Hi Erwann
Thank you for the add
Will do it as you suggest.
Best Regards
Ouzen Robert
Haifa University
Israel
-Original Message-
From: ADSM: Dist Stor Manager [mailto:ADSM-L@VM.MARIST.EDU] On Behalf Of Erwann
SIMON
Sent: Tuesday, February 7, 2017 10:39 AM
To: ADSM-L@VM.MARIST.ED
Hi Robert,
I'll do the same (with a small add) :
- add another stgpooldir pointing to the desired storage (def stgpooldir)
- mark the current stgpooldir as readonly (upd stgpooldir)
- move containers from the current stgpooldir to th new stgpooldir by directory
(move container)
@all : if not wat
Hi to all
Thanks to all for the feedback
About UPDATE STGPOOL stg1 HI=1 LO=0 NEXTSTGPOOL=stg2 in the doc look at
restrictions 3
NEXTstgpool
Specifies the name of a random-access or primary sequential storagepool
to which files are stored when the directory-container storag
There is still no method for moving data from a directory based container pool
to another one.
I think your only option would be to replicate to another server, then
replicate back to the smaller pool.
__
Matthew McGeary
Senior Technical Specialist - Infrastructure Manage
Wouldn't ordinary migration work for this?
UPDATE STGPOOL stg1 HI=1 LO=0 NEXTSTGPOOL=stg2
Roger Deschner University of Illinois at Chicago rog...@uic.edu
==I have not lost my mind -- it is backed up on tape somewhere.=
On Sun, 5 Feb 2017, rou...@univ.haifa.ac.il wrote:
>Hello
Robert,
If you want to migrate to a smaller volume I suggest you add that volume
(directory) to the same storagepool and just migrate the data using a move
container command after placing the original container in readonly mode.
I still think it isn't possible to really move to another storagepoo
I don't think this can be done Robert, only backup/archive, replication,
protect stgpool and convert can place data in the directory containerpool.
On Sun, Feb 5, 2017 at 8:38 AM, rou...@univ.haifa.ac.il <
rou...@univ.haifa.ac.il> wrote:
> Hello all
> Working with TSM server version 7.1.7.0 and D
wrote on 2013-10-10
> 10:45:42:
>
>> From: Tristan Kelkermans
>> To: ADSM-L@vm.marist.edu,
>> Date: 2013-10-10 10:46
>> Subject: Re: Move data to another storage pool Sent by: "ADSM: Dist
>> Stor Manager"
>>
>> Hi,
>>
>> Absolut
li
> +Storage+Manager/page/Home
>
> "ADSM: Dist Stor Manager" wrote on 2013-10-10
> 10:45:42:
>
>> From: Tristan Kelkermans
>> To: ADSM-L@vm.marist.edu,
>> Date: 2013-10-10 10:46
>> Subject: Re: Move data to another storage pool Sent by: "
r/page/Home
>
> "ADSM: Dist Stor Manager" wrote on 2013-10-10
> 10:45:42:
>
>> From: Tristan Kelkermans
>> To: ADSM-L@vm.marist.edu,
>> Date: 2013-10-10 10:46
>> Subject: Re: Move data to another storage pool
>> Sent by: "ADSM: Dist Stor M
/developerworks/mydeveloperworks/wikis/home/wiki/Tivoli
> +Storage+Manager/page/Home
>
> "ADSM: Dist Stor Manager" wrote on 2013-10-10
> 10:45:42:
>
>> From: Tristan Kelkermans
>> To: ADSM-L@vm.marist.edu,
>> Date: 2013-10-10 10:46
>> Subject: Re: M
/Tivoli+Storage+Manager
Product Wiki:
https://www.ibm.com/developerworks/mydeveloperworks/wikis/home/wiki/Tivoli
+Storage+Manager/page/Home
"ADSM: Dist Stor Manager" wrote on 2013-10-10
10:45:42:
> From: Tristan Kelkermans
> To: ADSM-L@vm.marist.edu,
> Date: 2013-10-10 10:46
I can't offer many details on this, because the mists of time have descended,
but I had an issue similar to this when I was moving all data off a file-based,
deduplicated pool to a VTL-based pool. After all the data had apparently been
moved to the VTL there were still volumes left with somethin
Same issue I'm having.
