INFO-VAX Sun, 16 Nov 2008 Volume 2008 : Issue 621 Contents: Re: Fibre channel driver documentation Re: Most impressive VAX installations Re: Most impressive VAX installations Re: Most impressive VAX installations Re: Most impressive VAX installations RE: OVMS Integrity BASIC LTU Getting only 1 user at cost of $2400.00??? strange disk state and corrupt new mail file Re: strange disk state and corrupt new mail file Re: strange disk state and corrupt new mail file Re: strange disk state and corrupt new mail file Re: strange disk state and corrupt new mail file Re: strange disk state and corrupt new mail file Re: strange disk state and corrupt new mail file Re: strange disk state and corrupt new mail file Re: strange disk state and corrupt new mail file ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Sun, 16 Nov 2008 14:15:11 +0100 From: Jur van der Burg <"lddriver at digiater dot nl"> Subject: Re: Fibre channel driver documentation Message-ID: <49201cdd$0$201$e4fe514c@news.xs4all.nl> There's no documentation other than the listings. If a device comes online then the driver will automaticaaly login. You can display what's going on the the FC extension in SDA, like FC SHOW RING [/FULL] and/or /SLOW. Jur (Former maitainer of the fibre drivers in VMS). Jeff Goodwin wrote: > "FrankS" wrote in message > news:9c9df522-30c1-45b2-bc3e-c53e9369ad76@40g2000prx.googlegroups.com... >> Is the PG or FG device driver interface documented? I looked in the I/ >> O User's reference quickly and didn't spot anything. >> >> I'm hoping to find a way of forcing a host to re-login to a given >> fibre channel device (in this case, an MDR) after that device has been >> powered off. >> >> I know I can do this using SYS$ETC:FC$CP to toggle interrupt >> coalescing, but whenever I use that utility all the disks on the SAN >> go through a mount verification and it freaks out the operators. If I >> can avoid freaking anyone out then it would be a good thing. >> >> The root issue here is that I need to power cycle the MDR so that it >> will rediscover attached SCSI devices, and then make them available to >> the host systems. I've also tried the remapfcscsi command, which the >> documentation states will redo the discovery, but it doesn't redo the >> discovery. >> >> Given no existing utility then I thought I'd look at the driver >> interface to see if I can roll my own. > > On rare occasion, we have access issues with the SCSI devices on our MDR. > To correct the issue, we disable and then re-enable the MDR fiber port on > the FC switch to correct the issue. > > -Jeff > > ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 16 Nov 2008 07:54:29 -0500 From: "Richard B. Gilbert" Subject: Re: Most impressive VAX installations Message-ID: Arne Vajhøj wrote: > Richard B. Gilbert wrote: >> Arne Vajhøj wrote: >>> VAXman- @SendSpamHere.ORG wrote: >>>> In article <490ca76d$0$90264$14726298@news.sunsite.dk>, >>>> =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Arne_Vajh=F8j?= writes: >>>>> JF Mezei wrote: >>>>>> At the opposite scale of things... >>>>>> >>>>>> I ran an all mighty Microvax 2 with 8 megs of RAM and a 154meg >>>>>> drive to >>>>>> support 8 users runing WPS-Plus. The success of the project lead the >>>>>> MVII to be upgraded to 16 meg of RAM to support 12 users. >>>>>> >>>>>> This was circa 1987. >>>>> And today a single word processing user is using a PC >>>>> with 4 MB L2 cache, 2 GB RAM and 320 GB disk ... >>>> >>>> Isn't Billzebub's bloatware just wonderful? >>>> >>>> Micro$oft... >>>> ... keeping Moore's Law in check by several factors for over 20 years! >>> >>> It is not just MS. IBM, Oracle, SUN, SAP, Borland etc. all let >>> HW requirements follow current hardware. >> >> Funny! I do word processing on a PC with ONLY 1 GB of RAM and only 40 >> GB of disk! I don't recall how much "Level X" cache it has; If anyone >> cares, it's an HP DC5750 with W/XP SP2. > > That is an OS from 2002. > > From what year is your Word ? > > Arne It's ANCIENT! I just looked and it says it's "Word 2000". It gets the job done! I'm not what you'd call a heavy user of Word and I may still be using it ten years from now! I'm certainly not going to spring for an upgrade at Microsoft's prices! ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 16 Nov 2008 09:55:12 -0500 From: =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Arne_Vajh=F8j?= Subject: Re: Most impressive VAX installations Message-ID: <4920344e$0$90276$14726298@news.sunsite.dk> Richard B. Gilbert wrote: > Arne Vajhøj wrote: >> Richard B. Gilbert wrote: >>> Arne Vajhøj wrote: >>>> VAXman- @SendSpamHere.ORG wrote: >>>>> In article <490ca76d$0$90264$14726298@news.sunsite.dk>, >>>>> =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Arne_Vajh=F8j?= writes: >>>>>> JF Mezei wrote: >>>>>>> At the opposite scale of things... >>>>>>> >>>>>>> I ran an all mighty Microvax 2 with 8 megs of RAM and a 154meg >>>>>>> drive to >>>>>>> support 8 users runing WPS-Plus. The success of the project lead the >>>>>>> MVII to be upgraded to 16 meg of RAM to support 12 users. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> This was circa 1987. >>>>>> And today a single word processing user is using a PC >>>>>> with 4 MB L2 cache, 2 GB RAM and 320 GB disk ... >>>>> >>>>> Isn't Billzebub's bloatware just wonderful? >>>>> >>>>> Micro$oft... >>>>> ... keeping Moore's Law in check by several factors for over 20 years! >>>> >>>> It is not just MS. IBM, Oracle, SUN, SAP, Borland etc. all let >>>> HW requirements follow current hardware. >>> >>> Funny! I do word processing on a PC with ONLY 1 GB of RAM and only >>> 40 GB of disk! I don't recall how much "Level X" cache it has; If >>> anyone cares, it's an HP DC5750 with W/XP SP2. >> >> That is an OS from 2002. >> >> From what year is your Word ? > > It's ANCIENT! I just looked and it says it's "Word 2000". > > It gets the job done! I'm not what you'd call a heavy user of Word and > I may still be using it ten years from now! I'm certainly not going to > spring for an upgrade at Microsoft's prices! I am sure that it gets the job done. But it is not a good argument for what HW modern SW requires. Arne ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 16 Nov 2008 10:01:09 -0500 From: "Richard B. Gilbert" Subject: Re: Most impressive VAX installations Message-ID: Arne Vajhøj wrote: > Richard B. Gilbert wrote: >> Arne Vajhøj wrote: >>> Richard B. Gilbert wrote: >>>> Arne Vajhøj wrote: >>>>> VAXman- @SendSpamHere.ORG wrote: >>>>>> In article <490ca76d$0$90264$14726298@news.sunsite.dk>, >>>>>> =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Arne_Vajh=F8j?= writes: >>>>>>> JF Mezei wrote: >>>>>>>> At the opposite scale of things... >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> I ran an all mighty Microvax 2 with 8 megs of RAM and a 154meg >>>>>>>> drive to >>>>>>>> support 8 users runing WPS-Plus. The success of the project lead >>>>>>>> the >>>>>>>> MVII to be upgraded to 16 meg of RAM to support 12 users. