Re: Errors on 3590 K tapes
2003-03-05 01:48:30
This problem was fixed in the F_0295 Level (I think that is right). It is
the latest level.
-----Original Message-----
From: Zoltan Forray/AC/VCU [mailto:zforray AT VCU DOT EDU]
Sent: Monday, March 03, 2003 3:45 PM
To: ADSM-L AT VM.MARIST DOT EDU
Subject: Re: Errors on 3590 K tapes
Sounds a lot like what I was seeing when we got our "new to us" 3590E1A
drives.
The problem was the microcode level. It was way behind and caused all kinds
of grief. 2/3 of our new tapes were unlabelable. The drive would load the
tape and spin for ever until it timed out.
Once the microcode/firmware was upgraded, problems went away. Went back and
relabeled tapes that previously were unlabelable.
Thomas Denier <Thomas.Denier AT MAIL.TJU DOT EDU>
Sent by: "ADSM: Dist Stor Manager" <ADSM-L AT VM.MARIST DOT EDU> 03/03/2003
03:30
PM Please respond to "ADSM: Dist Stor Manager"
To: ADSM-L AT VM.MARIST DOT EDU
cc:
Subject: Errors on 3590 K tapes
We are running a 4.2.3.2 TSM server under OS/390. We have four 3590 tape
drives that were and are working well with 3590 J tapes (the ones with 20 GB
capacity without compression). We are in the process of migrating our onsite
storage pools to 3590 K tapes (the ones with 40 GB capacity without
compression). So far we have had seven of the new tapes forced read-only
because of I/O errors. We have one full 3590 K tape, and seventeen in
'FILLING' status that have not so far had any I/O errors. The errors have
been spread across at least three of the tape drives. In most cases, there
is an OS/390 message like the following:
IOS071I 0C62,1D,ADSM, MISSING CHANNEL AND DEVICE END
and a TSM message like the following:
ANR5351E Error reading BlockID on device 0C62.
Do 3590 K tapes typically suffer the kind of infant mortality rate we are
seeing?
|
|
|