ADSM-L

Re: [ADSM-L] Re: There has got to be a better way - revisited

2011-02-14 16:10:47
Subject: Re: [ADSM-L] Re: There has got to be a better way - revisited
From: Zoltan Forray/AC/VCU <zforray AT VCU DOT EDU>
To: ADSM-L AT VM.MARIST DOT EDU
Date: Mon, 14 Feb 2011 16:10:08 -0500
On most servers, I am taking the default on SAN discovery,  which I think
is ON.  Back a while ago when I got some strange error messages related to
the SAN, I turned it off for some TSM servers,

At first I based the WWN info from the Q DRIVE output (see below)


9:39:05 AM   HADES : QUERY DRIVE IBM3494-2 TS1130-7 f=d
                                Library Name: IBM3494-2
                                  Drive Name: TS1130-7
                                 Device Type: 3592
                                     On-Line: Yes
                                Read Formats:
3592-3C,3592-3,3592-2C,3592-2,35-
                                               92C,3592
                               Write Formats:
3592-3C,3592-3,3592-2C,3592-2
                                     Element:
                                 Drive State: LOADED
                                 Volume Name: 086000
                                Allocated to: HADES
                                         WWN: 500507630F276702
                               Serial Number: 000007857440
              Last Update by (administrator): ZFORRAY
                       Last Update Date/Time: 08/16/2010 16:08:52
Cleaning Frequency (Gigabytes/ASNEEDED/NONE):

9:39:08 AM   HADES : QUERY DRIVE IBM3494-2 TS1130-8 f=d
                                Library Name: IBM3494-2
                                  Drive Name: TS1130-8
                                 Device Type: 3592
                                     On-Line: No
                                Read Formats:
3592-3C,3592-3,3592-2C,3592-2,35-
                                               92C,3592
                               Write Formats:
3592-3C,3592-3,3592-2C,3592-2
                                     Element:
                                 Drive State: EMPTY
                                 Volume Name:
                                Allocated to:
                                         WWN: 500507630F276702
                               Serial Number: 0000078A3C78
              Last Update by (administrator): OPERATIONS
                       Last Update Date/Time: 02/11/2011 14:11:06
Cleaning Frequency (Gigabytes/ASNEEDED/NONE):

If I look at the drives "Fibre" info, it shows the same.  I see a "ROOT"
set of numbers and then for each individual port,  of which we only use
one.




From:
Steven Langdale <steven.langdale AT GMAIL DOT COM>
To:
ADSM-L AT VM.MARIST DOT EDU
Date:
02/14/2011 03:36 PM
Subject:
Re: [ADSM-L] Re: There has got to be a better way - revisited
Sent by:
"ADSM: Dist Stor Manager" <ADSM-L AT VM.MARIST DOT EDU>



On 14 February 2011 15:55, Zoltan Forray/AC/VCU <zforray AT vcu DOT edu> wrote:

> It sounds like it should be simple.  Unfortunately, so far every drive
> replacement has been a pain.
>
> The CE said he does a "flash" via the 3494 Library Manager which should
do
> what you are saying.
>

Adreed, yes that should.


>
> In the mean time, while gathering SAN info from all of my drives, I
> discovered that 2-have the same identical WWN info but the serial
numbers
> are different.  IIRC, my SAN guy said something about not caring about
the
> WWN since he has all tape drives and servers that use them in a
group/pool
> (??? I am not a SAN person so I am not sure of the correct terminology
and
> my SAN guy is out sick).
>
> Duplicate WWN's is not right at all.  There can be 2 numbers, the PORT
WWN
and the HOST WWN.  Not 100% sure if a lib will present the Host WWN - but
I
can check that on a library in the office.

If it is really the PORT WWN that is wrong, they should be unique.

It Sounds like your SAN guy must be port Zoning rather than pWWN zoning -
which is why he doesnt care.

Either way, if the pWWN is changed and the S/N is changes it shoud just
work....

have you got SAN discovery off or on?

Steven

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>