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> This was circa 1987. >>>>>>> And today a single word processing user is using a PC >>>>>>> with 4 MB L2 cache, 2 GB RAM and 320 GB disk ... >>>>>> >>>>>> Isn't Billzebub's bloatware just wonderful? >>>>>> >>>>>> Micro$oft... >>>>>> ... keeping Moore's Law in check by several factors for over 20 >>>>>> years! >>>>> >>>>> It is not just MS. IBM, Oracle, SUN, SAP, Borland etc. all let >>>>> HW requirements follow current hardware. >>>> >>>> Funny! I do word processing on a PC with ONLY 1 GB of RAM and only >>>> 40 GB of disk! I don't recall how much "Level X" cache it has; If >>>> anyone cares, it's an HP DC5750 with W/XP SP2. >>> >>> That is an OS from 2002. >>> >>> From what year is your Word ? >> >> It's ANCIENT! I just looked and it says it's "Word 2000". >> >> It gets the job done! I'm not what you'd call a heavy user of Word >> and I may still be using it ten years from now! I'm certainly not >> going to spring for an upgrade at Microsoft's prices! > > I am sure that it gets the job done. > > But it is not a good argument for what HW modern SW requires. > > Arne I'd say it's a scathing criticism of modern bloatware! In ten years are we going to need a 100GB of RAM and a terabyte or two of disk just to boot Windows? Maybe YOU are, but not I! ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 16 Nov 2008 10:14:40 -0500 From: =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Arne_Vajh=F8j?= Subject: Re: Most impressive VAX installations Message-ID: <492038de$0$90273$14726298@news.sunsite.dk> Richard B. Gilbert wrote: > Arne Vajhøj wrote: >> Richard B. Gilbert wrote: >>> Arne Vajhøj wrote: >>>> Richard B. Gilbert wrote: >>>>> Arne Vajhøj wrote: >>>>>> VAXman- @SendSpamHere.ORG wrote: >>>>>>> In article <490ca76d$0$90264$14726298@news.sunsite.dk>, >>>>>>> =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Arne_Vajh=F8j?= writes: >>>>>>>> JF Mezei wrote: >>>>>>>>> At the opposite scale of things... >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> I ran an all mighty Microvax 2 with 8 megs of RAM and a 154meg >>>>>>>>> drive to >>>>>>>>> support 8 users runing WPS-Plus. The success of the project >>>>>>>>> lead the >>>>>>>>> MVII to be upgraded to 16 meg of RAM to support 12 users. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> This was circa 1987. >>>>>>>> And today a single word processing user is using a PC >>>>>>>> with 4 MB L2 cache, 2 GB RAM and 320 GB disk ... >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Isn't Billzebub's bloatware just wonderful? >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Micro$oft... >>>>>>> ... keeping Moore's Law in check by several factors for over 20 >>>>>>> years! >>>>>> >>>>>> It is not just MS. IBM, Oracle, SUN, SAP, Borland etc. all let >>>>>> HW requirements follow current hardware. >>>>> >>>>> Funny! I do word processing on a PC with ONLY 1 GB of RAM and only >>>>> 40 GB of disk! I don't recall how much "Level X" cache it has; If >>>>> anyone cares, it's an HP DC5750 with W/XP SP2. >>>> >>>> That is an OS from 2002. >>>> >>>> From what year is your Word ? >>> >>> It's ANCIENT! I just looked and it says it's "Word 2000". >>> >>> It gets the job done! I'm not what you'd call a heavy user of Word >>> and I may still be using it ten years from now! I'm certainly not >>> going to spring for an upgrade at Microsoft's prices! >> >> I am sure that it gets the job done. >> >> But it is not a good argument for what HW modern SW requires. > > I'd say it's a scathing criticism of modern bloatware! In ten years are > we going to need a 100GB of RAM and a terabyte or two of disk just to > boot Windows? Maybe YOU are, but not I! 1998 - 64 MB RAM and 4 GB disk 2008 - 2 GB RAM and 320 GB disk assuming same growth rate gives us: 2018 - 64 GB RAM and 25 TB disk my best guess would be a bit more RAM and a bit less disk. PC's with a TB or two disk is not the future - you can buy those today. Arne ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 16 Nov 2008 12:25:18 +0000 From: "Main, Kerry" Subject: RE: OVMS Integrity BASIC LTU Getting only 1 user at cost of $2400.00??? Message-ID: <9D02E14BC0A2AE43A5D16A4CD8EC5A593ED97FBC68@GVW1158EXB.americas.hpqcorp.net> > -----Original Message----- > From: Arne Vajh=F8j [mailto:arne@vajhoej.dk] > Sent: November 15, 2008 10:59 PM > To: Info-VAX@Mvb.Saic.Com > Subject: Re: OVMS Integrity BASIC LTU Getting only 1 user at cost of > $2400.00??? > > Main, Kerry wrote: > >> From: JF Mezei [mailto:jfmezei.spamnot@vaxination.ca] > >> Jan-Erik S=F6derholm wrote: > >>> The SPD (Software Product Description) for HP BASIC is > >>> reasonable clear on the licensing options. In IA64, the > >>> "Concurrent Use License" is the only option available, > >> Then $2400 for a single concurrent use is pretty expensive. > >> > >> I know that HP apologists will point to DSPP where compilers are > dirt > >> cheap. But for people who do development in-house, they don't > qualify > >> for DSPP and forcing them to pay those horrendous prices is not > right. > > > > So I guess the Enterprise Oracle licensing at $40K USD/cpu (not > system) > > or BEA at $10K per cpu must really upset you then? > > > > :-) > > That is for production server stuff. > > AFAIK then Oracle development tools are completely free. > > Arne At the end of the day, its one Oracle bill for whoever is paying. Regards Kerry Main Senior Consultant HP Services Canada Voice: 613-254-8911 Fax: 613-591-4477 kerryDOTmainAThpDOTcom (remove the DOT's and AT) OpenVMS - the secure, multi-site OS that just works. ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 16 Nov 2008 07:55:32 +0000 (UTC) From: helbig@astro.multiCLOTHESvax.de (Phillip Helbig---remove CLOTHES to reply) Subject: strange disk state and corrupt new mail file Message-ID: A few days ago, I posted here about a strange disk state in my cluster. Before I could solve the problem, things became even more strange, so I did a cluster reboot. So far, so good. However, I noticed that the mail file of one user (me) was unreadable: %MAIL-E-NOTISAM, operation cannot be performed on non-ISAM message file I then saw that a new mail file had been created: Directory DISK$USER:[HELBIG.MAIL.MAIL] MAIL.MAI;2 0/34 15-NOV-2008 14:11:58.50 16-NOV-2008 08:30:31.40 MAIL.MAI;1 21726/21726 11-OCT-2008 12:13:45.16 15-NOV-2008 14:02:19.29 I used BACKUP to make copies of both mail files for further experimentation. After deleting MAIL.MAI;2, things work as they should. However, there are some messages in MAIL.MAI;2 (or, now, its backup copy) which I want to get: MAIL> SHOW NEW You have 31 new messages. MAIL> DIR/NEW %MAIL-W-NONEWMAIL, no new messages Here is what the strange file looks like: File organization: Sequential Shelved state: Online Caching attribute: Writethrough File attributes: Allocation: 34, Extend: 15, Global buffer count: 0 No version limit Record format: Variable length, maximum 2048 bytes, longest 255 bytes Record attributes: Carriage return carriage control What I would like to do is change this file so that I can SET FILE to it and read the messages. Should I try SET FIL/ATTR or CONVERT with an FDL based on the proper mail file? What could have caused this? ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 16 Nov 2008 07:59:32 +0000 (UTC) From: helbig@astro.multiCLOTHESvax.de (Phillip Helbig---remove CLOTHES to reply) Subject: Re: strange disk state and corrupt new mail file Message-ID: In article , helbig@astro.multiCLOTHESvax.de (Phillip Helbig---remove CLOTHES to reply) writes: > Should I try SET FIL/ATTR or CONVERT with an FDL based on the proper > mail file? After a CONVERT, I get: MAIL> set file DISK$USER:[HELBIG.MAIL.mail]MAIL_BAD_TEST.MAI;1 MAIL> DIR %MAIL-E-NOTEXIST, folder MAIL_BAD_TEST does not exist MAIL> DIR/FOLDER %MAIL-W-FILEMPTY, file DISK$USER:[HELBIG.MAIL.MAIL]MAIL_BAD_TEST.MAI has no folders ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 