Re: baffling tape, 3584 HW compression, and stgpool design
2002-08-27 13:12:35
My experience with tapes in this condition is that the "write protect" tab
was set on by accident. AS Dwighty check the tape out. Then check
the Write Protect. If it is on, then set it off and check the tape back
in as scratch.
David Longo
>>> DWIGHT.E.COOK AT SAIC DOT COM 08/27/02 07:30AM >>>
Tapes like this generally become this way due to some error such as not
being able to read the volume's internal label when mounted to fill a
scratch request.
There is some TSM message that is along the lines of
"... making volume private to prevent further access..."
Now this doesn't mean the volume is ~bad~, might have been a drive problem.
Check the tape out, check it back in with a "checklabel=yes", if it can't
read the label, attempt to relabel it, if that fails, toss the tape...
Dwight E. Cook
Software Application Engineer III
Science Applications International Corporation
509 S. Boston Ave. Suite 220
Tulsa, Oklahoma 74103-4606
Office (918) 732-7109
-----Original Message-----
From: Dan Foster [mailto:dsf AT GBLX DOT NET]
Sent: Tuesday, August 27, 2002 3:34 AM
To: ADSM-L AT VM.MARIST DOT EDU
Subject: baffling tape, 3584 HW compression, and stgpool design
Couple unrelated questions:
1. When I query a 3570 library, there's one tape that baffles me:
adsm> q libvol 3570lib1
Library Name Volume Name Status Last Use Home
Element
------------ ----------- ----------------- ---------
------------
3570LIB1 133060 Private 34
I can't do anything with it -- ie, I can't discard the data on it because
ADSM says it doesn't belong to a storage pool, and yet, no indication
that
it's a DbBackup. All other tapes in the library are sane and belongs to
either scratch, a storage pool, or a dbbackup.
So what could it be, and how do I wipe that lone offending tape and
change
its status to scratch? (This is with ADSM 3.1+patches)
2. How do I enable hardware compression for LTO tapes? Some sort of device
class or drive definition parameter? (This is with TSM 4.2.2+patches)
I've looked through docs set and not finding anything that addresses
this.
I'm currently using:
tsm> DEFINE DEVCLASS 3584_DEVCLASS1 DEVTYPE=LTO FORMAT=DRIVE-
MOUNTLIMIT=10 MOUNTWAIT=60 MOUNTRETENTION=0 LIBRARY=3584LIB1
tsm> DEFINE DEVCLASS 3584_DEVCLASS2 DEVTYPE=LTO FORMAT=DRIVE-
MOUNTLIMIT=2 MOUNTWAIT=60 MOUNTRETENTION=0 LIBRARY=3584LIB1
The mountlimit of 10 and 2 is to put an hard upper bound on number
of drives that the backups (10) and offsite copying (2) can use.
The mountwait of 60 minutes is to avoid having jobs fail if they're
sitting there, waiting for a particularly huge 300GB job to finish and
free up a drive for it to use.
Mountretention=0 is because this is a fast automated library (3584 with
12 drives); I can see setting it to 10 or so if it was a smaller human
operated library or requiring operator tape swaps like the 3570 library.
3584LIB1 refers to the library, obviously. ;) (device /dev/smc0, etc)
As I understand it, FORMAT=DRIVE means it uses the drive's compression
settings. I haven't seen any explicit mention of what this defaults to
nor how to adjust it in either the 3584 or TSM docs.
Or would I use something like DEVTYPE=LTOC...?
3. Is there really a reason to use multiple storage pools for the same
tape repository?
Ie: the TSM 4.2 docs suggests an out-of-box default setup such as
DISKDIRS,
DISKDATA that then migrates to TAPEDATA, which then copies to OFFDIRS
and OFFDATA (offsite copy pool tapes). This makes sense. (I understand
the
purpose for each and every one of them, and how they're organized.)
Is there a good reason why someone might want to split up diskdata and
tapedata into multiple stgpools? I ask because I've heard references to
other folks having multiple stgpools, and wondering what I'm missing
here.
That's the only thing I think that eludes my understanding in preparing
the
new design, at this point.
Any insight or comments much appreciated. Thanks!
-Dan
"MMS <health-first.org>" made the following
annotations on 08/27/2002 09:50:02 AM
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
This message is for the named person's use only. It may contain confidential,
proprietary, or legally privileged information. No confidentiality or
privilege is waived or lost by any mistransmission. If you receive this
message in error, please immediately delete it and all copies of it from your
system, destroy any hard copies of it, and notify the sender. You must not,
directly or indirectly, use, disclose, distribute, print, or copy any part of
this message if you are not the intended recipient. Health First reserves the
right to monitor all e-mail communications through its networks. Any views or
opinions expressed in this message are solely those of the individual sender,
except (1) where the message states such views or opinions are on behalf of a
particular entity; and (2) the sender is authorized by the entity to give such
views or opinions.
==============================================================================
|
<Prev in Thread] |
Current Thread |
[Next in Thread>
|
- baffling tape, 3584 HW compression, and stgpool design, Dan Foster
- Re: baffling tape, 3584 HW compression, and stgpool design, Cook, Dwight E
- Re: baffling tape, 3584 HW compression, and stgpool design, Koen Willems
- Re: baffling tape, 3584 HW compression, and stgpool design, David Longo
- Re: baffling tape, 3584 HW compression, and stgpool design, Daniel Sparrman
- Re: baffling tape, 3584 HW compression, and stgpool design,
David Longo <=
- Re: baffling tape, 3584 HW compression, and stgpool design, Zlatko Krastev/ACIT
|
Previous by Date: |
Re: baffling tape, 3584 HW compression, and stgpool design, Daniel Sparrman |
Next by Date: |
Re: Monthly FAQ posting, Mark Stapleton |
Previous by Thread: |
Re: baffling tape, 3584 HW compression, and stgpool design, Daniel Sparrman |
Next by Thread: |
Re: baffling tape, 3584 HW compression, and stgpool design, Zlatko Krastev/ACIT |
Indexes: |
[Date]
[Thread]
[Top]
[All Lists] |
|
|