[Veritas-bu] Question in regards to Request terminated by tpunmount call
Hi, Has anyone seen this error before? 1323301067 1 386 16 media-server-name 0 0 0 *NULL* bptm error unloading media, TpErrno = Request terminated by tpunmount call from another process I was told by the Oracle engineers its usually indicative of an impending drive motor failure; however, I was wondering if others had seen this before as well, nothing has changed on the NBU side of things for months/years so the motor theory makes sense.. Then if you take that and look in the SLConsole logs (or SNMP) you'll see: STREAMLINE-TAPE-LIBRARY-MIB::slTrapDeviceFreeFormText = STRING: \Drive not unl ded for fetch - on rewindUnload\, hliLsm=3 So the drive is not unloaded when the picker wants to pickup the tape, as drives age does the motor performance degrade? Justin. ___ Veritas-bu maillist - Veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/mailman/listinfo/veritas-bu
Re: [Veritas-bu] IBM LTO-5 Drive Question (8.0gbps FC, FW: B5BF)
Make sure to run the latest firmware on the tape drives (B6W0). IBM 'claims' that this will solve all media issues. Best Regards, Bart WALLEBROEK Message: 1 Date: Mon, 12 Dec 2011 04:23:10 -0500 From: Justin Piszcz jpis...@lucidpixels.com Subject: [Veritas-bu] IBM LTO-5 Drive Question (8.0gbps FC, FW: B5BF) To: veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu Message-ID: 001801ccb8af$ab386850$01a938f0$@lucidpixels.com Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Hi, I read on this list awhile back there were some media issues others were having with the IBM LTO-5 tape drives; after an update, things were better. Currently running B5BF and notice a lot of '(86) - media read errors' on separate drives in different locations, has anyone seen this, one could chalk it up to some bad tape media but because it seems to occur across 2 drives in 1 location I was curious if anyone else had seen this issue and if so, which F/W where they running that seemed to solve the issue? Drive: IBM LTO-5 8.0gbps F/C F/W: B5BF ** ___ Veritas-bu maillist - Veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/mailman/listinfo/veritas-bu
Re: [Veritas-bu] Question in regards to Request terminated by tpunmount call
As robots age everything gets worse. I'd used the STK L700 or OEMed versions of it for years. However the last few years of the one we had here made our lives a bit miserable. Drives failed more often, the hand had to be replaced 2-3 times and various other quirks. (That robot was here when I got here 7 years ago and I think it was already 3 years old then.) We did periodically see something like unexpected rewind during write on drives and would have to replace them. Once that unexpected rewind occurred all backup images on the tape become suspect. -Original Message- From: veritas-bu-boun...@mailman.eng.auburn.edu [mailto:veritas-bu-boun...@mailman.eng.auburn.edu] On Behalf Of Justin Piszcz Sent: Tuesday, December 13, 2011 6:27 AM To: veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu Subject: [Veritas-bu] Question in regards to Request terminated by tpunmount call Hi, Has anyone seen this error before? 1323301067 1 386 16 media-server-name 0 0 0 *NULL* bptm error unloading media, TpErrno = Request terminated by tpunmount call from another process I was told by the Oracle engineers its usually indicative of an impending drive motor failure; however, I was wondering if others had seen this before as well, nothing has changed on the NBU side of things for months/years so the motor theory makes sense.. Then if you take that and look in the SLConsole logs (or SNMP) you'll see: STREAMLINE-TAPE-LIBRARY-MIB::slTrapDeviceFreeFormText = STRING: \Drive not unl ded for fetch - on rewindUnload\, hliLsm=3 So the drive is not unloaded when the picker wants to pickup the tape, as drives age does the motor performance degrade? Justin. ___ Veritas-bu maillist - Veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/mailman/listinfo/veritas-bu Athena(r), Created for the Cause(tm) Making a Difference in the Fight Against Breast Cancer - CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: This e-mail may contain privileged or confidential information and is for the sole use of the intended recipient(s). If you are not the intended recipient, any disclosure, copying, distribution, or use of the contents of this information is prohibited and may be unlawful. If you have received this electronic transmission in error, please reply immediately to the sender that you have received the message in error, and delete it. Thank you. -- ___ Veritas-bu maillist - Veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/mailman/listinfo/veritas-bu