In a non-dedup pool, the heads/tails of big spanned files still show up in Q
CONTENT, and a move data will take care of those heads & tails.
Whatever this is, isn't related to that.
In my case, the MOVE DATA fails, with no detail in the error message, audit
says there are
Hi,
Absolutely both are storage pools with dedup enabled. Maybe it has to do
with tails of big files written in these volumes as Grigori said but i'm
not sure about it.
Query content doesn't show any files in those volumes but when you do an
audit volume it finds more than one file in it..
Trist
I am having a similar problem.
Is this a deduplicated storage pool?
In my case I'm suspecting that has something to do with it.
-Original Message-
From: ADSM: Dist Stor Manager [mailto:ADSM-L@VM.MARIST.EDU] On Behalf Of
Tristan Kelkermans
Sent: Wednesday, October 09, 2013 12:19 PM
To:
Maybe these volumes contain tails of some big files written into different
volumes? In this case, you need to move volume with beginning of file and tail
of file will be moved as well...
Grigori Solonovitch, Senior Systems Architect, IT, Ahli United Bank Kuwait,
www.ahliunited.com.kw
-Orig
Tristan,
If you must use the move data approach, and haven't done so, I would strongly
suggest that you carefully read the conditions for using this command. There
are plenty of "gotcha's" in using it, but they are well noted in the help file.
For instance;
Make sure the old and new storage pool
Rick,
Thank you for your feedback. Indeed it’s a very good idea, I haven’t thought
about it !
However, do you have any idea about the cause of this strange behavior ?
Thanks,
Tristan
Le 9 oct. 2013 à 19:26, Rick Adamson a écrit :
> Tristen,
> Why not just configure the original storage pool
Tristen,
Why not just configure the original storage pool to use the new storage pool as
it's "next storage pool", then migrate the data rather than performing a "move
data" on all the volumes?
For example:
1.Create the new storage pool
2. configure your backup copy groups the original stg pool
I found similar problems as well and investigation showed a part of file which
was writen to other olmost full volume and tail of the file was written to the
next volume. Move data for the first volume will clean this tail.
Try to audit volume as well. Sometimes it helps.
---
Indeed, that happens too often with TSM 5. Do Audit Volume ... Fix=Yes.
Richard Sims
In my opinion creating new copy pool and use "move data" for old offsite
volumes is the best option. In this case datafor new copy is taken from
primary pools and offsite volumes are released to be moved back.
From: ADSM: Dist Stor Manager [ads...@vm.mar
The other option is to delete the old volumes a few at a time and let backup
stgpool rebuild the copy pool as time permits. It might depend on how much
tape time you can spare. The new pool is the easiest, but will require more
tape drive time.
10tb may use one solution, 200TB may need another
One way is to define a new copy pool using the LT04 and then backup your
storage pools to
The new pool. When done, you can delete the old volumes.
-Original Message-
From: ADSM: Dist Stor Manager [mailto:ads...@vm.marist.edu] On Behalf Of
Moyer, Joni M
Sent: Thursday, January 14, 2010 12:2
Hello Michael,
Thanks for solution but amount of data and files is not very small, so
exporting data will be very take a lot of time and in fact i will have to do
it two times.
So , if any one can tell me a shorter path to do it?
On Thu, Nov 26, 2009 at 6:52 PM, Michael Green wrote:
> Ah I see
Ah I see.. If so then either..
1. Restore and backup (which would limit you to active (latest)
versions of everything)
2. Fire up another TSM instance somewhere (even on the same machine).
Export your NODEA file spaces to there. Rename NODEA to NODEB on the
new server instance. And EXPORT NODEB bac
But Node B is already existing on TSM servers? Is it possible to rename a
node to a name already existing? The data is manufacturing data and hence
very criticalso i cant test too much
On Thu, Nov 26, 2009 at 6:27 PM, Michael Green wrote:
> How about simply renaming the NODE A to NODE B?
