Oh, understood; we're normally the last people to go to new code.  A
combination of circumstances here more or less forced our hand this time.

I suppose someone has to report problems to the list first....



_________________________________

Kathleen Hallahan
Freddie Mac
Storage Management -- Tape
703-450-3317




   "Stapleton, Mark" <mark.stapleton AT BERBEE DOT COM>
   Sent by: "ADSM: Dist Stor Manager" <ADSM-L AT VM.MARIST DOT EDU>
   07/17/2007 02:04 PM
   Please respond to
"ADSM: Dist Stor Manager" <ADSM-L AT VM.MARIST DOT EDU>


To
ADSM-L AT VM.MARIST DOT EDU
cc

Subject
Re: upgrade of 200 GB DB






There is a lesson here: do not perform an upgrade to any code (TSM or
otherwise) until there is at least one maintenance level available, unless
there is a specific reason to use a patch level to fix a particular
problem.

--
Mark Stapleton (mark.stapleton AT berbee DOT com)

________________________________

From: ADSM: Dist Stor Manager on behalf of Kathleen M Hallahan
Of greater concern is that the performance at the new code does not seem
to be as good, in a rather vague and intermittent way.  We are seeing
behavior that suggests that it's not always releasing network
communications properly, but not all the time and not for all
communications.  We have not seen this in either of the two much smaller
environments that it's been installed on.  So if you have a lot of
connections on a daily basis, you might start seeing some impact.  We've
opened a ticket to IBM

I would love to know if you (or anyone else) see any behavior differences
over time at 5.4.  I haven't seen much here in the way of complaint but I
don't know if that means it's really great stable code, or if there just
aren't many people using it yet.  Or both, and we're flukey.  :-)