Allen- thanks a lot - I expected that but wanted to be sure
yes I agree, it might be too much pain there :-)
Allen S. Rout schrieb:
On Mon, 22 May 2006 16:14:28 +0200, Rainer Wolf <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
the question is now:
is it possible to make use of the group-collocation-feature when
having disk-cache as Primary StoragePools and the next-storagepool
is on a remote-tsm-server's virtual volumes ?
If you want to get this kind of distinction working on the other side
of a virtual-volume link, you're going to have to split things up by
node on the virtual-volume target side. Then, you'll have different
SERVER definitions on the source server, and different devclasses, and
different stgpools.
Probably more pain in the patoot than you desire.