Re: [Veritas-bu] IBM LTO-5 Drive Question (8.0gbps FC, FW: B5BF)
A good thing to ask vendors when they suggest you patch software or update firmware is for the documentation for that patch/firmware that shows where it fixes your SPECIFIC issue. Telling people to patch/update has always been viewed by me as just a vendor stalling tactic for the most part. You should of course do planned patching/updating as regular maintenance but usually when it is suggested during troubleshooting it has little value and doesn't solve the issue. In more than 20 years I can only think of 2-3 occasions where a vendor when so challenged was actually able to show where the suggested patch/firmware specifically mentioned the issue I was having. -Original Message- From: veritas-bu-boun...@mailman.eng.auburn.edu [mailto:veritas-bu-boun...@mailman.eng.auburn.edu] On Behalf Of WALLEBROEK Bart Sent: Tuesday, December 13, 2011 7:12 AM To: veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu; jpis...@lucidpixels.com Subject: Re: [Veritas-bu] IBM LTO-5 Drive Question (8.0gbps FC, FW: B5BF) Make sure to run the latest firmware on the tape drives (B6W0). IBM 'claims' that this will solve all media issues. Best Regards, Bart WALLEBROEK Message: 1 Date: Mon, 12 Dec 2011 04:23:10 -0500 From: Justin Piszcz jpis...@lucidpixels.com Subject: [Veritas-bu] IBM LTO-5 Drive Question (8.0gbps FC, FW: B5BF) To: veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu Message-ID: 001801ccb8af$ab386850$01a938f0$@lucidpixels.com Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Hi, I read on this list awhile back there were some media issues others were having with the IBM LTO-5 tape drives; after an update, things were better. Currently running B5BF and notice a lot of '(86) - media read errors' on separate drives in different locations, has anyone seen this, one could chalk it up to some bad tape media but because it seems to occur across 2 drives in 1 location I was curious if anyone else had seen this issue and if so, which F/W where they running that seemed to solve the issue? Drive: IBM LTO-5 8.0gbps F/C F/W: B5BF ** ___ Veritas-bu maillist - Veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/mailman/listinfo/veritas-bu Athena(r), Created for the Cause(tm) Making a Difference in the Fight Against Breast Cancer - CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: This e-mail may contain privileged or confidential information and is for the sole use of the intended recipient(s). If you are not the intended recipient, any disclosure, copying, distribution, or use of the contents of this information is prohibited and may be unlawful. If you have received this electronic transmission in error, please reply immediately to the sender that you have received the message in error, and delete it. Thank you. -- ___ Veritas-bu maillist - Veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/mailman/listinfo/veritas-bu
Re: [Veritas-bu] IBM LTO-5 Drive Question (8.0gbps FC, FW: B5BF)
i use the get on the latest firmware first option as an easy way to get on the latest firmware without having to do all of the paperwork for planned upgrades. it's broke and needs patching now! when they correct a known issue (bug), the fix could also inadvertantly fix a different issue, the issue that you are experiencing. if it doesn't fix your issue, then it forces them to now look at it much more closely. i had an issue a couple of weeks ago where we've been using lto5 drives for 8 months with no issues, but we are only writing to lto4 media. we put on our first batch of lto5 media and all tapes gave us errors and went to a partially written FROZEN state: /var/log/messages: Nov 17 19:12:40 tldd[18902]: TLD(0) MountTape L5 on drive 1, from slot 51 Nov 17 19:12:41 tldcd[18908]: Processing MOUNT, TLD(0) drive 1, slot 51, barcode L5 , vsn L5 Nov 17 19:42:19 bptm[9924]: TapeAlert Code: 0x03, Type: Warning, Flag: HARD ERROR, from drive lto5_drv1 (index 1), Media Id L5 Nov 17 19:42:19 bptm[9924]: TapeAlert Code: 0x06, Type: Critical, Flag: WRITE FAILURE, from drive lto5_drv1 (index 1), Media Id L5 Nov 17 19:42:19 bptm[9924]: TapeAlert Code: 0x14, Type: Critical, Flag: CLEAN NOW, from drive lto5_drv1 (index 1), Media Id L5 Nov 17 19:42:19 bptm[9924]: TapeAlert Code: 0x27, Type: Warning, Flag: DIAGNOSTICS REQ., from drive lto5_drv1 (index 1), Media Id L5 Nov 17 19:42:20 tldd[18902]: TLD(0) DismountTape L5 from drive 1 ~netbackup/db/media/errors: 11/17/11 19:42:08 L5 1 WRITE_ERROR lto5_drv1 11/17/11 19:42:18 L5 1 POSITION_ERROR lto5_drv1 11/17/11 19:42:19 L5 1 TAPE_ALERT lto5_drv1 0x24001000 0x0200 ouch! so i opened a support ticket and they thought it could be bad tapes (all of them?), but suggested a firmware upgrade. how could that fix it? lto5 drives should be able to write to lto5 media. would we have had this issue if we had used lto5 media 8 months ago with the firmware that was on the drives when they were new? so i upgraded the drives to B6W0 and it fixed the issue. i now get twice as much data written per tape in each slot of the library. jerald -Original Message- From: veritas-bu-boun...