[Search for users] [Overall Top Noters] [List of all Conferences] [Download this site]

Conference decwet::networker

Title:	NetWorker
Notice:	kits - 12-14, problem reporting - 41.*, basics 1-100
Moderator:	DECWET::RANDALL.com::lenox

Created:	Thu Oct 10 1996
Last Modified:	Fri Jun 06 1997
Last Successful Update:	Fri Jun 06 1997
Number of topics:	750
Total number of notes:	3361

653.0. "re-labelling a recylable volume ?" by LIL09::MALRAS (Jean-Francois MALRAS, SI) Mon May 05 1997 09:52

DU 4.0B
Networker 4.2A

I'm testing fo a customer a shell to label or re-label a recyclable volume.

The following command prompts for confirmation even if volume retention date
is passed:

	# mminfo -m                          1
	   volume         written  (%)    read  expires mounts capacity
	E  lil950.009        0 KB         0 KB   6/16/97   12   4000 MB

	# nsrmm -l -m -e "6 weeks" -f /dev/nrmt0h Test.001
	Are you sure you want to over-write lil950.009 with a new label? 

Is it normal ?

If this volume is in a jukebox (many media in same pool) with media management
enabled, what happens ? Does a reyclable volume be re-used automatically ?

Thanks for any help

JF

T.R	Title	User	Personal Name	Date	Lines
653.1		DECWET::RWALKER	Roger Walker - Media Changers	`Mon May 05 1997 10:01`	14
	The volume expiration is only used when selecting volume to satisfy a backup write request. Once the date has passed expiration that volume will not be selected when a save needs a tape. This has nothing to do with reusing the volume, that is dependent on the retention date (in the client records) of the data on the tape. Automatic recyling only happens in a jukebox when there are no other volumes available AND all the data on the tape has passed retention AND a save needs a volume. Manual recyling, like you are doing, will always ask before overwriting a NetWorker labeled tape no mater what the volume's status.
653.2		DECWET::ONO	Software doesn't break-it comes broken	`Mon May 05 1997 10:07`	10
	NetWorker asks before deleting/destroying data. It is a data protection product, after all. But, if you really want to do this, nsrmm has a -y option. From the man page: -y Don't confirm (potentially destructive) operations before performing them. This option should be used with extreme care. Wes
653.3	re .1: more on volume expiration date ?	LIL09::MALRAS	Jean-Francois MALRAS, SI	`Tue May 06 1997 01:33`	14
	re .1 Roger, I know well understand difference between "volume expiration date" and "client retention date". I assume that volume expiration date can be used for tape life cycle administration. But, each time a tape is lebelled, expiration date is by default +2 years. So what is your recommandation for using efficiently tape expiration. Thanks. JF
653.4		DECWET::RWALKER	Roger Walker - Media Changers	`Tue May 06 1997 10:44`	11
	Use the volume expiration so that an old tape (not completely filled) that is removed from the jukebox does not get more data writen to it. Since this is so hard to set for any complex enviornment I would just ignore it. Use the client retention settings to control how long the tapes need to be kept. If you need more variety you will have to manually intervene since NetWorker does not provide more than one retention value per client. This is typically a problem when you want to keep all fulls for a year but incrementals for only three months.
653.5	Same results with v3.2?	ALFSS2::ZURIK_E		`Wed May 21 1997 09:30`	20
	In ref. to .1 Manual recyling, like you are doing, will always ask before overwriting a NetWorker labeled tape no matter what the volume's status. Was this true in version 3.2? Customer claims that after he upgraded to 3.2a the following occurred: Tried to label a tape with a volume name that was in the media database marked as recycable. Got the message: duplicate name; pick new name or delete old one Customer thinks that because the tape in the database is recycable, he should not get this message. He claims he did not get this message with 3.2. Gene - NSR Support
653.6	Was this true in version 3.2? (yes)	DECWET::EVANS	NSR Engineering	`Wed May 21 1997 12:44`	0