Moving Arev to new server; mopup (AREV Specific) [Revelation On-Line Wiki]

This page is read only. You can view the source, but not change it. Ask your administrator if you think this is wrong.
[[https://www.revelation.com/|Sign up on the Revelation Software website to have access to the most current content, and to be able to ask questions and get answers from the Revelation community]]


==== Moving Arev to new server; mopup (AREV Specific) ====
=== At 18 DEC 2006 04:09:38PM David Craig wrote: ===
 
{{tag>"AREV Specific"}}
 
<QUOTE>
The migration is a success and Arev seems to be happy running on the new server.  I have two unanswered questions however, and I don't know if they are of concern or not;



1.  We received repeated error messages runnning fixvol on one of our directories;



InitializeFileUse failed 1009 - 1 - 0.

InitializeFileUse failed 1009 - 1 - 0.

Fixing \\SERVER2\AREVRT\AREV\CLIODAT1\REV55037 ...

No errors found.



InitializeFileUse failed 1009 - 1 - 0.

Fixing \\SERVER2\AREVRT\AREV\CLIODAT1\REV55043 ...

No errors found.



I don't know if this is a problem, according to the documentation it is being fixed but if I run it again I get the same error message.  



2.  This may be related, we discovered that we used 'fixvol' from Version 1.5 of the NPP instead of version 2.1 and the signatures are different.  Is this something I should be concerned about?



Thanks in advance;



David Craig
</QUOTE>
----

=== At 18 DEC 2006 04:34PM Victor Engel wrote:  ===

<QUOTE>I think the fix operation will be successful only if the service is not running at the time you perform the fix. Otherwise, the file(s) may not be available.



I hope someone else will weigh in, since I've never actually done this (well, maybe once).



Victor

</QUOTE>

----

=== At 18 DEC 2006 04:48PM Kevin Ruane wrote:  ===

<QUOTE>Did that directory have a revparam in place? I have seen that skew the results of fixvol.

</QUOTE>

----

=== At 18 DEC 2006 07:02PM David Craig wrote:  ===

<QUOTE>We might have missed one, but they were not supposed to be there.  Actually, no, it can't have been there because then we would have gotten an error on every .lk in the directory and there were only the two, that directory has 80 some odd files, so roughly 40 .lks.  



Another thing that seems odd is that even after running fixvol, the .lks which were over 64k were still over 64k.  Rereading the documentation it seems like there is only *possible* corruption at that size, which implies that it's OK for them to stay the same size as long as they've been 'fixed'.  Am I missing something or is that correct?



It sounds like we should plan on re running fixvol (the latest version) sometime soon to be safe.  Do you think this is concerning enough to kick users out and run it immediately or probably not a problem and we can wait until they take off for the holidays?



Thanks for taking the time to answer;



David Craig.  

</QUOTE>

----

=== At 20 DEC 2006 03:37PM David Craig wrote:  ===

<QUOTE>I called revelation tech support to get an answer to my questions, in case someone else follows this thread;



1.  Is the fact that we get the error message repeatedly on the same files something to worry about?

a: If the files are < 64 K then no, take a look at the data and make sure it's all there but otherwise don't worry about it. 



2.  We ran the version of fixvol from 1.5 instead of 2.1 and the signatures are different, should we rerun it (this involves kicking users out, stopping the service and modifying files, otherwise we'd just do it)

a: no need, they do the same thing.



David C.  

</QUOTE>


[[https://www.revelation.com/revweb/oecgi4p.php/O4W_HANDOFF?DESTN=O4W_RUN_FORM&INQID=NONWORKS_READ&SUMMARY=1&KEY=F593ECB85F98BB6F8525724800743D58|View this thread on the  forum...]]