Zlatko, Karel, Thanks for your help, I'll fall asleep a little bit wiser tonight !
Regards Arnaud =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= | Arnaud Brion, Panalpina Management Ltd., IT Group | | Viaduktstrasse 42, P.O. Box, 4002 Basel - Switzerland | | Phone: +41 61 226 19 78 / Fax: +41 61 226 17 01 | =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= -----Original Message----- From: Zlatko Krastev [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, 30 July, 2003 13:20 To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: Effect of multiple migration processes to a collocated pool - serial or parallel node migration ? Diskpools are always "collocated" :-))) Option 1 is incorrect. It can happen only if next pool is *non-collocated*! Look at list archives and you will see that the answer to question "why my multi-session client is having all but one in MediaW" is to disable the collocation. Option 2 is somewhat correct. Each migration batch is processed by a process and next process can work only if there is another batch. If the next storage pool is collocated by node, a complete node constitutes a batch. If the storage pool is collocated by filespace, each filespace is a separate batch. Example: A node is having three filesystems /data1, /data2 and /data3, 100 GB each. The diskpool is having migproc=3. If the tapepool is having collocation=filespace, three separate processes will be lauched and each will migrate 100 GB. If the tapepool is having collocation=yes, only one process will be lauched and it will migrate all 300 GB. Only if there is another node's data in diskpool, a second process can start to migrate it. Zlatko Krastev IT Consultant PAC Brion Arnaud <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent by: "ADSM: Dist Stor Manager" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 30.07.2003 13:28 Please respond to "ADSM: Dist Stor Manager" To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] cc: Subject: Effect of multiple migration processes to a collocated pool - serial or parallel node migration ? Hi list, A quickie one : when migrating multiple nodes data from non-collocated disk pool to collocated tape pool, using migproc=2, in which order will data be migrated ? 1) node 1 data on 2 different tapes, then node 2 data on 2 different tapes etc .... 2) node 1 data on one tape and node 2 data on another tape, then node 3 data on another tape etc .... I would tend to say 1) is the right response, as the order of nodes processed is per largest amount of data in the disk storage pool, but wanted to make it sure ... If my assumption is right, is there any way achieving parallel mounts for nodes migration (option 2) instead of serial mounts (option 1) ? This would avoid waste of tapes (2 tapes created for 1 node migrated, in a collocated pool looks strange to me), and also from time (tape reclamation will probably recombine those tapes to a new one after a while) Thanks in advance ! Regards. Arnaud =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= | Arnaud Brion, Panalpina Management Ltd., IT Group | | Viaduktstrasse 42, P.O. Box, 4002 Basel - Switzerland | | Phone: +41 61 226 19 78 / Fax: +41 61 226 17 01 | =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
