Unsolved
2.4K Posts
0
236
February 10th, 2022 11:00
NW 19.6.0.0, when running 'scanner -i', does not set a recoverable save set to browseable again
Hello,
in NW 19.6 some changes have been applied to the scanner command. I am pretty sure that there is an additional bug. Just look at the following, very simple example:
E:\>mminfo -q "name=D:\TEST,level=full" -r "client(15),name(15),level,savetime(25),nsavetime,ssid,sumsize(10),sumflags,volume"
client name lvl date time save time ssid size fl volume
19-snode19-2.eval.local D:\TEST full 2/10/2022 5:05:30 PM 1644509130 4177868746 50003936 cb DATA.001
19-snode19-2.eval.local D:\TEST full 2/10/2022 5:15:28 PM 1644509728 4161092128 50003936 cb DATA.001
19-snode19-2.eval.local D:\TEST full 2/10/2022 5:25:29 PM 1644510329 4144315513 50003936 cb DATA.001
19-snode19-2.eval.local D:\TEST full 2/10/2022 5:35:29 PM 1644510929 4127538897 50003936 cb DATA.001
19-snode19-2.eval.local D:\TEST full 2/10/2022 5:45:29 PM 1644511529 4110762281 50003936 cb DATA.001
E:\>
E:\>
E:\>nsrmm -dP -S 4177868746
Purge file index entries for save set `4177868746'? y
E:\>
E:\>
E:\>mminfo -q "name=D:\TEST,level=full" -r "client(15),name(15),level,savetime(25),nsavetime,ssid,sumsize(10),sumflags,volume"
client name lvl date time save time ssid size fl volume
19-snode19-2.eval.local D:\TEST full 2/10/2022 5:05:30 PM 1644509130 4177868746 50003936 cr DATA.001
19-snode19-2.eval.local D:\TEST full 2/10/2022 5:15:28 PM 1644509728 4161092128 50003936 cb DATA.001
19-snode19-2.eval.local D:\TEST full 2/10/2022 5:25:29 PM 1644510329 4144315513 50003936 cb DATA.001
19-snode19-2.eval.local D:\TEST full 2/10/2022 5:35:29 PM 1644510929 4127538897 50003936 cb DATA.001
19-snode19-2.eval.local D:\TEST full 2/10/2022 5:45:29 PM 1644511529 4110762281 50003936 cb DATA.001
E:\>
E:\>
E:\>scanner -i -S 4177868746 AFTD_1
8909:scanner: using 'AFTD_1' as the device name
8936:scanner: scanning adv_file disk DATA.001 on AFTD_1
8939:scanner: adv_file disk DATA.001 already exists in the media index
202631:scanner: ssid 4177868746: already exists in the media index
29485:scanner: ssid 4177868746: scan complete
8786:scanner: ssid 4177868746: 48 MB, 8 file(s)
E:\>
E:\>
E:\>mminfo -q "name=D:\TEST,level=full" -r "client(15),name(15),level,savetime(25),nsavetime,ssid,sumsize(10),sumflags,volume"
client name lvl date time save time ssid size fl volume
19-snode19-2.eval.local D:\TEST full 2/10/2022 5:05:30 PM 1644509130 4177868746 50003936 cr DATA.001
19-snode19-2.eval.local D:\TEST full 2/10/2022 5:15:28 PM 1644509728 4161092128 50003936 cb DATA.001
19-snode19-2.eval.local D:\TEST full 2/10/2022 5:25:29 PM 1644510329 4144315513 50003936 cb DATA.001
19-snode19-2.eval.local D:\TEST full 2/10/2022 5:35:29 PM 1644510929 4127538897 50003936 cb DATA.001
19-snode19-2.eval.local D:\TEST full 2/10/2022 5:45:29 PM 1644511529 4110762281 50003936 cb DATA.001
E:\>
E:\>
E:\>mminfo -m
state volume written (%) expires read mounts capacity
DATA.001 244 MB 100% 3/11/2022 0 KB 4 0 KB
E:\>
E:\>
E:\>nsrmm
adv_file disk DATA.001 mounted on AFTD_1, write protected
E:\>
E:\>
E:\>scanner -i AFTD_1
8909:scanner: using 'AFTD_1' as the device name
8936:scanner: scanning adv_file disk DATA.001 on AFTD_1
