On Sun, 23 Feb 2003 10:46:46 +0200 Zlatko Krastev/ACIT <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> What's the point? I see nothing buggy here except DDSPOOL not in the > storage hierarchy (which might be intentional). > > Zlatko Krastev > IT Consultant > > > Which is intentional. I guess it's a feature of copy storagepools not to have a next stg, so no, no bug... > > > > Remco Post <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Sent by: "ADSM: Dist Stor Manager" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > 21.02.2003 17:20 > Please respond to "ADSM: Dist Stor Manager" > > > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > cc: > Subject: bug? > > > Hi, > > tsm: COOKE>q stg > > Storage Device Estimated Pct Pct High Low Next > Stora- Pool Name Class Name Capacity Util Migr Mig Mig > ge Pool > (MB) Pct Pct > ----------- ---------- ---------- ----- ----- ---- --- > ----------- ARCHIVEPOOL DISK 2,000.0 0.0 0.0 90 > 70 FILEPOOL BACKUPPOOL DISK 2,000.0 65.3 65.3 90 > 70 FILEPOOL DDSPOOL TAPECLASS 0.0 0.0 0.0 90 > 70 FILECOPYPO- FILEDEV 100,000.0 4.1 > OL > FILEPOOL FILEDEV 100,000.0 4.6 6.0 90 70 > SPACEMGPOOL DISK 2,000.0 50.4 50.4 90 70 FILEPOOL > > > So this is our test-server, no biggy, but ehhh,this isn't supposed to > work this way... > > -- > Met vriendelijke groeten, > > Remco Post > > SARA - Stichting Academisch Rekencentrum Amsterdam > http://www.sara.nl > High Performance Computing Tel. +31 20 592 8008 Fax. +31 20 668 > 3167 > > "I really didn't foresee the Internet. But then, neither did the > computer industry. Not that that tells us very much of course - the > computer industry > didn't even foresee that the century was going to end." -- Douglas > Adams
