Onderwerp: Re: [ADSM-L] Equating current 3494 configuration to TS3500
On 30 apr. 2013, at 19:33, Zoltan Forray zfor...@vcu.edu wrote:
Sounds like something from the 3-Stooges ;-)
No HA here - could barely afford the upgrade. Besides, I though library
firmware was IBM's responsibility? My drives
would be the same for them, or, unique.
Rick
From: Prather, Wanda wanda.prat...@icfi.com
To: ADSM-L@VM.MARIST.EDU
Date: 04/25/2013 01:04 PM
Subject:Re: Equating current 3494 configuration to TS3500
Sent by:ADSM: Dist Stor Manager ADSM-L@VM.MARIST.EDU
I have
To: ADSM-L@VM.MARIST.EDU
Subject: Re: [ADSM-L] Equating current 3494 configuration to TS3500
One more question about this. The book isn't very clear about whether a
separate fibre cable is needed between the library and our SAN switch for
communications. From the book:
*The host server attaches
Of
Zoltan Forray
Sent: Tuesday, April 30, 2013 10:04 AM
To: ADSM-L@VM.MARIST.EDU
Subject: Re: [ADSM-L] Equating current 3494 configuration to TS3500
One more question about this. The book isn't very clear about whether a
separate fibre cable is needed between the library and our SAN switch
] Equating current 3494 configuration to TS3500
One more question about this. The book isn't very clear about whether a
separate fibre cable is needed between the library and our SAN switch for
communications. From the book:
*The host server attaches to the library by using fiber cables
@VM.MARIST.EDU
Subject: Re: [ADSM-L] Equating current 3494 configuration to TS3500
One more question about this. The book isn't very clear about whether
a
separate fibre cable is needed between the library and our SAN switch
for
communications. From the book:
*The host server attaches
That is what I understood from previous emails but wanted to make sure
but
someone here keeps insisting there should be another cable just for the
library.
Our libraries have one fiber cable per tape drive, and two lan cables.
The lan cables are for the specialist web interface. One lan
Thanks for the details. So, there really isn't that big of a difference
from the 3494 to the 3584 other than the lack of an internal PC/LM and a
redesigned, mostly plastic picker/gripper mechanism.
The first time you stand at one end and watch the robot come toward you,
you will probably
Thanks for the response. The library hasn't arrived (scheduled for 05/15)
so I don't have access to any books other than what is on the web. Yes I
have scoured the I P Guide.
I had heard numbers like ~60-seconds to scan/inventory a frame?
On Tue, Apr 30, 2013 at 11:57 AM, Richard Rhodes
Oh yeah!! Everybody has that reaction.
It's zippy.
-Original Message-
From: ADSM: Dist Stor Manager [mailto:ADSM-L@VM.MARIST.EDU] On Behalf Of
Richard Rhodes
Sent: Tuesday, April 30, 2013 11:57 AM
To: ADSM-L@VM.MARIST.EDU
Subject: Re: [ADSM-L] Equating current 3494 configuration
Of
Richard Rhodes
Sent: Tuesday, April 30, 2013 11:57 AM
To: ADSM-L@VM.MARIST.EDU
Subject: Re: [ADSM-L] Equating current 3494 configuration to TS3500
Thanks for the details. So, there really isn't that big of a
difference from the 3494 to the 3584 other than the lack of an
internal PC/LM
@VM.MARIST.EDU] On Behalf Of
Richard Rhodes
Sent: Tuesday, April 30, 2013 11:57 AM
To: ADSM-L@VM.MARIST.EDU
Subject: Re: [ADSM-L] Equating current 3494 configuration to TS3500
Thanks for the details. So, there really isn't that big of a
difference from the 3494 to the 3584 other than the lack
[mailto:ADSM-L@VM.MARIST.EDU] On Behalf
Of
Richard Rhodes
Sent: Tuesday, April 30, 2013 11:57 AM
To: ADSM-L@VM.MARIST.EDU
Subject: Re: [ADSM-L] Equating current 3494 configuration to TS3500
Thanks for the details. So, there really isn't that big of a
difference from the 3494
Rhodes
Sent: Tuesday, April 30, 2013 11:57 AM
To: ADSM-L@VM.MARIST.EDU
Subject: Re: [ADSM-L] Equating current 3494 configuration to TS3500
Thanks for the details. So, there really isn't that big of a
difference from the 3494 to the 3584 other than the lack of an
internal PC/LM
be sure to get the latest firmware... in a HA lib the accessors
might collide at full speed when accessing the cap with older
versions of the firmware. Yes, that'll give carnage in your lib,
pieces of accessors and grippers flying around.
