With the latest Atape driver 5.4.4.0 ?



Von:  Diana Noble <djk AT UMICH DOT EDU>
Am:   30.01.2001 16:46 GMT


Bitte antworten an "ADSM: Dist Stor Manager" <ADSM-L AT VM.MARIST DOT EDU>

An:   ADSM-L AT VM.MARIST DOT EDU
Kopie:     (Blindkopie: Matthew Muldoon/MAINSTOR/Niedernberg/mus/DE)
Thema:    Re: Antwort: Re: Problems after 4.1 Upgrade and Resolutions




We are running 4.1.2.

At 05:41 PM 1/30/01 +0100, you wrote:
>Are you using 4.1.0  or 4.1.2?
>
>
>
>
>Von:  Diana Noble <djk AT UMICH DOT EDU>
>Am:   30.01.2001 16:22 GMT
>
>
>Bitte antworten an "ADSM: Dist Stor Manager" <ADSM-L AT VM.MARIST DOT EDU>
>
>An:   ADSM-L AT VM.MARIST DOT EDU
>Kopie:     (Blindkopie: Matthew Muldoon/MAINSTOR/Niedernberg/mus/DE)
>Thema:    Re: Problems after 4.1 Upgrade and Resolutions
>
>
>
>
>We are running D25D.  This level of microcode ran fine prior to going to
>TSM 4.1.  We had never had an IO error before then.  Now we receive the
>errors on both our tape drives.
>
>At 08:43 AM 1/30/01 -0600, you wrote:
> >Diane,
> >
> >What level of microcode are you currently running on your 3590 tape
>drives.
> >We are running 3590E1A tape drives with a microcode level of D22E.  We
>have
> >been on this level of code for quite some time with no errors.  Our
3590's
> >are also house within a 3494.
> >
> >
> >-----Original Message-----
> >From: Diana Noble [mailto:djk AT UMICH DOT EDU]
> >Sent: Tuesday, January 30, 2001 8:15 AM
> >To: ADSM-L AT VM.MARIST DOT EDU
> >Subject: Problems after 4.1 Upgrade and Resolutions
> >
> >
> >I had posted some questions last month regarding problems we encountered
> >after our upgrade to TSM 4.1 and thought I would pass along what we
> >found.  We are using AIX 4.3, 3590E's and a 3494.
> >
> >When issuing the dsmadmc command we received "ANS1033E An invalid TCP/IP
> >host name was specified".  Resolution was to edit
> >/usr/tivoli/tsm/client/ba/bin/dsm.sys and add a line for
TCPServeraddress
> >which stated the tsm server name in full.  This was apparently not
> >necessary under 3.1.
> >
> >We could not label K tapes.  We had problems with this under 3.1, but it
> >turned out IBM needed to flick a switch on the drives.  We upgraded the
> >same day.  We would receive "ANR8750E Volume is incompatible with
>specified
> >device type".  IBM had defined the volume range for the K tapes as "K
> >extended" and should have been defined as just "K".
> >
> >We also started receiving IO errors on our 3590 tape drives.  This still
> >persists today, but a microcode fix for the problem is in test at IBM
and
> >is suppose to be released by the end of the month (Hopefully!).  The
error
> >we are receiving is "ANR8302E I/O error on drive RMT1 (/dev/rmt1)
> >(OP=WRITE, CC=0, KEY=0B, ASC=44, ASCQ=00".