>1) Is the use of DIRMC obsolete?
Jochem - APAR IC24321 would partially make it seem that way; but consider
the case where the directory information is not incidentally on
the tape containing the data being restored, and thus would not be
encountered during restoral processing on that tape so as to replace the
surrogate directory: TSM would have to additionally mount the tape
containing the directory information. That would prolong the restoral
process.
>2) If the redbook is incorrect, but if DIRMC is still used (with seperate
>STG) how will a restore work, first the DIRMC STP, then the file STP or
>what?
I would expect restoral processing to always take the directories from
their dedicated storage pool first, if it exists; and being in a disk
storage pool would help speed the restoral, given that the directory
structure as a whole would be rebuild before files were restored.
Don't hesitate to use the "Review the redbook" clickable to provide
feedback to the authors. I just did so, to prompt them to expand the
discussion of DIRMC to encompass Restore Order as well.
Richard Sims, BU
