Re: Cache Battery Swap ?

[Charles Wilt <charles.wilt@xxxxxxxxx>]

DrFranken / Dan...

I've heard stories about IBM CE's pulling the battery with the system
shut down without failing the battery first and wiping out systems.
Even happened to one of our uniform rental boxes, but that's not my
team so I don't have any details. Rob Berendt at Dekko mentions such
stories in a couple of posts in the archives...

perhaps PWRDWNSYS *IMMED vs PWRDWNSYS *CNTRLD makes a difference...

or perhaps the hardware itself makes a difference...

If it were me, I'd fail the cache first :)

Charles


On Wed, Dec 1, 2010 at 11:39 AM, DrFranken <midrange@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> That is clearly the implication indeed! But I do NOT concur. I routinely
> PWRDWNSYS, pull the drives, put in others, and fire up again with no
> 'cache data exists' messages. If this were the case my 'shelf based
> LPAR' partitions would all be scrap especially since they don't always
> go back under the same controller!! I have done this dozens of times
> with nary a failure.
>
> It seems to me that this is a CYA sort of statement but that's just MHO.
>
>     - Larry "DrFranken" Bolhuis
>
> On 12/1/2010 11:04 AM, Dan Kimmel wrote:
> > So the implication here is that PWRDWNSYS does NOT flush the cache even though the disks stop spinning. Is that what I'm hearing?