Re: LABEL LIBV versus DSMLABEL

Yes. However, the tape MK0193 wasn't defined in a storage pool.

> You said you took the tape to another server and labeled it.
>
> Kelly J. Lipp
> Storage Solutions Specialists, Inc.
> www.storsol.com
> lipp AT storsol DOT com
> (719)531-5926
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From:   Kirsten Gloeer
> Sent:   Wednesday, February 03, 1999 7:10 AM
> To:     ADSM-L AT VM.MARIST DOT EDU
> Subject:        Re: LABEL LIBV versus DSMLABEL
>
> Hi,
>
> > Do you have two ADSM servers?  If yes, your label command overwrote data
> > from the other server.
>
> We have seven ADSM servers. The tape AD4433 is defined in a storage pool
> of an ADSM server and I wanted to label the tape MK0193. However,
> the label command didn't overwrites data of the tape AD4433.
> Why do you think a tape was overwritten? Which tape do you think
> was overwritten?
>
> ciao,
> Kirsten Gloeer.
>
> > Oops, but auf wiedersehen to that data!  Hopefully
> > that tape was just in a volume history record and not really in a pool.  If
> > this is the case, the tape might have been a database backup tape and
> > perhaps you don't care as much.
> >
> > One wants to be careful when labeling tapes.  If a new label is written on
> > a tape, the old stuff is all gone.  Forever.  (Well, not forever.  You
> > could call one of the those data retrieval companies, but the cost might be
> > prohibitive!)
> >
> > Kelly J. Lipp
> > Storage Solutions Specialists, Inc.
> > www.storsol.com
> > lipp AT storsol DOT com
> > (719)531-5926
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From:   Kirsten Gloeer
> > Sent:   Tuesday, February 02, 1999 6:57 AM
> > To:     ADSM-L AT VM.MARIST DOT EDU
> > Subject:        Re: LABEL LIBV versus DSMLABEL
> >
> > Hello,
> >
> > Sometimes, we have problems with writing labels to tapes, too.
> > By issuing the command
> >
> >         LABEL libvolume robbi MK0193 devtype=CARTRIDGE OVERWRITE=yes
> >
> > within ADSM server A, the following message arises
> >
> >         ANR8808E Could not write label MK0193 on the volume in
> >         drive 853 (/dev/rmt63) of library ROBBI because that
> >         volume is already labeled with AD4433 which is still
> >         defined in a storage pool or volume history.
> >
> > By issuing the same command within ADSM server B, the volume was labeled
> > without any problems.
> >
> > Best regards,
> > Kirsten Gloeer
> > ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> > Kirsten Gloeer                  e-mail: gloeer AT rz.uni-karlsruhe DOT de
> > University of Karlsruhe         Phone:  +49 721 608-6156
> > Computing Center                Fax:    +49 721 32550
> > Zirkel 2
> > 76131 Karlsruhe
> > Germany
> > ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> >
> > > What errrors are you getting?
> > >
> > > Kelly J. Lipp
> > > Storage Solutions Specialists, Inc.
> > > www.storsol.com
> > > lipp AT storsol DOT com
> > > (719)531-5926
> > >
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From:   Johan Pol
> > > Sent:   Monday, February 01, 1999 10:01 AM
> > > To:     ADSM-L AT VM.MARIST DOT EDU
> > > Subject:        Re: LABEL LIBV versus DSMLABEL
> > >
> > > In fact...
> > >
> > > Even if i assign OVERWRITE=YES, i still have problems with writing the
> > > labels to the tapes.
> > >
> > > with kind regards, / met vriendelijke groeten,
> > > Johan Pol
> > > Boerhaavelaan 11 - 2713 HA - Zoetermeer - Tel. (+31)79 3223051 - Fax.
> > > (+31)79 3213989
> > > Internet :JPol AT nl.ibm DOT com / johan.pol AT xerion.be.philips DOT com
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > "Kelly J. Lipp" <lipp AT STORSOL DOT COM> on 01-02-99 17:20:01
> > >
> > > Please respond to "lipp AT storsol DOT com" <lipp AT storsol DOT com>
> > >
> > > To:   ADSM-L AT VM.MARIST DOT EDU
> > > cc:    (bcc: Johan Pol/Netherlands/Contr/IBM)
> > > Subject:  Re: LABEL LIBV versus DSMLABEL
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > In the case of label libvol you specify overwrite=no and in dsmlabel you
> > > specified -overwrite.  That's why dsmlabel wrote labels and label libvol
> > > didn't.
> > >
> > > I like dsmlabel for that first labeling job.  You can use multiple tape
> > > drives and label libvol will only use one at a time.  In some future
> > > release, it will dawn on engineering to add a processes= switch to label
> > > libvol so all the drives can be used, but until then, dsmlabel gets my
> > > vote.
> > >
> > > That said, the caveats should be discussed.  Don't use dsmlabel without
> > > extreme care.  Since it isn't aware of ADSM or ADSM of it, you can easily
> > > write over tapes you did not mean to write on.  Understand the tool
> > before
> > > using it!
> > >
> > > Kelly J. Lipp
> > > Storage Solutions Specialists, Inc.
> > > www.storsol.com
> > > lipp AT storsol DOT com
> > > (719)531-5926
> > >
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From:   Johan Pol
> > > Sent:   Monday, February 01, 1999 8:03 AM
> > > To:     ADSM-L AT VM.MARIST DOT EDU
> > > Subject:        LABEL LIBV versus DSMLABEL
> > >
> > > Hi ADSM fans,
> > >
> > > Is there anyone who have experience with the labelling of tapes.
> > > We are using a Windows NT 4.0 environment, with IBM Magstar 3570
> > connected.
> > > Further we are using ADSM Version 3.1 for the servers and Version 3.1.3
> > on
> > > the NT client.
> > >
> > > If we label tapes with the LABEL LIBV MAGLIB LABELSOURCE=BARCODE
> > > CHECKIN=SCR OVERWRITE=NO SEARCH=YES command, none of the tapes are
> > > labelled.
> > > If we however use the DSMLABEL.EXE -DRIVE=xx,xx -LIBRARY=xxx -OVERWRITE
> > > -SEARCH -BARCODE - KEEP utility it worked fine.
> > >
> > > I thought that LABEL LIBV has the same functionality as the DSMLABEL
> > > command ???
> > >
> > > with kind regards, / met vriendelijke groeten,
> > > Johan Pol
> > > Boerhaavelaan 11 - 2713 HA - Zoetermeer - Tel. (+31)79 3223051 - Fax.
> > > (+31)79 3213989
> > > Internet :JPol AT nl.ibm DOT com / johan.pol AT xerion.be.philips DOT com
> > >
> >
>