[Veritas-bu] Storage Units
steingra at pprd.abbott.com
Wed Mar 15 15:39:11 CST 2000
In fact, this is a general side-effect of having media servers "own" their
media, rather than listing it in the central-catalog.
What is the rationale for this design, and will it be changed at some point in
the future so that I can easily migrate media between servers, etc?
Andy Steingruebl | e-mail: steingra at pprd.abbott.com
Unix Systems Admin/Programmer | phone: (847) 935-4728
Unix/Network Security | fax: (847) 935-0142
Abbott Laboratories, PPDR&D | post: 100 Abbott Park Road, D472 - AP9A
| Abbott Park, IL 60064-6115
"George Roper" said:
>Re: Connecton of two hosts to a single robot
>I have an ATL P1000 with 4xDLT7000 tape drives installed. I have two UNIX
>hosts, each connected to two drives. I have created two Storage Units (SU),
>each containing two drives, associated with each system. I believe this is
>the usual way of creating a 'split robot' configuration.
>I have observed that a tape, allocated to and written by one SU is not
>available to the other, despite the tape being physically accessable
>to the other SU.
>This has the effect of creating a pool within a pool eg. PoolX has tapes
>that are accessable to both SUs, if SU_A requires a tape it cannot access
>and use any tape that has been previously used by SU_B (unless the volume
>has expired) even if it is a tape from the required pool with space
>available on it.
>This behaviour has serious implications to my volume allocation strategy (I
>keep getting error 96 - no media available, despite there being plenty of
>tapes for the requested pool available within the robot)
> o Is this behaviour correct?
> o Is there a way of modifying it so that one SU can gain access to
> the other's volumes?
>Can any-one help?
>Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com
>Veritas-bu maillist - Veritas-bu at mailman.eng.auburn.edu
More information about the Veritas-bu