How about simply renaming the NODE A to NODE B?
--
Warm regards,
Michael Green
On Thu, Nov 26, 2009 at 2:38 PM, ashish sharma wrote:
> Hello All,
>
>
> I have two nodes on a TSM server , NODA A and NODE B. I want to move all
> data belonging to NODE A to NODE B and once NODE B owns all the data
There is no single right answer for this as it depends on what you the
administrator feels is right for the type of data you are backing up. It
also depends on your scheduling for the other admin process. You can
start with a high of 70 and low of 20 and see how that's working for
you.
BERTAUT TCH
Thank you. One more thing; if the storage pool 1 says that is only 50% full,
what should I set the low and high migration threshold?
>>>
From: "Tchuise, Bertaut"
To:
Date: 8/5/2009 8:47 AM
Subject: Re: [ADSM-L] Move data(file space)
Ramiro,
I sent the previous post prior to your answer below.
Ramiro,
I sent the previous post prior to your answer below. The move data
operation will work as well; I would rather work with the migration
operation. You mentioned that pool1 didn't appear to be migrating;
granted that you have enough tape drives available, you could increase
the migration pro
Ramiro,
You can make use of the migration process to move the data from a
storage pool that's getting full to another. You can use the ISC for
that and set the High and Low migration threshold for the data movement.
If you have access to the administrative client (dsmadmc), you can logon
to the TS
Thanks Richard, that is all set and working OK. I have 3 storage pools(File)
and 1 tape pool, and I setup pool 1 to go to pool 2, pool 2 to pool 3 and pool
3 to tape pool, also setup the migration thresholds. Pool 1 has no more space
and doesn't appear to be migrating, anyway I thought if I go
Read the Admin Guide's description of "storage pool hierarchy".
The data can exist in any storage pool in the hierarchy, and be
accessed by the client.
Richard Sims
Grigor,
With large sata/fata drives recover can take a long time and during that time
one could loose a second disk drive which with RAID 5 would result in total
data loss.
RaID6 provides two sets of independent party calculations P is one set and Q
the other so you can have dual disk failure
Grigori,
Regarding the point made below:
>>1) migration is totally controlled by TSM Server and depends on number of
>>nodes and number of migration processes. I am afraid to overlap migration
>>activity and backup/restore operations.<<
I don't know how big your disk pool is but you should be a
RAID6 came together with FATA 900GB disks.
IBM does not support RAID5 on so big disks (only RAID10 and new RAID6).
Difference in arrays is: RAID5 - 6+P+S, RAID6 - 5+P+Q+S.
I do not know what is drive Q, but it allows to recover big disks faster.
Grigori G. Solonovitch
Senior Technical Architect
Hello Grigori
Quite new then if you're using raid 6.
In that case, I'd not worry too much about fragmentation. If you have
more than a couple arrays for each of the FATA drives, the data is
probably going to be all over the drives anyway.
steven
Steven Langdale
Global Information Services
EA
Hello Steven,
We have IBM DS8100 with:
- 146GB Enterprise disks (RAID5) for data;
- 500GB FATA (RAID5) for backup and archive data;
- 900GB FATA (RAID6) for backup and archive data.
DS8100 is shared by nodes and TSM Server using different arrays for data and
backup data.
Regards,
Grigori G.
Hello Grigori
What SAN have you got, and is it shared storage? I ask because there has
been discussion on FS fragmentation but surely this is meaningless if your
using a SAN.
Steven Langdale
Global Information Services
EAME SAN/Storage Planning and Implementation
( Phone : +44 (0)1733 584175
(
Hello Christian,
Thank you very much for your proposal. I understand that it is much easier to
use migration, but I am still going to use procedure based on data movement
because of:
1) migration is totally controlled by TSM Server and depends on number of
nodes and number of migration pro
Grigori,
Your process below works; I would have done the same as Christian
Svensson that is migrating all the data off of the Disk storage pool to
the next storage pool (what hierarchy do you have in your environment:
Disk -> VTL -> Tape or Disk -> Tape?? ). Depending on the number of
tape drives
"delete volume 000139 discarddata=yes" did solve that issue. The tape is back
on track. Found 3 more tapes that had this behavior, but did the same on them.
