Snapmirror.conf file regenerated by registry?

I wonder if someone has come accross the snapmirror.conf file being regenerated by the registry?

basically we  had snapmirrors working for a while, then something happened, now the snapmirror.conf file gets regenerated by registry....

Now, the end user HAS protection manager, but there are no backups in there.  If we go to external relationships, they are there...  but once the file is regenerated they dissappear...

can anyone tell me, what updates the snapmirror.conf file?  Filer view, yes, but not automatically.  And if it does update it lines are added to the bottom of the file.

I'm going mad trying to figure out what is updating it...  nothing in snapmirror log, nothing in messages....


Snapmirror.conf file regenerated by registry?

Not sure if this will help or not.  Older version of DFM used to manipulate the snapmirror.conf file.  Basically, you should either use protection manager or local configurations, but not both.  I believe newer versions of DFM/OM leave this alone.  At least you have the previous version on a snapshot on the root volume.

Re: Snapmirror.conf file regenerated by registry?

Yeah, well I thought I remembered that. The problem from what I could (and

I have yet to verify this with a replicated install).. originally there was

a Protection Manager schedule for mirroring the volume form one filer to

another... this was put in for a quick and dirty replication job while the

rest of the config was put in..., I got to site and disabled the

schedule.... to use SMVI.

Another guy got to site and deleted the job, which killed replication. I

got the client to do a few things, including recreating the file and

reseeding the volumes, renaming the destination volumes and recreating the

relationship... however none of this worked. what we had to do was create

new destination volumes from scratch and redo the snapmirror from scratch...

I don¹t know what version of DFM was used as I didn¹t do the install but I

will update this post when I get back to site.


On 10/06/2011 23:56, "shaunjurr" <