8939:scanner: adv_file disk DATA.001 already exists in the media index
202631:scanner: ssid 4144315513: already exists in the media index
29485:scanner: ssid 4144315513: scan complete
8786:scanner: ssid 4144315513: 48 MB, 8 file(s)
202631:scanner: ssid 4127538897: already exists in the media index
29485:scanner: ssid 4127538897: scan complete
8786:scanner: ssid 4127538897: 48 MB, 8 file(s)
202631:scanner: ssid 4110762281: already exists in the media index
29485:scanner: ssid 4110762281: scan complete
8786:scanner: ssid 4110762281: 48 MB, 8 file(s)
202631:scanner: ssid 4177868746: already exists in the media index
29485:scanner: ssid 4177868746: scan complete
8786:scanner: ssid 4177868746: 48 MB, 8 file(s)
202631:scanner: ssid 4161092128: already exists in the media index
29485:scanner: ssid 4161092128: scan complete
8786:scanner: ssid 4161092128: 48 MB, 8 file(s)
8761:scanner: done with adv_file disk DATA.001
E:\>
E:\>
E:\>nsrinfo -t 1644509130 19-snode19-2
scanning client `19-snode19-2' for savetime 1644509130(2/10/2022 5:05:30 PM) from the backup namespace
D:\TEST\10_MIO_BYTES_1.TXT
D:\TEST\10_MIO_BYTES_2.TXT
D:\TEST\10_MIO_BYTES_3.TXT
D:\TEST\10_MIO_BYTES_4.TXT
D:\TEST\10_MIO_BYTES_5.TXT
D:\TEST\
D:\
/
8 objects found
E:\>
E:\>nsrmm -dP -S 4177868746
Purge file index entries for save set `4177868746'? y
E:\>
E:\>
E:\>nsrim
86069:nsrim: Processing 1 clients
19-snode19-2.eval.local:D:\TEST, 4 browsable cycle(s)
32 browsable files of 40 total, 244 MB recoverable of 244 MB total
86068:nsrim: Managing 1 volumes.
DATA.001: 244 MB used, 5 save sets, read-only, 4 browsable save sets, 1 recoverable save sets
86073:nsrim: Compressing media database.
E:\>
E:\>
E:\>
E:\>nsrinfo -t 1644509130 19-snode19-2
scanning client `19-snode19-2' for savetime 1644509130(2/10/2022 5:05:30 PM) from the backup namespace
D:\TEST\10_MIO_BYTES_1.TXT
D:\TEST\10_MIO_BYTES_2.TXT
D:\TEST\10_MIO_BYTES_3.TXT
D:\TEST\10_MIO_BYTES_4.TXT
D:\TEST\10_MIO_BYTES_5.TXT
D:\TEST\
D:\
/
8 objects found
E:\>
How to read the above?
- One can successfully purge a save set to change the status from 'browseable' to 'recoverable'.
BTW, I verified the the CFI directory for this saveset will in fact not be deleted at all!
- One can successfully run 'scanner -i'.
- The CFI info is back in place, you can even browse at this savetime.
- However, the save set status will not become browseable again.
Bug or feature? - Or did the behavior change at all?
How would you really delete a CFI vor a save set or a volume?
Any input welcome. thank you.
bingo.1
2.4K Posts
0
February 12th, 2022 09:00
Although the contradiction (existing CFI for a non-browsable save set) persists, I found the solution to make the save set browsable again - you must use the new (NW 19.6) scanner option '-F' to enforce the process of adding the meta-data to the NW databases. This makes a recoverable save set browsable again.
Can someone please sched the light why the new behavior is beneficial to really add only missing index information while scanning? - Of course it will speed up the process a little bit if the CFI does not need to be repopulated. However - especially for tapes - does it make sense at all if you need to travel the whole tape when scanning a volume?