George,

"I have NEVER gotten that little feature to work (3.7.2 or 4.1.4.5)"

Then you might have something wrong with your TSM system.

Like most *SM users, most of the time I use the "checkl=bar" switch, but on
occasion, I've needed to check the actual tapes, so I used "checkl=yes".
In EVERY CASE it ran to successful completion-at least as long as the
library itself wasn't broken.  I've used that command on our 3575s (L12 and
L18) as well as our 3583 (L72).  It works for us when called upon. That was
with ADSM 3.1 and TSM 4.1 - we skipped 3.7.

Tab Trepagnier
TSM Administrator
Laitram Corporation






George Lesho <GLesho AT AFCE DOT COM>@VM.MARIST.EDU> on 04/09/2002 11:19:08 AM

Please respond to "ADSM: Dist Stor Manager" <ADSM-L AT VM.MARIST DOT EDU>

Sent by:  "ADSM: Dist Stor Manager" <ADSM-L AT VM.MARIST DOT EDU>


To:   ADSM-L AT VM.MARIST DOT EDU
cc:
Subject:  Re: auditing tape libraries again


The audit library function needs to have most all the processes quiet. In
addition, if you let it slap the tapes into drives to read the labels, it
may never finish... I have NEVER gotten that little feature to work (3.7.2
or 4.1.4.5). I do audits using the barcode reader as in: audit library
3575lib1 checklabel=barcode. This will read the last scan the library did
of its elements from memory and only mount a tape if the label is damaged.
It will NOT move from slot to slot as one would expect.

George Lesho
System/Storage Admin
AFC Enterprises



                      Marc Lowers
                      <Marc.R.Lowers@GS        To:
ADSM-L AT VM.MARIST DOT EDU
                      K.COM>                   cc:       (bcc: George
Lesho/Partners/AFC)
                      Sent by: "ADSM:          Subject:  auditing tape
libraries again
                      Dist Stor
                      Manager"
                      <[email protected]
                      .EDU>


                      04/09/02 10:32 AM
                      Please respond to
                      "ADSM: Dist Stor
                      Manager"






Does the size of a TSM database relate to the length in time that an AUDIT
LIBRARY will take to complete?
We have a TSM server running on Solaris software which is around 40GB in
size and have left it running for 3 days and it still failed to complete!
We had to cancel the process.

Any ideas if this is the reason it should take so long?

Marc.