That's a good catch! Make sure IBM installs the
No HA here - could barely afford the upgrade. Besides, I though library
firmware was IBM's responsibility? My drives are fairly current and
will
upgrade to the latest, just to be sure.
You can upgrade the library and drive firmware yourself.
For the library, you download the file from IBM
Slight tangent, Wanda's volume location comment spurred this:
We upgraded our SCSI 3584 offsite lib to ALMS, no problems...but the onsite
ALMS install went horribly wrong...(maint windows are rare, we did several
things). Afterwards the lib couldn't reliably find a particular tape with both
: Stout, Susie (NIH/CIT) [E] sto...@mail.nih.gov
To: ADSM-L@VM.MARIST.EDU
Date: 04/26/2013 10:00 AM
Subject:Equating current 3494 configuration to TS3500
Sent by:ADSM: Dist Stor Manager ADSM-L@VM.MARIST.EDU
Slight tangent, Wanda's volume location comment spurred this:
We
to that.
W
-Original Message-
From: ADSM: Dist Stor Manager [mailto:ADSM-L@VM.MARIST.EDU] On Behalf Of
Zoltan Forray
Sent: Wednesday, April 24, 2013 2:39 PM
To: ADSM-L@VM.MARIST.EDU
Subject: Re: [ADSM-L] Equating current 3494 configuration to TS3500
Thanks for all the responses - it has
to that.
W
-Original Message-
From: ADSM: Dist Stor Manager [mailto:ADSM-L@VM.MARIST.EDU] On Behalf Of
Zoltan Forray
Sent: Wednesday, April 24, 2013 2:39 PM
To: ADSM-L@VM.MARIST.EDU
Subject: Re: [ADSM-L] Equating current 3494 configuration to TS3500
Thanks for all the responses
Ya, I had to look it up too/ ;-)
-Original Message-
From: ADSM: Dist Stor Manager [mailto:ADSM-L@VM.MARIST.EDU] On Behalf Of Dave
Canan
Sent: Wednesday, April 24, 2013 9:00 PM
To: ADSM-L@VM.MARIST.EDU
Subject: Re: [ADSM-L] Equating current 3494 configuration to TS3500
And now I've
To: ADSM-L@VM.MARIST.EDU
Subject: Re: [ADSM-L] Equating current 3494 configuration to TS3500
Again thank you for this additional useful piece of information. But now this
brings up another issue/question.
If I am limited to no more than 255 unassigned tapes, how do I do a mass/bulk
checkin
] On Behalf Of
Zoltan Forray
Sent: Thursday, April 25, 2013 4:37 AM
To: ADSM-L@VM.MARIST.EDU
Subject: Re: [ADSM-L] Equating current 3494 configuration to TS3500
Again thank you for this additional useful piece of information. But now
this brings up another issue/question.
If I am limited to no more than
] Equating current 3494 configuration to TS3500
The virtual I/O slots can be very confusing.
One time we filled our library up due to needing as many tape as possible.
Every slot was full with either a real tape or cleaning cartridge. Later
we tried to eject a tape that was bad. The checkout cmd
have more than one virt lib if the element
numbers would be the same for them, or, unique.
Rick
From: Prather, Wanda wanda.prat...@icfi.com
To: ADSM-L@VM.MARIST.EDU
Date: 04/25/2013 01:04 PM
Subject:Re: Equating current 3494 configuration to TS3500
Sent by:ADSM: Dist
Zoltan,
The Web Specialist can be used with an https interface, and a physical console
to the 3584 is available. I have little experience with the physical console,
but you could determine whether it has the features and suits your needs better
than the Web Specialist.
Wanda just wrote the Red
Thanks for all the responses - it has been immensely educational and I have
much less trepidation about the upcoming
unload-pull-out-3494-push-in-reload-3584 weekend. I am going to miss my
3494 - been using it since 1995!
I agree that Wanda has some of the best documentation/experiences with TSM,
Hi Zoltan
You can share drives between your logical libraries in the TS3500 when
you have ALMS. Doing this might give you more flexibility in your drive
assignments.
