.
>
>Of course, if it is indeed working as designed now, it doesn't resolve the
>other dirmc issues currently being discussed in this thread.
>
>Is there anyone on the list who has in recent history decided to ditch using
>a dirmc diskpool altogether and done so with success
ith success on the restore side?
regards,
Paul
- Original Message -
From: "Richard Sims"
To:
Sent: Saturday, March 19, 2005 4:44 AM
Subject: Re: [ADSM-L] DIRMC - Are copypool reclamation performance issues
resolved or not.
> Paul -
>
> This generally falls under the TS
h 19, 2005 3:17 PM
To: ADSM-L@VM.MARIST.EDU
Subject: Re: DIRMC - Are copypool reclamation performance issues
resolved or not.
Paul,
It is definitely, absolutely, positively, seen it myself - fixed
Been
fixed for years. Forget DIRMC.
Ken
> -Original Message-
> From: ADSM: Dist St
on the restore side?
regards,
Paul
- Original Message -
From: "Richard Sims"
To:
Sent: Saturday, March 19, 2005 4:44 AM
Subject: Re: [ADSM-L] DIRMC - Are copypool reclamation performance issues
resolved or not.
> Paul -
>
> This generally falls under the TSM term Res
> To: ADSM-L@VM.MARIST.EDU
> Subject: Re: DIRMC - Are copypool reclamation performance
> issues resolved or not.
>
>
> Hi Richard,
>
> I took a look through the Quickfacts (something I should have
> done long ago). It does indeed suggest that surrogate
> directories are created
rday, March 19, 2005 4:44 AM
Subject: Re: [ADSM-L] DIRMC - Are copypool reclamation performance issues
resolved or not.
Paul -
This generally falls under the TSM term Restore Order processing. We've
discussed it on the List before. I have an entry on it in ADSM
QuickFacts which you can refer
Paul -
This generally falls under the TSM term Restore Order processing. We've
discussed it on the List before. I have an entry on it in ADSM
QuickFacts which you can refer to as a preliminary to further pursuit
in IBM doc.
Richard Simshttp://people.bu.edu/rbs
On Mar 19, 2005, at 3:06 AM, Pau
onger needed.
Is there any documentation on this somewhere I can reference?
regards,
Paul
- Original Message -
From: "TSM_User" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To:
Sent: Thursday, March 17, 2005 3:54 PM
Subject: Re: [ADSM-L] DIRMC - Are copypool reclamation performance issues
resolved or
DU
Cc:
Subject: Re: DIRMC - Are copypool reclamation performance issues resolved or
not.
It is fixed but the reason there have been suggestions to use a file type
device class is because disk pools unline sequential pools are scanned from
begining to end for every storage pool backup. I hav
Storage pools consist of one or more volumes, generally disk or tape.
The storage pool gets its volumes via the device class which has a
maxscr setting to limit the volume count and max capacity to estimate or
assign the max size of the volume. The device class also points to a
directory which in t
On Thu, 17 Mar 2005, Steve Bennett might have said:
> Wanda,
>
> I just added a sata disk array in TSM v5.2 so I'll jump in here.
>
> If you are using one disk partition in Windows for the device class then
> you can let TSM define the number of vols it needs up to maxscr or out
> of disk conditio
On Thu, Mar 17, 2005 at 07:38:16AM -0500, Richard Sims wrote:
> blocks of 256 KiB minimum...". Could you provide a documentation or web
> site reference for that 5.3 change?
No, sorry. Just the info I received through the PMR. I made the suggestion
to include this in e.g. a README, and that sugge
n but this is not the case (at least on windows, on 5.2.2.4
- discussed on the list).
Tim
-Original Message-
From: Steve Bennett [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, March 17, 2005 10:09 AM
To: ADSM-L@VM.MARIST.EDU
Subject: Re: DIRMC - Are copypool reclamation performance issues
r
Tim/Steve
Thanks - got it!
-Original Message-
From: ADSM: Dist Stor Manager [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of
Rushforth, Tim
Sent: Thursday, March 17, 2005 11:17 AM
To: ADSM-L@VM.MARIST.EDU
Subject: Re: DIRMC - Are copypool reclamation performance issues
resolved or not.
1. You
ED]
Sent: Thursday, March 17, 2005 9:49 AM
To: ADSM-L@VM.MARIST.EDU
Subject: Re: DIRMC - Are copypool reclamation performance issues
resolved or not.
Tim:
We are looking at using all disk now for our onsite disk pool with our
next capital$ buy.
Something I've never been sure of -
Whenf you u
it somehow?
Thanks
Wanda
-Original Message-
From: ADSM: Dist Stor Manager [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of
Rushforth, Tim
Sent: Wednesday, March 16, 2005 5:31 PM
To: ADSM-L@VM.MARIST.EDU
Subject: Re: DIRMC - Are copypool reclamation performance issues
resolved or not.
It is fixed
2) Do reclaims happen by themselves, or do you have to force it somehow?
