Re: Restore Volume vs. Restore Stgpool
1998-11-26 00:53:55
Subject: |
Re: Restore Volume vs. Restore Stgpool |
From: |
Bruce Elrick <belrick AT HOME DOT COM> |
Date: |
Wed, 25 Nov 1998 22:53:55 -0700 |
"Brazner, Bob" wrote:
>
> Two questions:
>
> First question: I recently discovered we had lost a single 3590 tape from
> our primary backup pool. Per the Admin. Ref., we marked the volume as
> "destroyed" and then used Restore Stgpool to successfully reconstruct the
> files. In looking at the description for Update Volume, it looks like we
> could have used that, too. So the question is: would Restore Volume have
> worked just as well?
>
Yes...
> Second question: After the Restore Stgpool completed, the destroyed volume
> still showed up as a libvol in scratch status. Shouldn't I now do a
> Delete Volume to permanently remove this lost tape from ADSM? Or, does
> ADSM have some other way of knowing to never try to mount this volume
> again?
You can't do a delete volume because it is not a volume (try q vol X).
As you mentioned, it shows up as a libv, but that is because ADSM still
thinks it is in the library; destroyed may mean damaged completely,
damaged partially, or lost. You can do an audit library to fix that.
Cheers...
Bruce
|
|
|