@mailman.eng.auburn.edu [mailto:veritas-bu-boun...@mailman.eng.auburn.edu] On Behalf Of Lightner, Jeff Sent: Tuesday, December 13, 2011 8:31 AM To: veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu Subject: Re: [Veritas-bu] IBM LTO-5 Drive Question (8.0gbps FC, FW: B5BF) A good thing to ask vendors when they suggest you patch software or update firmware is for the documentation for that patch/firmware that shows where it fixes your SPECIFIC issue. Telling people to patch/update has always been viewed by me as just a vendor stalling tactic for the most part. You should of course do planned patching/updating as regular maintenance but usually when it is suggested during troubleshooting it has little value and doesn't solve the issue. In more than 20 years I can only think of 2-3 occasions where a vendor when so challenged was actually able to show where the suggested patch/firmware specifically mentioned the issue I was having. -Original Message- From: veritas-bu-boun...@mailman.eng.auburn.edu [mailto:veritas-bu-boun...@mailman.eng.auburn.edu] On Behalf Of WALLEBROEK Bart Sent: Tuesday, December 13, 2011 7:12 AM To: veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu; jpis...@lucidpixels.com Subject: Re: [Veritas-bu] IBM LTO-5 Drive Question (8.0gbps FC, FW: B5BF) Make sure to run the latest firmware on the tape drives (B6W0). IBM 'claims' that this will solve all media issues. Best Regards, Bart WALLEBROEK Message: 1 Date: Mon, 12 Dec 2011 04:23:10 -0500 From: Justin Piszcz jpis...@lucidpixels.com Subject: [Veritas-bu] IBM LTO-5 Drive Question (8.0gbps FC, FW: B5BF) To: veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu Message-ID: 001801ccb8af$ab386850$01a938f0$@lucidpixels.com Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Hi, I read on this list awhile back there were some media issues others were having with the IBM LTO-5 tape drives; after an update, things were better. Currently running B5BF and notice a lot of '(86) - media read errors' on separate drives in different locations, has anyone seen this, one could chalk it up to some bad tape media but because it seems to occur across 2 drives in 1 location I was curious if anyone else had seen this issue and if so, which F/W where they running that seemed to solve the issue? Drive: IBM LTO-5 8.0gbps F/C F/W: B5BF ** Confidentiality Note: The information contained in this message, and any attachments, may contain confidential and/or privileged material. It is intended solely for the person(s) or entity to which it is addressed. Any review, retransmission, dissemination, or taking of any action in reliance upon this information by persons or entities other than the intended recipient(s) is
Re: [Veritas-bu] IBM LTO-5 Drive Question (8.0gbps FC, FW: B5BF)
As noted it does occur on rare occasion that an update has a fix for the issue you're experiencing. The point in my email was that most of time it does not and is simply suggested to avoid actual work by the vendor in troubleshooting your issue. While you've seen inadvertent fixes of side issues I can say I've also seen inadvertent side breaks. Years ago during regular patching of systems one vendor introduced a patch the broke how later patches got applied. We ended up having to back out all patches in that set and introduce them one by one to try to figure out which patch broke it because the vendor didn't know. Since the bad patch was actually the one BEFORE the one that we saw an error on we had to prove it was that patch by NOT applying the next one but instead applying others in the set AFTER applying the bad one so we could show any new patch applied after the bad one gave an error. From that point on there, and everywhere I've been since, the rule is we don't apply any update that is less than 30 days old and hasn't already been applied at other of the vendors' clients previously. As I noted patching/updating is important but unless there is a specific fix for your issue it almost always is unhelpful and in fact muddies the water because once you do actually resolve your problem you're never really sure if the final fix was the fix or if it was a combination of patches and other changes. One thing that NetBackup is good for in this regard is usually if they tell you to apply a new patch/binary they've made it IS specifically related to the problem you're experiencing. They actually go the opposite way in troubleshooting often and it sometimes takes a while for you to find out they have such a patch/binary. -Original Message- From: veritas-bu-boun...