I disagree on this point. If you are doing reclamation of your primary pool, then it should not be that bad, ie, the copy pool should look similar to the primary pool.
Another alternative is to use the move data command of a volume to its same copy storage pool which causes them to rebuild them from the primary pool. We do this all the time so we do not have to have open storage in the offsite. We use a select to figure out what tapes are coming back and do a move data of those volumes to create new offsites the week before it is to come back. This basically eliminates the need for reclamation of the offsite pool. Boy does it make the offsite rotation simple for the tape operators. Yes, it takes a little while to recreate the tapes coming back, but I have all week to accomplish that. This can be automated with a script to perform the function. -----Original Message----- From: Alan Davenport [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Thursday, January 10, 2002 1:46 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: Copypool reclamation Very often, the copy pool volumes are off site volumes. It would be quite impractical to reclaim these volumes. By doing reclamation from the on-site primary pool, you do not have to return the off-site volumes in order to do reclamation. Alan Davenport Senior Storage Administrator Selective Insurance [EMAIL PROTECTED] (973) 948-1306 -----Original Message----- From: Lawrence Clark [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Thursday, January 10, 2002 1:22 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Copypool reclamation Can any explain to me the reasoning behind having the valid data from a reclamation on a copypool volume having to be obtained from the primary storage pool? It seems to me that it would be much more efficient to copy the valid data directly from the copypool volume being reclaimed to the target copypool volume.
