If you try to label a volume if it is defined in volumes table, it will
fail even if you specify overwrite=yes. Under such case you can label it by
using dsmlabel command. Restriction is that you can not use label more that
6 characters long. So if your existing label is longer then you are stuck.
This process is unpredictable and there is no guarantee that you can get
your data back after labeling. So be careful and keep a recovery plan ready
if this trick fails.
Regards
Samiran Das
"Qualls, Ted
W {PBSG}" To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
<Ted.W.Qualls cc:
@PBSG.COM> Subject: Re: labeling 3590 volumes
Sent by:
"ADSM: Dist
Stor Manager"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]
RIST.EDU>
05/25/2002
05:32 AM
Please
respond to
"ADSM: Dist
Stor Manager"
have you tried a 'move data' against the volumes?
-----Original Message-----
From: Jolliff, Dale [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Friday, May 24, 2002 11:56 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: labeling 3590 volumes
Already tried that, it fails with ANR8816E - volume is already defined to
the library.
I need some way to bypass the checkin step of the label process..
-----Original Message-----
From: Pearson, Dave [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Friday, May 24, 2002 11:51 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: labeling 3590 volumes
I did a "Help Label" in TSM and if I'm thinking what you want... here it is
labe libv library_name volume_name overwrite=yes
Dave Pearson
Comptuer & Nework Service
Snohomish County PUD # 1
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Jolliff, Dale [SMTP:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Friday, May 24, 2002 9:41 AM
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: labeling 3590 volumes
>
> Is there anyway to overwrite the header/label of a 3590 tape?
>
> One of our ATLs had a problem with some 3590 drives and chewed up the
> header
> records.
> The assumption is that the tape is good, the header records are just bad.
>
> I would restore the volumes from the copypools, but it just so happened
> that
> the two volumes that got whacked were a primary and the copy of the
> primary
> --
>
> Anyway, I'm hoping there is a way to get TSM to overwrite the header
> records
> without destroying the data. If there isn't, we are going to try using
dd
> to recreate the headers.
>
> Anybody ever done that successfully?