Thanks
Wanda
-Original Message-
From: ADSM: Dist Stor Manager [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of
Rushforth, Tim
Sent: Wednesday, March 16, 2005 5:31 PM
To: ADSM-L@VM.MARIST.EDU
Subject: Re: DIRMC - Are copypool reclam
Jurjen -
In this thread, and the "Minor gotcha on upgrade to 5.3" thread, you
indicate that TSM 5.3 has changed things such that "...the handling of
FILE volumes was changed. All writes to such a volume is now done in
blocks of 256 KiB minimum...". Could you provide a documentation or web
site refe
On Wed, Mar 16, 2005 at 07:29:50PM -0600, Rushforth, Tim wrote:
[DIRMC]
> What in 5.3 warrants new consideration?
Probably the fact that sequential volumes are written to in blocks of at
least 256 KB, even when the data is only 1500 bytes. This can cause a lot of
overhead, and the effecti
- Original Message -
in a much faster backup. Now all that being said this new feature in V5.3
warrents new consideration. My new consideration is to stop using DIRMC
pools as the reason they were created in the first place has also long been
fixed.
Which reason is this that has been fixe
directories were on tape.
Thanks,
Tim Rusforth
City of Winnipeg
-Original Message-
From: TSM_User [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wed 3/16/2005 6:48 PM
To: ADSM-L@VM.MARIST.EDU
Cc:
Subject: Re: DIRMC - Are copypool reclamation performance
It is fixed but the reason there have been suggestions to use a file type
device class is because disk pools unline sequential pools are scanned from
begining to end for every storage pool backup. I have had some customers that
have millions of directories in their DIRMC pool. Even when none ch
Sent: Wednesday, March 16, 2005 2:31 PM
To: ADSM-L@VM.MARIST.EDU
Subject: Re: DIRMC - Are copypool reclamation performance issues
resolved or not.
It is fixed (somewhere around 5.1.5.2).
-Original Message-
From: Thorneycroft, Doug [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, March 16, 2005
It is fixed (somewhere around 5.1.5.2).
-Original Message-
From: Thorneycroft, Doug [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, March 16, 2005 4:25 PM
To: ADSM-L@VM.MARIST.EDU
Subject: DIRMC - Are copypool reclamation performance issues resolved or
not.
OK, after spending a large portion
OK, after spending a large portion of my day reviewing adsm-l post going back to
2000, I'm still not sure. Does anyone know if there is still a performance
problem
running reclamation on a DIRMC random access disk pool?
I came across one post that said it was supposedly fixed, but recommended usin
y: "ADSM: Dist Stor Manager" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
19.09.2003 21:58
Please respond to "ADSM: Dist Stor Manager"
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
cc:
Subject:Copypool Reclamation
How does Copypool reclamation work? I mean, the tapes are offsite,
Corporate Computer Center
Schering-Plough Corp.
(901) 320-4462
(901) 320-4856 FAX
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
-Original Message-
From: Mark Bertrand [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Friday, September 19, 2003 1:58 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Copypool Reclamation
How does Copypool reclamation
How does Copypool reclamation work? I mean, the tapes are offsite, so is all
of the reclamation done within the database?
When I start the copypool reclamation with an "upd stg copypool reclaim=50"
it tells me what tapes it is going to perform reclamation on. Everything is
OK, those
Hi -
We have a site with some of the primary pool volumes outside the
library. We are running reclamation on the copypool, but it fails
frequently because some of the primary volumes needed are outside the
library. I am wondering if anyone has created a SQL query that will
predict which PRIMARY
AIL PROTECTED]>
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
cc:(bcc: John Naylor/HAV/SSE)
Subject: Re: Copypool reclamation
Alan, I am guessing that the operation you discribe also
is writing the copypool tapes over a lng wire between the tsm server
and the remote library. In that case, there is no need t
trator
>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 reaso
Manager [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of
Lawrence Clark
Sent: Thursday, January 10, 2002 11:52 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Copypool reclamation
That's true, but with more interest in hands off operation, some sites are
now storing the copypool volumes in separate librari
rk
> 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?
>
>
: 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
ation.
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
ry 10, 2002 11:35 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Copypool reclamation
The copypool volumes are normally off-site, in a vault with no tape drives.
> -Original Message-
> From: ADSM: Dist Stor Manager [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of
> Lawrence Clark
> Sent: Thursday,
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
]On Behalf Of
> Lawrence Clark
> 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
The copypool volumes are normally off-site, in a vault with no tape drives.
> -Original Message-
> From: ADSM: Dist Stor Manager [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of
> Lawrence Clark
> Sent: Thursday, January 10, 2002 1:22 PM
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: Co
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 targe
Copypool reclamation is performed by copying data that is still valid on
the tape that is being reclaimed from the *source* primary stgpool again to
a new copypool tape.
e.g. if files a,b,c are all still unexpired on copypool tape c1 and d is
unexpired on c2, they also still exist in the
Sorry if this has been asked before. Is it possible to
do tape copypool reclamation with a single tape drive
? The reclaimpool option isn't allowed for a copypool,
so I can't see how to define file (disk) space to do
it. Since I can do reclaim of primary tape pools using
a reclaimpool
42 matches
Mail list logo