16 Nov 2008 08:36:11 +0000 From: "R.A.Omond" Subject: Re: strange disk state and corrupt new mail file Message-ID: <491fdb7e$0$90276$14726298@news.sunsite.dk> Phillip Helbig---remove CLOTHES to reply wrote: > A few days ago, I posted here about a strange disk state in my cluster. > Before I could solve the problem, things became even more strange, so I > did a cluster reboot. So far, so good. > > However, I noticed that the mail file of one user (me) was unreadable: > > %MAIL-E-NOTISAM, operation cannot be performed on non-ISAM message file > > I then saw that a new mail file had been created: > > Directory DISK$USER:[HELBIG.MAIL.MAIL] > > MAIL.MAI;2 0/34 15-NOV-2008 14:11:58.50 16-NOV-2008 08:30:31.40 > MAIL.MAI;1 21726/21726 11-OCT-2008 12:13:45.16 15-NOV-2008 14:02:19.29 First thing I'd do is make sure you get, ahem, a little more than the zero blocks used by: $ set file/end mail.mai.2 > I used BACKUP to make copies of both mail files for further > experimentation. After deleting MAIL.MAI;2, things work as they should. > However, there are some messages in MAIL.MAI;2 (or, now, its backup > copy) which I want to get: See above. If you used Backup, you copied zero (used) blocks. > Should I try SET FIL/ATTR or CONVERT with an FDL based on the proper > mail file? > > What could have caused this? All sorts of "thing". ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 16 Nov 2008 03:50:23 -0800 (PST) From: Bob Gezelter Subject: Re: strange disk state and corrupt new mail file Message-ID: <8de2972d-1a64-4ec8-9a8d-aa65f73487ad@d10g2000pra.googlegroups.com> On Nov 16, 2:55=A0am, hel...@astro.multiCLOTHESvax.de (Phillip Helbig--- remove CLOTHES to reply) wrote: > A few days ago, I posted here about a strange disk state in my cluster. = =A0 > Before I could solve the problem, things became even more strange, so I > did a cluster reboot. =A0So far, so good. > > However, I noticed that the mail file of one user (me) was unreadable: > > =A0 =A0%MAIL-E-NOTISAM, operation cannot be performed on non-ISAM message= file > > I then saw that a new mail file had been created: > > Directory DISK$USER:[HELBIG.MAIL.MAIL] > > MAIL.MAI;2 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 0/34 =A0 =A0 =A0 15-NOV-2008 14:11:58.50 = =A016-NOV-2008 08:30:31.40 > MAIL.MAI;1 =A0 =A0 =A0 21726/21726 =A0 =A011-OCT-2008 12:13:45.16 =A015-N= OV-2008 14:02:19.29 > > I used BACKUP to make copies of both mail files for further > experimentation. =A0After deleting MAIL.MAI;2, things work as they should= . > However, there are some messages in MAIL.MAI;2 (or, now, its backup > copy) which I want to get: > > MAIL> SHOW NEW > You have 31 new messages. > > MAIL> DIR/NEW > %MAIL-W-NONEWMAIL, no new messages > > Here is what the strange file looks like: > > File organization: =A0Sequential > Shelved state: =A0 =A0 =A0Online > Caching attribute: =A0Writethrough > File attributes: =A0 =A0Allocation: 34, Extend: 15, Global buffer count: = 0 > =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 No version limit > Record format: =A0 =A0 =A0Variable length, maximum 2048 bytes, longest 25= 5 bytes > Record attributes: =A0Carriage return carriage control > > What I would like to do is change this file so that I can SET FILE to it > and read the messages. > > Should I try SET FIL/ATTR or CONVERT with an FDL based on the proper > mail file? > > What could have caused this? Phillip, I would first do a DUMP/HEX/ASCII of the file to see just what is actually there. If the contents make sense, then you MAY be able to recover some part of the file). The new message count can often get out of synchronization, even on a system in normal operation. [I do not have the precise citation at hand, and do not