@mailman.eng.auburn.edu [mailto:veritas-bu-boun...@mailman.eng.auburn.edu] On Behalf Of Iverson, Jerald Sent: Tuesday, December 13, 2011 10:23 AM To: veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu Subject: Re: [Veritas-bu] IBM LTO-5 Drive Question (8.0gbps FC, FW: B5BF) i use the get on the latest firmware first option as an easy way to get on the latest firmware without having to do all of the paperwork for planned upgrades. it's broke and needs patching now! when they correct a known issue (bug), the fix could also inadvertantly fix a different issue, the issue that you are experiencing. if it doesn't fix your issue, then it forces them to now look at it much more closely. i had an issue a couple of weeks ago where we've been using lto5 drives for 8 months with no issues, but we are only writing to lto4 media. we put on our first batch of lto5 media and all tapes gave us errors and went to a partially written FROZEN state: /var/log/messages: Nov 17 19:12:40 tldd[18902]: TLD(0) MountTape L5 on drive 1, from slot 51 Nov 17 19:12:41 tldcd[18908]: Processing MOUNT, TLD(0) drive 1, slot 51, barcode L5 , vsn L5 Nov 17 19:42:19 bptm[9924]: TapeAlert Code: 0x03, Type: Warning, Flag: HARD ERROR, from drive lto5_drv1 (index 1), Media Id L5 Nov 17 19:42:19 bptm[9924]: TapeAlert Code: 0x06, Type: Critical, Flag: WRITE FAILURE, from drive lto5_drv1 (index 1), Media Id L5 Nov 17 19:42:19 bptm[9924]: TapeAlert Code: 0x14, Type: Critical, Flag: CLEAN NOW, from drive lto5_drv1 (index 1), Media Id L5 Nov 17 19:42:19 bptm[9924]: TapeAlert Code: 0x27, Type: Warning, Flag: DIAGNOSTICS REQ., from drive lto5_drv1 (index 1), Media Id L5 Nov 17 19:42:20 tldd[18902]: TLD(0) DismountTape L5 from drive 1 ~netbackup/db/media/errors: 11/17/11 19:42:08 L5 1 WRITE_ERROR lto5_drv1 11/17/11 19:42:18 L5 1 POSITION_ERROR lto5_drv1 11/17/11 19:42:19 L5 1 TAPE_ALERT lto5_drv1 0x24001000 0x0200 ouch! so i opened a support ticket and they thought it could be bad tapes (all of them?), but suggested a firmware upgrade. how could that fix it? lto5 drives should be able to write to lto5 media. would we have had this issue if we had used lto5 media 8 months ago with the firmware that was on the drives when they were new? so i upgraded the drives to B6W0 and it fixed the issue. i now get twice as much data written per tape in each slot of the library. jerald -Original Message- From: veritas-bu-boun...@mailman.eng.auburn.edu [mailto:veritas-bu-boun...@mailman.eng.auburn.edu] On Behalf Of Lightner, Jeff Sent: Tuesday, December 13, 2011 8:31 AM To: veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu Subject: Re: [Veritas-bu] IBM LTO-5 Drive Question (8.0gbps FC, FW: B5BF) A good thing to ask vendors when they suggest you patch software or update firmware is for the documentation for that patch/firmware that shows where it fixes your SPECIFIC issue. Telling people to patch/update has always been viewed by me as just a vendor stalling tactic for the most part. You should of course do planned patching/updating as regular maintenance but usually when it is suggested during
Re: [Veritas-bu] IBM LTO-5 Drive Question (8.0gbps FC, FW: B5BF)
I have IBM LTO-5 drives, Production are at B6W2, Test are at A5R0 and A9Q5. I have seen read/write errors, but mostly as a result of excessive head wear. I would suggest keeping an eye on how often the drives request cleanings - symptomatically if you see them starting to request cleanings more often, they will eventually request it every day - you will need to replace the drive... I am not seeing any error 86 at this time. -- Message: 1 Date: Mon, 12 Dec 2011 04:23:10 -0500 From: Justin Piszcz jpis...@lucidpixels.com Subject: [Veritas-bu] IBM LTO-5 Drive Question (8.0gbps FC, FW: B5BF) To: veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu Message-ID: 001801ccb8af$ab386850$01a938f0$@lucidpixels.com Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Hi, I read on this list awhile back there were some media issues others were having with the IBM LTO-5 tape drives; after an update, things were better. Currently running B5BF and notice a lot of '(86) - media read errors' on separate drives in different locations, has anyone seen this, one could chalk it up to some bad tape media but because it seems to occur across 2 drives in 1 location I was curious if anyone else had seen this issue and if so, which F/W where they running that seemed to solve the issue? Drive: IBM LTO-5 8.0gbps F/C F/W: B5BF Justin. -- next part -- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/pipermail/veritas-bu/attachments/20111212/a92e7ba0/attachment-0001.htm -- ___ Veritas-bu maillist - Veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/mailman/listinfo/veritas-bu
