / The Blue Chip Company
> 1295 State St, E060, Springfield, MA 01111
> 413-744-5095
>
>
>
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Mapes, Mark [SMTP:MWM4 AT PGE DOT COM]
> > Sent: Monday, October 12, 1998 10:37 AM
> > To:   ADSM-L AT VM.MARIST DOT EDU
> > Subject:      Errors:  ANR0104E and ANR9999D
> >
> > Hello,
> >
> > We just started getting these error last Thursday, and now get many a
> day.
> >
> >
> > ANR0104E asvolut.c(2225): Error 2 deleting row from table
> > "AS.Volume.Assignment".
> >
> >
> > ANR9999D afmigr.c(517): Error checking pending volumes for completion of
> > reuse delay period.
> >
> >
> >
> > We upgrade our AIX/ADSM from 3.1.1.3 to 3.1.2 last Monday (and before
> that
> > we applied a patch last Spring and upgraded from 2.1 to 3.1 and AIX 3.2
> to
> > 4.2 in January and sometime before that we went from v1.x to v2.1).
> >
> > In IBMLink, I could not find a direct hit on these messages.  The
> closest
> > I
> > found was APAR II08975, dated 02/13/97 and refers to V1 to V2 migration.
> > It
> > suggests that the AS.Volume.Assignment table be reorganized.  Is that
> what
> > I
> > want to do?  Should I follow the instructions that are specified in that
> > APAR, which is just the reorg of that on table or do I want to do an
> > entire
> > reorg of the ADSM database (perhaps fixing other problems and/or
> achieving
> > some performance gains)?
> >
> > How serious is this problem?  Is there something else that can be done,
> > such
> > as an AUDIT LIBRARY command.
> >
> > Thanks for you help.
> >
> > Mark Mapes
> > PG&E
>
<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>