Happy again!!
/Larsa
-Original Message-
From: ADSM: Dist Stor Manager [mailto:ads...@vm.marist.edu] On Behalf Of
Richard Sims
Sen
Thanks for the additional info on that vaulted volume.
With an Access state of Offsite, the Move Data should operate on local
primary pool volumes containing the same data. Whereas that didn't
happen, it calls into question the state of the online volumes or
whether the TSM database contains entr
Last Update Date/Time: 07/12/2009 20:12:02
Begin Reclaim Period:
End Reclaim Period:
Drive Encryption Key Manager: None
/Larsa
-Original Message-
From: Richard Sims [mailto:r...@bu.edu]
Sent: den 20 juli 2009 15:22
To: Lars-Erik Öhman
Subject: Re: Move data
Hello, Thomas -
I explored segment spanning at one time, to see if there was any
ready way of identifying the span-from or span-to volume via standard
commands or Select, and concluded that there wasn't. The only
recourse is to perform MOVe Data and then see what further volume TSM
requests.
> Geoff - The IBM explanation of the ANR1171W message well describes the
> situation: Do the Query RESTore as Bill suggested.
>A TSM Support Page search on that message turns up some APARS which
>supply more background.
At the time I had done a q restore and found nothing so it led to the
Geoff - The IBM explanation of the ANR1171W message well describes the
situation: Do the Query RESTore as Bill suggested.
A TSM Support Page search on that message turns up some APARS which
supply more background.
I don't know what disk you are referring to. If this was a disk housing
a
> Geoff - What's the message number and text?
Sorry for responding so late on this. Below are the message specifics I
got yesterday when trying the move data. What I did notice was that I
lost a disk, which crashed TSM again, and it looks to me like the data
may be related to that disk somehow. Wh
Maybe a restartable restore? QUERY RESTORE
Bill Boyer
-Original Message-
From: ADSM: Dist Stor Manager [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Gill,
Geoffrey L.
Sent: Monday, January 08, 2007 1:39 PM
To: ADSM-L@VM.MARIST.EDU
Subject: move data
I am trying to move data from an offsite ta
On Jan 8, 2007, at 1:39 PM, Gill, Geoffrey L. wrote:
I am trying to move data from an offsite tape but am getting a
response
that a restore is in process for that tape and it fails. ...
Geoff - What's the message number and text?
Maybe this is a RESTORE Volume server process; or a RESTORE STG
Select 'MOVE DATA', VOLUME_NAME, 'STG=WIN-POOL' from volumes where
ACCESS='OFFSITE' and PCT_UTILIZED <=
60
I need to make:
Move data TAP017 STGPOOL=WIN-POOL
Move data TAP055 STGPOOL=WIN-POOL
Move data TAP214 STGPOOL=WIN-POOL
Can somebody say I eat up to make it?
TSM 5.3.
Or you could simply run the command
backup stg primarypool newcopypool
and then delete the old copy pool after the new copy completes. Unless
you need the 3590's back immediately, or there's a downside to this that
I'm not aware of...
_
Kathleen Hallahan
Fredd
> I have to move
>data from 3590 tapes to 3592 tapes. I know I can delete volumes from
the
>copy storage pool and make a backup of the primary storage pool
again.
>But I prefer a saver way.
>
There is not a safer way. Make sure you have the reusedelay parm set
appropriately on your copy storage p
Ashok,
It depends on several factors. First, is the pool in question
collocated? If so, then depending on how many
filespaces/nodes/collocation groups you've got, you might well end up
with all the tapes defined in the pool (or the MAXSCRATCH number, if
using scratch tapes) in a 'filling' status
We move data manually and it is a pain .I was wondering what is the "best
practice" out there for moving the data and reclaiming. We need to free up
tapes in the pool we have too many tapes in each pool with status="filling"
utilization below 28-30%
Appreciate any guidance.