Re: [Veritas-bu] IBM LTO-5 Drive Question (8.0gbps FC, FW: B5BF)
Justin, Do you have a library that will show you a little more detail on the error from the log that is within the tape drive and or the tape library. Also the code that shows up on the led display on the front of the tape drive. If any. We have been having issues with some lto-5 tape drives that appears to be a cooling fan issue. This shows up as a 3584 library issues. HEC/HECQ B886 (Canister cooling fan failure) We had upgraded the firmware to address several other issue. We are now at B6W8. From: veritas-bu-boun...@mailman.eng.auburn.edu [mailto:veritas-bu-boun...@mailman.eng.auburn.edu] On Behalf Of Justin Piszcz Sent: Monday, December 12, 2011 4:23 AM To: veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu Subject: [Veritas-bu] IBM LTO-5 Drive Question (8.0gbps FC, FW: B5BF) Hi, I read on this list awhile back there were some media issues others were having with the IBM LTO-5 tape drives; after an update, things were better. Currently running B5BF and notice a lot of '(86) - media read errors' on separate drives in different locations, has anyone seen this, one could chalk it up to some bad tape media but because it seems to occur across 2 drives in 1 location I was curious if anyone else had seen this issue and if so, which F/W where they running that seemed to solve the issue? Drive: IBM LTO-5 8.0gbps F/C F/W: B5BF Justin. ___ Veritas-bu maillist - Veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/mailman/listinfo/veritas-bu
Re: [Veritas-bu] IBM LTO-5 Drive Question (8.0gbps FC, FW: B5BF)
Hi Len et all, I looked in the error warn info logs and I could not find anything interesting, I have seen temp alarms in one site with SL500s, once, but not at this particular site. Thanks for the information though, it seems B5BF is highly recommended (Oracle also recommended moving to the newer version). Justin. From: Len Boyle [mailto:len.bo...@sas.com] Sent: Tuesday, December 13, 2011 11:43 AM To: Justin Piszcz; veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu Subject: RE: [Veritas-bu] IBM LTO-5 Drive Question (8.0gbps FC, FW: B5BF) Justin, Do you have a library that will show you a little more detail on the error from the log that is within the tape drive and or the tape library. Also the code that shows up on the led display on the front of the tape drive. If any. We have been having issues with some lto-5 tape drives that appears to be a cooling fan issue. This shows up as a 3584 library issues. HEC/HECQ B886 (Canister cooling fan failure) We had upgraded the firmware to address several other issue. We are now at B6W8. From: veritas-bu-boun...@mailman.eng.auburn.edu [mailto:veritas-bu-boun...@mailman.eng.auburn.edu] On Behalf Of Justin Piszcz Sent: Monday, December 12, 2011 4:23 AM To: veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu Subject: [Veritas-bu] IBM LTO-5 Drive Question (8.0gbps FC, FW: B5BF) Hi, I read on this list awhile back there were some media issues others were having with the IBM LTO-5 tape drives; after an update, things were better. Currently running B5BF and notice a lot of '(86) - media read errors' on separate drives in different locations, has anyone seen this, one could chalk it up to some bad tape media but because it seems to occur across 2 drives in 1 location I was curious if anyone else had seen this issue and if so, which F/W where they running that seemed to solve the issue? Drive: IBM LTO-5 8.0gbps F/C F/W: B5BF Justin. ___ Veritas-bu maillist - Veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/mailman/listinfo/veritas-bu
Re: [Veritas-bu] IBM LTO-5 Drive Question (8.0gbps FC, FW: B5BF)