have the time at this instant to search for it, but it may even be in the FAQ]. My offhand recollection is that the reported new message count is NOT the actual count of messages in the NEWMAIL folder, but a summary value stored separately. Please remember that the MAIL file only contains short messages. Longer messages are stored in separate files within the same directory (MAIL$*.MAI). I would also check for any separate files from the period in question. Although, if a problem with the file structure was happening, they could be damaged also. All of this said, I would want to run ANALYZE/DISK_STRUCTURE/REPAIR on ALL volumes on this system. If one file was corrupted, I would want to ensure that there are no other file structure problems that have so far been silent. If left uncorrected, they can create a kind of creeping paralysis of corruption, which is annoying to track down and more problematical to correct. Make sure backups from before the problem are preserved. - Bob Gezelter, http://www.rlgsc.com ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 16 Nov 2008 13:12:31 +0000 (UTC) From: helbig@astro.multiCLOTHESvax.de (Phillip Helbig---remove CLOTHES to reply) Subject: Re: strange disk state and corrupt new mail file Message-ID: In article <8de2972d-1a64-4ec8-9a8d-aa65f73487ad@d10g2000pra.googlegroups.com>, Bob Gezelter writes: > I would first do a DUMP/HEX/ASCII of the file to see just what is > actually there. If the contents make sense, then you MAY be able to > recover some part of the file). The file appears to be empty (full of nulls). > The new message count can often get out of synchronization, even on a > system in normal operation. [I do not have the precise citation at > hand, and do not have the time at this instant to search for it, but > it may even be in the FAQ]. My offhand recollection is that the > reported new message count is NOT the actual count of messages in the > NEWMAIL folder, but a summary value stored separately. Yes, this is in the FAQ, but the fix mentioned there doesn't work for me, which is why I expect that there really are some new mail messages somewhere. > Please remember that the MAIL file only contains short messages. > Longer messages are stored in separate files within the same directory > (MAIL$*.MAI). I would also check for any separate files from the > period in question. Right. Neither in the directory where MAIL.MAI is nor in SYS$SPECIFIC:[TCPIP$SMTP] are there any files. ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 16 Nov 2008 13:22:58 +0000 (UTC) From: helbig@astro.multiCLOTHESvax.de (Phillip Helbig---remove CLOTHES to reply) Subject: Re: strange disk state and corrupt new mail file Message-ID: In article , helbig@astro.multiCLOTHESvax.de (Phillip Helbig---remove CLOTHES to reply) writes: > Yes, this is in the FAQ, but the fix mentioned there doesn't work for > me, Correction: it did work. ANA/DISK shows a few "common errors". One rather strange error is: %ANALDISK-W-LOSTHEADER, file (2116,11,0) MAIL.LIS; not found in a directory %ANALDISK-W-LOSTHEADER, file (51663,9,0) MAIL.LIS; not found in a directory %ANALDISK-W-LOSTHEADER, file (51978,8,0) MAIL.LIS; not found in a directory %ANALDISK-W-LOSTHEADER, file (53679,36,0) MAIL.LIS; not found in a directory %ANALDISK-W-LOSTHEADER, file (58334,4,0) MAIL.LIS; Several of these files on DISK$USER and some on DISK$SCRATCH (where every user has SYS$SCRATCH). What is MAIL.LIS? How can I find out more about these files, i.e. access them? There doesn't appear to be DIR/FILE_ID= or whatever. ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 16 Nov 2008 13:24:47 +0000 (UTC) From: helbig@astro.multiCLOTHESvax.de (Phillip Helbig---remove CLOTHES to reply) Subject: Re: strange disk state and corrupt new mail file Message-ID: In article <8de2972d-1a64-4ec8-9a8d-aa65f73487ad@d10g2000pra.googlegroups.com>, Bob Gezelter writes: > All of this said, I would want to run ANALYZE/DISK_STRUCTURE/REPAIR on > ALL volumes on this system. If one file was corrupted, I would want to > ensure that there are no other file structure problems that have so > far been silent. If left uncorrected, they can create a kind of > creeping paralysis of corruption, which is annoying to track down and > more problematical to correct. Make sure backups from before the > problem are preserved. The MAIL.MAI file wasn't so much corrupted as there was a bogus higher version. Of course, the official recommendation is always to have a backup. However, what are the chances of ANA/DISK/REPAIR causing problems? ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 16 Nov 2008 09:04:41 -0500 From: "Richard B. Gilbert" Subject: Re: strange disk state and corrupt new mail file Message-ID: Phillip Helbig---remove CLOTHES to reply wrote: > In article , helbig@astro.multiCLOTHESvax.de > (Phillip Helbig---remove CLOTHES to reply) writes: > >> Yes, this is in the FAQ, but the fix mentioned there doesn't work for >> me, > > Correction: it did work. > > ANA/DISK shows a few "common errors". One rather strange error is: > > %ANALDISK-W-LOSTHEADER, file (2116,11,0) MAIL.LIS; > not found in a directory > %ANALDISK-W-LOSTHEADER, file (51663,9,0) MAIL.LIS; > not found in a directory > %ANALDISK-W-LOSTHEADER, file (51978,8,0) MAIL.LIS; > not found in a directory > %ANALDISK-W-LOSTHEADER, file (53679,36,0) MAIL.LIS; > not found in a directory > %ANALDISK-W-LOSTHEADER, file (58334,4,0) MAIL.LIS; > > Several of these files on DISK$USER and some on DISK$SCRATCH (where > every user has SYS$SCRATCH). > > What is MAIL.LIS? How can I find out more about these files, i.e. > access them? There doesn't appear to be DIR/FILE_ID= or whatever. > The easy fix is ANALYZE /DISK_STRUCTURE /REPAIR /[NO]CONFIRM. If any of this stuff is, or is likely to be, critical, do a BACKUP /PHYSICAL first! I suspect that you will wind up with a whole bunch of these files in [SYSLOST]. Look at them carefully. The owners may still want them! OTOH, they may be garbage; it's your call! ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 16 Nov 2008 09:11:27 -0500 From: "Richard B. Gilbert" Subject: Re: strange disk state and corrupt new mail file Message-ID: Phillip Helbig---remove CLOTHES to reply wrote: > In article > <8de2972d-1a64-4ec8-9a8d-aa65f73487ad@d10g2000pra.googlegroups.com>, Bob > Gezelter writes: > >> All of this said, I would want to run ANALYZE/DISK_STRUCTURE/REPAIR on >> ALL volumes on this system. If one file was corrupted, I would want to >> ensure that there are no other file structure problems that have so >> far been silent. If left uncorrected, they can create a kind of >> creeping paralysis of corruption, which is annoying to track down and >> more problematical to correct. Make sure backups from before the >> problem are preserved. > > The MAIL.MAI file wasn't so much corrupted as there was a bogus higher > version. > > Of course, the official recommendation is always to have a backup. > However, what are the chances of ANA/DISK/REPAIR causing problems? > The chances of ANA/DISK/REPAIR causing problems are not great. OTOH, gambling that there will not be some sort of a screw-up that costs you a valuable file or two, is a good way to start searching for a new job! Make that backup!!!!! YOU HAVE BEEN WARNED!!!!!!!! And make it /PHYSICAL. That way you can restore the mess block for block if you need to make another try! ------------------------------ End of INFO-VAX 2008.621 ************************