T.R | Title | User | Personal Name | Date | Lines |
---|
378.1 | | DECWET::FARLEE | Insufficient Virtual um...er.... | Tue Feb 04 1997 08:53 | 19 |
| NetWorker defines per device type what the block size should be
for reading and writing for that type of device. Currently, ALL
tape devices are read and written in 32K blocks. In the near future
we will be writing larger blocks for some devices which are more efficient
with larger blocks.
This message tells us that NetWorker attempted a 32K read, and only got
10K from record on the tape. That, in combination with the volume name
being "" tells me that the tape either had not been written by NetWorker
as you thought it had (maybe a fresh tape got miced into the stacker?)
or else the tape is physically corrupted.
NetWorker's reaction is to drop the assumption that it knows where things are
on tape, and to move around by record. It will still get to the data
if it is there, but positioning will be very slow.
My bet is that somehow a non-NetWorker tape got into the stacker.
Kevin
|
378.2 | Tape read error on block size | SIOG::BR_MURPHY | | Tue Feb 04 1997 09:41 | 16 |
| Kevin,
I guarantee you that no other tapes got into the stacker. I can run
the backup & when I try to read the data back in it fails. Sometime it
enters "Unknown" ... although the tapes had been labelled Alpha1.001 &
Alpha1.002.
If I run an inventory on the tapes in the stacker. Only those tapes
that networker has written to are rejected with the aforementioned
error. These are then listed as being none-networker tapes. The
remaining tapes in the rack are registered as valid labelled, but
unused tapes.
If there's any info you think I should copy onto this conference
I'll go back out to site & download it all.
Brendan.
|
378.3 | reset tape magnetics | DECWET::EVANS | Be a Point Of Light! | Tue Feb 04 1997 11:35 | 15 |
| what is the error when you label one of those tapes.
Can you supply us an example of the messages seen when you label a new tape
as you did when you started this process??
I wonder if these tapes are Compact3 or 2 (or 1)??
Can you try doing
mt -f /dev/nrmt1h rewind
mt -f /dev/nrmt1h weof 4
mt -f /dev/nrmt1h rewind
to reset the tape and then try lebelling (relabel) using NetWorker.
Let us know what happens - thanks!
|
378.4 | | DECWET::RWALKER | Roger Walker - Media Changers | Tue Feb 04 1997 17:28 | 13 |
| 1. Check the system error log for any hardware errors.
2. Make sure that the SCSI interface you are using is supported by
the HSZ for tape passthrough. Not all are.
3. Make sure that you have the current version of HSOF for the
HSZ40.
It sounds like the HSZ is not transfering the full 32k byte blocks
to the tape. This is not likely to be an application problem.
Very few people are using NetWorker and tape drives behind
an HSZ so we are not as experianced at we might like with
this combination.
|
378.5 | Apologies | SIOG::BR_MURPHY | | Fri Feb 07 1997 02:10 | 17 |
| Dear All,
Thanks very much for your help. I'm terribly sorry for doubting you.
After thinking about your comments on swapped tapes, it dawned on me
that if they hadn't been swapped...which they weren't...someone must be
writing to them. Before visiting the customer site I checked this out,
running an NSR backup, tarring to the tape with 10k bock size, & trying
to restore from networker. Sure enough I got the exact same
errors....the "unknown" bit is because Networker thinks it has a valid
NSR labelled tape in the drive. After the first verification this is
dropped.
I visited the customer & found a cron job writing data to the tape
every night. This has now been stopped & the customer warned
strenuously that the Stacker should really be dedicated to networker,
if they want to avoid problems.
|
378.6 | Hey -- this is Good News!! | DECWET::EVANS | Be a Point Of Light! | Fri Feb 07 1997 10:13 | 1 |
| Thanks for letting us know the outcome!
|