Hi Justin, I used to work many many years ago in Sun support level 2, mainly doing NBU support. (Have never worked for Oracle, if that helps date my time with Sun). So, next I should say that this is my opinion/experience and not that of Sun's and not a reflection on any one individual. But I can quickly give some insight/tips: - Many but not all customers see the request to update firmware as stalling. Don't dispute that this is a common opinion. - The engineers are instructed to do this - they have no choice - so don't get too grumpy at them. This is one of many due diligence things they are expected to do - it only stands out because it involves an outage. - Some don't like it because they only want to make technically justified changes - I agree with this, but in moderation/ in context. I eventually came to the position that 1. systems should be resourced/sufficiently redundant to allow an outage and 2. A firmware update is not like the support engineer is asking for an outage to the business's principal database or a customer facing system, so it's not such an diabolic request and needs to stay in perspective. - Technically, I see more than one reason to update the firmware. o The obvious reason is it's a problem identified as fixed in the README. o The other one people generally think of is an issue might be accidentally fixed by the update. o But the one that isn't so well-known is that level 3 support have diagnostic tools - it's actually possible to collect logs from the tapedrive and examine these - the update to firmware source code doesn't just improve functionality and remove code defects, but also improves log/debug information. It's presumably still the case. I only found out about this tool(s) as I had a very competent dedicated level 3 engineer two cubicle walls over from me - it wasn't particularly common knowledge or commonly needed. Now to help you with your issue, my recommendation is: 1. Schedule to do the update. 2. Whilst you waiting for a window to do the update, run some vmstat and iostat commands collecting output - particularly monitor %b - there's so much to interpret just with this, and you're in a better position than an offsite support engineer to interpret it as you will know when the tape drive is and isn't in use. This can identify a dying tape drive without looking at the diagnostic logs. (I've often wished customers would do this before ringing support as it's the obvious thing to do before updating firmware) (I'm assuming your media server is on a nix box as you've mentioned Oracle support.) 3. If iostat doesn't show an issue and the problem persists after update, get the problem escalated until you have a level2/3 engineer who can look at diagnostics. Hope this helps. Robyn -- Robyn Hirano Rodd Consulting Pty Ltd M: +61 412 352 725 E: robyn.hir...@roddconsulting.com.au From: veritas-bu-boun...@mailman.eng.auburn.edu [mailto:veritas-bu-boun...@mailman.eng.auburn.edu] On Behalf Of Justin Piszcz Sent: Wednesday, 14 December 2011 8:30 AM To: 'Len Boyle'; veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu Subject: Re: [Veritas-bu] IBM LTO-5 Drive Question (8.0gbps FC, FW: B5BF) Hi Len et all, I looked in the error warn info logs and I could not find anything interesting, I have seen temp alarms in one site with SL500s, once, but not at this particular site. Thanks for the information though, it seems B5BF is highly recommended (Oracle also recommended moving to the newer version). Justin. From: Len Boyle [mailto:len.bo...@sas.com] Sent: Tuesday, December 13, 2011 11:43 AM To: Justin Piszcz; veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu Subject: RE: [Veritas-bu] IBM LTO-5 Drive Question (8.0gbps FC, FW: B5BF) Justin, Do you have a library that will show you a little more detail on the error from the log that is within the tape drive and or the tape library. Also the code that shows up on the led display on the front of the tape drive. If any. We have been having issues with some lto-5 tape drives that appears to be a cooling fan issue. This shows up as a 3584 library issues. HEC/HECQ B886 (Canister cooling fan failure) We had upgraded the firmware to address several other issue. We are now at B6W8. From: veritas-bu-boun...@mailman.eng.auburn.edu [mailto:veritas-bu-boun...@mailman.eng.auburn.edu] On Behalf Of Justin Piszcz Sent: Monday, December 12, 2011 4:23 AM To: veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu Subject: [Veritas-bu] IBM LTO-5 Drive Question (8.0gbps FC, FW: B5BF) Hi, I read on this list awhile back there were some media issues others were having with the IBM LTO-5 tape drives; after an update, things were better. Currently running B5BF and notice a lot of '(86) - media read errors' on separate drives in different locations, has anyone seen this, one could chalk it up to some bad tape media but because it seems to occur across 2 drives
