[Info-vax] Reconfiguring VMS 6.2 - Shadow set question

[Stephen Hoffman]

On 2012-10-22 10:42:43 +0000, Jan-Erik Soderholm said:

> Stephen Hoffman wrote 2012-10-22 12:26:
> 
> 
>> 
>> Now...
>> 
>> You could have hardware problems with the disk devices that were specified
>> in the shadowset MOUNT commands, or they could have been removed, or you
>> could have one of the usual SCSI hardware problems with this box.  The only
>> way to be sure is to open the box and look.
> 
> He *wrote* that DKA200 and DKA400 was (or had been) external disks.
> And he also wrote that he *knew* that they where "gone".

Ok.  That was the "they could have been removed" option.    I've 
encountered folks that use "gone" to mean "not visible".  Such as "I 
re-ran the configuration, and then the disks were gone..."  
Technical-English is a funny language, and different folks use it, 
well, differently.

> 
>> Given that you are not particularly experienced with VMS, I would strongly
>> recommend nuking and paving this disk.  A fresh installation...
> 
> No no no...

You have your opinion.  I have mine.

Reverse-engineering an existing OpenVMS installation - even when the 
system manager is experienced with OpenVMS system management - is not 
high on my list of tasks.

Reverse-engineering one where the hardware has changed - using your 
interpretation of "gone" - is further down on my list.

Now if this were an existing server in an existing production 
environment, then I wouldn't be suggesting that option directly, though 
I would be working toward it.  But a new-to-the-owner box?  I'd wipe 
and install the box.

> *Is* there any actual problem with this system at all ??

Other than being a disk that's filled with random junk?   Ummmmm. OK.

I'm mildly surprised there's anything on the disk; it's more typical to 
erase the available storage to avoid leaking any sensitive data.  This 
if the supplier is going to transfer the disks at all.  Some don't.  
Some scrap the disks.  But I digress.

> Apart from the *informational* message at the MOUNT, but that is
> just "FYI", so to speek. It's not an error, from VMS's point of view.

It's an error from the perspective of somebody that hasn't yet become 
comfortable with a MOUNT command, or we wouldn't be posting in this 
thread.

> There is not any major problem here, two disks are "gone" and no
> re-install in the world will get them back...

I don't understand why VMS folks are so allergic to the nuke-and-pave.  
Like the folks striving for "uptime", system management isn't a 
contest.  Nuke-and-pave gets a clean environment, with known settings, 
with pristine files, and with fewer lurking weirdnesses, and an 
environment that more directly matches the OpenVMS documentation.  It's 
more maintainable.


-- 
Pure Personal Opinion | HoffmanLabs LLC