Asset ID:	1-71-1012390.1
Update Date:	2010-10-08
Keywords:

---

Solution Type  Technical Instruction Sure

Solution  1012390.1 :   Sun StorEdge[TM] T3 - Explanation of Port DataBase(PDB) messages in syslog  


PreviouslyPublishedAs
217089

Description

The following messages were noted in the T3 syslog :

 Sep 18 01:32:01 t3b0 FCC0[2]: N: u2ctr PDB Changed on port 3 (id 2)
Sep 18 01:32:02 t3b0 ISR1[2]: N: u2ctr ISP2200[2] PDB Invalidated (host id 2,wwn 210000e08b098920)
Sep 18 01:32:02 t3b0 ISR1[2]: N: u2ctr ISP2200[2] PDB resync done (host id 2,wwn 210000e08b098920)
Sep 18 01:36:51 t3b0 ISR1[2]: N: u2ctr ISP2200[2] PDB resync done (host id 2,wwn 210000e08b098920)
Sep 18 01:36:51 t3b0 FCC0[2]: N: u2ctr PDB Changed on port 3 (id 2)

They didn't seem to be affecting the operation of the array in any way.

Steps to Follow

PDB is the T3's internal Port DataBase and as it seems, it is a record that the fibre ports are visible to the T3. The WWN (world wide number) that it was referencing was a Qlogic HBA (host bus adapter) on one of the hosts connected to this T3. It turns out that the messages were being logged when the host was rebooted and the Port DataBase is noting that the port has disappeared and then re-appeared.

Out of interest, we could tell that this was a Qlogic HBA due to the 00e08b substring within the worldwide number (WWN). Each fibre channel vendor has unique substring assigned to it (see Sunsolve doc 73557 for further details on this).

Product
Sun StorageTek T3 Array

T3, PDB, syslog
Previously Published As
78320

Change History
Date: 2004-09-27
User Name: 7058
Action: Approved
Comment: Changing audience to contract for consistency with other doc referenced in this document.
At some point in the future, if authors of both documents agree, maybe both docs can be updated to become available as "free".
Version: 4
Date: 2004-09-27
User Name: 36992
Action: Approved
Comment: Passing to Nita as agreed
Version: 0
Date: 2004-09-27
User Name: 36992
Action: Add Comment
Comment: Personally, I believe that doc 73557 *should* be free, not contract as its based on IEEE information that is freely available on the web. So my preference would be to make both docs free but if for the sake of consistency you want to make this new one contract then thats OK too
Version: 0
Date: 2004-09-24
User Name: 7058
Action: Rejected
Comment: Hi Tim,

Before publishing this doc, I just want to check on one thing I noticed that seems
like it might be confusing to customers.
The document you reference (73557) is only visible by contract customers, yet
this document (78320) is marked as "free". Should we make this a contract
document instead for consistency or is there a particular reason why it needs to
be marked as free.

Please add a comment into the comment area for this document, let me know what
audience makes most sense for it and then you can place it back to my "final review"
queue and I'll publish it. It doesn't have to go back through tech review again.

Thanks much,
nita
Version: 0
Date: 2004-09-24
User Name: 7058
Action: Accept
Comment:
Version: 0
Date: 2004-09-24
User Name: 33935
Action: Approved
Comment: Good info to know for phone-support engineers.
Version: 0
Date: 2004-09-24
User Name: 33935
Action: Accept
Comment:
Version: 0
Date: 2004-09-24
User Name: 36992
Action: Approved
Comment: new document. please evaluate
Version: 0
Date: 2004-09-24
User Name: 36992
Action: Created
Comment:
Version: 0
Product_uuid
2a6d7d50-0a18-11d6-8e0b-f0bd33b24928|Sun StorageTek T3 Array

Attachments

This solution has no attachment