Hello, one reason why I updated to version 5.3 was that there is the possibility to create collocation groups.
I have now packed all small servers (about 20 of them) in one group, about 10 medium servers in another group and I made groups for large servers with about 1-3 nodes each. So now no server is spread across more than 1-4 tapes (except for the really large ones) and the tapes have a good utilization. One problem still existing is that for each collocation group (we have 6 of them) there is one tape send to the offsite location each day (we have collocation=group turned on the copy pool). And as we do offsite reclamation only on the weekend we have 5*6=30 tapes that are very little utilized at the end of the week. But I think there is no way around this. I'm not sure if this might work, but couldn't you just use the "move data STGPOOL_NAME"-command to move the data from your 1% utilized volumes? regards, Volker Maibaum Tel: +49 711 939 0972 Fax: +49 711 939 160972 [EMAIL PROTECTED] Am Donnerstag, den 25.08.2005, 16:56 -0700 schrieb Roark Ludwig: > I have been handed a TSM system in the past week that has been running for > a year. IT has collocation = yes for TAPEPOOL and COPYPOOLS. this system > is running TSM 5.2.2. > > We have run out of tapes as the setting for collocation (yes) is trying to > use a tape for each node (as I understand it, ,,please correct me if I am > wrong).. > > We have decided that since we have about 80 volumes with less then 1% > utilized and 20 or so with large utilization %'s to set COLLOCATION=NO for > the TAPEPOOL and COPYPOOLS. > > We are expecting to add another set of nodes and don't wish to consume more > of our volumes (with small percent utilization) as we add the nodes. > > Question .. > > Will this setting COLLOCATION=NO stop the addition of volumes? (I expect > the answer is YES,, please correct me if I am wrong.) > > Now to the second question. > > I see no easy way to have Space Reclamation condense the volumes included > in the two pools as it will only process "FULL" volumes. (Again Please jump > in here). > > QUESTION: is it acceptable to set the status from "FILLING" to "FULL" for > the volumes with low percentage utilized to force Space Reclamation ? > > OR > > is there an easier way to accomplish the GOAL of reducing the number of > volumes needed for the pools? (given that we have set COLLOCATION=NO) > or should we simply wait out the natural filling of the volumes and allow > normal Space Reclamation as time proceeds? > > > Has anyone done this in the past? > > How have others dealt with this?? > > > Thanks for any input. >
