From:	SMTP%"wrightn@bardolph.demon.co.uk" 29-JUL-1994 15:26:45.81
To:	EVERHART
CC:	
Subj:	Re: BACKUP to Multiple Volumes

X-Newsgroups: comp.os.vms
From: wrightn@bardolph.demon.co.uk ("Nicholas R. Wright")
Subject: Re: BACKUP to Multiple Volumes
Organization: Number 24
Reply-To: wrightn@bardolph.demon.co.uk
X-Newsreader: Demon Internet Simple News v1.27
Lines: 64
Date: Fri, 29 Jul 1994 10:43:46 +0000
Message-ID: <775478626snz@bardolph.demon.co.uk>
Sender: usenet@demon.co.uk
To: Info-VAX@CRVAX.SRI.COM
X-Gateway-Source-Info: USENET

In article <775232323snz@bardolph.demon.co.uk>
           I wrote:

> 
> My Datacentre manager thinks he has a problem,
> 
> We have cluster connected TA91 and TA90E drives to which we backup.
> We use OpenVMS VAX V5.5-2.
> 
> The command we use is something like,
> 
> $backup/journal/ignore=interlock/fast _ZULU$DUA73:/image -
>  media:saveset.sav/save/norewind/label=(24966,24967,25035,20840,25039) -
>  /block_size=32000/media_format=compaction
> 
>  where media is the logical name of the tape drive and
>        saveset.sav is typically 'disk_volume_name'.sav
> 
> The exact syntax is generated automatically by a third party product (X-UIS
> Media just for the record) so I'm quoting a specific example.
> 
> Assume our trusty operators put volume 24996 in the hopper first but then
> mix up all of the following tapes i.e. labels correct (in list) but not in
> the quoted order. (It's hard to get good operators on the money we pay :-)
> 
> My Datacentre manager thinks that backup overwrites all of the labels after
> the first one and on the evidence he's shown me - he could be right.
> Please note that if the operator puts up a tape that is not in the list
> we get the expected "please SPECIFY QUIT,CONTINUE or OVERWRITE" which is fine
> Equally BACKUP spots if the first tape in the sequence in incorrect - it's
> just the 2nd and subsequent volumes. I hope someone with more knowledge of
> VMS tape handling than me can shed some light on this because my DCM thinks
> the solution is to buy something called an International Business Machine
> which apparently knows all about tapes :-)
> -- 

Many thanks to those who responded. It would seem that V6.1 would fix my
problem as it uses a new /EXACT_ORDER qualifier to ensure correct label
processing.
In particular I wish to thank Jim Kirkpatrick who suggested to me that a
patch was available on VMS V5.5-2 BACKUP to get the new qualifier.
I contacted our local CSC about this but they denied all knowledge. It took
me a second attempt quoting actual patch numbers (suggested to me by Jim)
before I got any joy ... and to those of you interested it is - 
      
         CSCPAT_1101 V1.7

So the final score on this one is,

         comp.os.vms 1
         Digital CSC 0

I hate paying for service I don't get.
-- 
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
+ Question: Does a DIGITAL VAX clean your carpets bit by bit ? :-)         +
+                                                                          +
+ Any opinions expressed are my own and not those of any company dumb      +
+ enough to give me money in return for my presence !                      +
+                                                                          +
+ Internet folk can get me on 1) wrightn@bardolph.demon.co.uk (Preferred)  +
+                          or 2) Nicholas.Wright@kgb.com                   +
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Nicholas R. Wright