John, the answer is that someone have put a SCSI adapter in the box and Windoze being "so smart" reordered ALL the SCSI/FC adapters. SCSI adapters get numbered before FC ones thus your QLogic get higher number (6, having 5 in the past). The other possibility is that there was second SAN switch/plane installed. Again additional adapter but insertion of FC adapter is somewhat 50/50% chance - PCI slot numbers are considered which one is getting lower number. If you are unlucky - new inserted FC adapter gets HBA #5 and your one moves to HBA #6. If it was AIX - new adapter will get next *available* device name (scsiX or fcsY+fscsiY) preserving existing device names. Keep in mind also another thing to be aware - the SDG module in 3583. If someone makes SCSI channel to FC port zoning, changing number of visible drives (for example willing to split each device to separate FC ports) this may affect \\.\Tape0. And \\.\Tape1 can become \\.\Tape0 leading to element number mismatch - TSM will refuse to work with the drive.
Zlatko Krastev IT Consultant Please respond to "ADSM: Dist Stor Manager" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent by: "ADSM: Dist Stor Manager" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] cc: Subject: 3583 with SDG, Windows 2000 and Qlogic 2200 adapters Hi all Here's the scenario: TSM 4.2.1.15 Server on Win2K 3583 with San Data Gateway 2109 Switch Implemented the solution only to be called back with the library not responding to TSM. After a closer inspection I notice that the library has now been renamed by Windows from lb2.1.0.5 to lb3.1.0.6. So, how is this possible. There have been no hardware address changes made and I made sure to name the libary and the drives independently of the windows generic naming ie lb2.1.0.5 was configured as LTOLIB \\.\Tape0 was configured as DRIVE1 \\.\Tape1 was configured as DRIVE2 I have read in the Qlogic literature that persistent naming is not supported which means the binding needs to happen elsewhere. I cant zone the switch to tightly because I will be configuring SAN agents next and that means all the SAN attached hosts need access to the library. Has anyone one out there seen this happening in a SAN environment and how I can make it go away? Any help is much appreciated Rgds John
