VGs, LVs and FSs not showing up within smit
PROBLEM: Unable to create a raw logical volume from backup.
ACTION TAKEN: Had her go into smit sysback and retrace the steps she
has taken so far. She has done what she should have.
When the backup was made, she chose no for the option
to backup non-jfs lv's. But when she tries to recreate
the logical volume, sysback only shows JFS type of
logical volumes to choose from. I will research this and
call her back.
CUSTOMER REP: Terry
ACTION TAKEN: Created a rawlv on my system, backed it up, excluding
the rawlv. Went into smit sysback to duplicate what the
customer had done and the same thing happened.
Consulted with Lee Miller and he had me try to recreate
the rawlv using the following command:
remakevg -f /dev/rmt\# -l (lvname) -> works
Lee will fix the smit panel and update sysback next
week. Called customer to give her the workaround, got
voice mail. Left her a message with the above command.
If the customer excludes a volume group, during a system backup
they cannot create that excluded VG, LV or FS from within smit.
The "VG, LV or FS" do not show up as an option within smit.
The customer from the command line using the remakevg
command create any "VG, LV or FS" without any problems.
.I have added a new flag to the sysrestore command to display all
the VGs, LVs, and FSs on a backup reguardless of weather it was
part of the backup or note. This will only show up on the full
system backup and volume group backups, where someone excludes a
filesystem or LV. This flag is a hidden flag from the customer,
but is called within smit. The flag is the -A option.
Listing all VGs on a backup:
sysrestore -ALf /dev/rmt0 -tV
Listing all LVs on a backup:
sysrestore -ALf /dev/rmt0 -tL
Listing all FSs on a backup:
sysrestore -ALf /dev/rmt0 -tF
Listing all FSs and LVs on a backup:
sysrestore -ALf /dev/rmt0 -tl
.I will add this to the documentation later.
Fixed in sysback.rte 188.8.131.52
Support Line: VGs, LVs and FSs not showing up within smit ITEM: HD0728L
Dated: July 1998 Category: N/A
This HTML file was generated 99/06/24~13:30:13
Comments or suggestions?