I am doing a similar 3494 to TS3500 migration at the moment. The person
who sized the TS3500 did it by TB and not by slots so I
PM
To: ADSM-L@VM.MARIST.EDU
Subject: Re: [ADSM-L] Equating current 3494 configuration to TS3500
Thanks for all the responses - it has been immensely educational and I have
much less trepidation about the upcoming
unload-pull-out-3494-push-in-reload-3584 weekend. I am going to miss my
3494 - been
And now I've learned what BTDTGTTS stands for. My education for the
day. Thanks Wanda.
Dave Canan From: Prather, Wanda
Sent: 4/24/2013 7:35 PM
To: ADSM-L@vm.marist.edu
Subject: Re: [ADSM-L] Equating current 3494 configuration to TS3500
Thank you both for the kind words; I think it's just a matter
As you are aware from previous posts, we are replacing our 3494 with a
TS3500/3584.
I am trying wrap my mind around the proper way to configure the TS3500 so
it functions the same way our 3494 does. If changing our current
configuration makes things easier for the transition, now would be the
: Tuesday, April 23, 2013 10:28 AM
To: ADSM-L@VM.MARIST.EDU
Subject: [ADSM-L] Equating current 3494 configuration to TS3500
As you are aware from previous posts, we are replacing our 3494 with a
TS3500/3584.
I am trying wrap my mind around the proper way to configure the TS3500 so it
functions
the drives, or do you use it as if it is
2 separate physical libraries?
Wanda
-Original Message-
From: ADSM: Dist Stor Manager [mailto:ADSM-L@VM.MARIST.EDU] On Behalf Of
Zoltan Forray
Sent: Tuesday, April 23, 2013 10:28 AM
To: ADSM-L@VM.MARIST.EDU
Subject: [ADSM-L] Equating current 3494
We have 2-TSM servers acting at Library Managers/Owner, thus each LM has
its own 3494 category codes, each owns n-3592 drives, etc. This was
done
for redundancy, fail-over, etc. We have tape drives spinning most of the
time so having all library functionality and drives attached to only
1-TSM
On Tue, Apr 23, 2013 at 1:05 PM, Richard Rhodes rrho...@firstenergycorp.com
wrote:
What are you trying to protect against?
Library Manager server/outage - We have massive backups that overflow our
disk storage pools, all the time. Plus we have to perform Linux kernel
patching/maintenance
When we've have major library problems where an entire library is down,
and we've had several of these, we have scrambled to add disk space to the
staging disk pools to keep backups running.
I don't have this luxury. 5 of my 7 production servers do not have any
external/SAN disk - only what the
: Tuesday, April 23, 2013 12:50 PM
To: ADSM-L@VM.MARIST.EDU
Subject: Re: [ADSM-L] Equating current 3494 configuration to TS3500
2-libraries with fixed drives. One library has 9 drives the other one has 8.
-
Zoltan Forray
TSM Software Hardware Administrator
Virginia Commonwealth
Manager [mailto:ADSM-L@VM.MARIST.EDU] On Behalf Of
Zoltan Forray
Sent: Tuesday, April 23, 2013 12:50 PM
To: ADSM-L@VM.MARIST.EDU
Subject: Re: [ADSM-L] Equating current 3494 configuration to TS3500
2-libraries with fixed drives. One library has 9 drives the other one has
8.
-
Zoltan
:42 PM
To: ADSM-L@VM.MARIST.EDU
Subject: Re: [ADSM-L] Equating current 3494 configuration to TS3500
As always, thanks Wanda. That clears up / confirms a lot of what I was
thinking. Don't know about the I/O path failover for these SAN paths - need to
ask my OS guy.
Having to do everything from
I've meant to ask - how does the library appear to the TSM server OS? Is
it /dev/smc0,1,2,etc or /dev/IBMchanger0,1,2,etc?
As /dev/smcX to AIX; as /dev/IBMchangerX to linux.
David
How is TSM setup to use virtual drives - my current understanding is
that
Drives are defined to a Library and Paths connect the Library and Drives
to
a TSM server. The Library Manager (drive owner) server delegates the
drives
it owns/manages to a TSM server that needs it. So, how would a
41 matches
Mail list logo