Thanks,
Ash
On Jan 2, 2006, at 12:20 PM, hassan MOURTADI wrote:
Hi all,
I did a backup of my SAP production database based on oracle with
TDP for
R/3.
This backup is stored in one seq. volume.
My problem i want to move the data from one volume to another only for
this data i have backup up.
I am in TSM
Bill,
Did you ever get this resoved? I'm guessing that the tape you're trying to do
move data on has a file split across tapes and you don't have one of those
tapes onsite. So it goes to the primary pool instead to find the data.
David Ehresman
>>> [EMAIL PROTECTED] 09/16/05 9:26 PM >>>
TSM
5 10:53:56
>
>
>Bill Boyer
>"Some days you're the bug, some days you're the windshield" -
??
>
>-Original Message-
>From: ADSM: Dist Stor Manager [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Behalf Of Stapleton, Mark
>Sent: Friday, September 16, 2005 9:48 PM
&
ADSM: Dist Stor Manager [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Stapleton,
Mark
Sent: Friday, September 16, 2005 9:48 PM
To: ADSM-L@VM.MARIST.EDU
Subject: Re: Move data for offsite volume
Because checking in a tape with CHECKIN that was checked out with MOVE DRM
still has "offsite" as i
MAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Stapleton,
Mark
Sent: Friday, September 16, 2005 9:48 PM
To: ADSM-L@VM.MARIST.EDU
Subject: Re: Move data for offsite volume
Because checking in a tape with CHECKIN that was checked out with MOVE DRM
still has "offsite" as its access. You need to run
u
Because checking in a tape with CHECKIN that was checked out with MOVE
DRM still has "offsite" as its access. You need to run
upd volume access=reado
on every copy pool volume you check back in.
--
Mark Stapleton ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
IBM Certified Advanced Deployment Professional
Tivoli Stor
I suspect that there is a backed-up or archived file that starts on
ITG008L2, and finishes on ITG052L2.
--
Mark Stapleton ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
IBM Certified Advanced Deployment Professional
Tivoli Storage Management Solutions 2005
IBM Certified Advanced Technical Expert (CATE) AIX
Office 262.521
> I'm in the process of designing a migration of the diskpools to a better
> organisation of disks. Some of the pools only have one volume, so they
> will be no problem to move - there's only one other disk the data can go
> to - but the other pools with more than one disk could cause problems.
>
>
, December 10, 2004 9:08 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: MOVE DATA wants some other tapes
On Dec 10, 2004, at 9:57 AM, Tuncel Mutlu (B.T.B.S.V.Y.G.) wrote:
> ...How can I understand if the tape to move will ask for
> another tape and which tape it will ask ?
For full use of volumes, and
From: ADSM: Dist Stor Manager [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Tuncel Mutlu (B.T.B.S.V.Y.G.)
>I have a question about how MOVE DATA works. On a remote
>location (which I manage from the net) I have to empty tapes,
>because I don't have enought scratch tapes. I move data from
>01 (STKL
On Dec 10, 2004, at 9:57 AM, Tuncel Mutlu (B.T.B.S.V.Y.G.) wrote:
...How can I understand if the tape to move will ask for
another tape and which tape it will ask ?
For full use of volumes, and where files may even be larger than
volumes, TSM will span a file (Aggregate) from one volume to another
On Dec 7, 2004, at 2:49 AM, Robert Ouzen wrote:
Hello
What will be the most efficient way to move data from a primary
storage pool (sequential) to a new primary storage pool (disk). My TSM
version is 5.2.3.0
Simple migration: Insert the destination storage pool into your stgpool
hierarchy beneath t
On Nov 22, 2004, at 2:45 AM, Robert Ouzen wrote:
Hi to all
Can anybody tell me the difference between move data and reclaimation.
When I run reclaimation on a cartridge with bad files is sometimes
stuck and I have to cancel the process after a long time , but when I
run a move data on the same car
thanks ...
Allan West
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>cc:
Sent by: "ADSM: Subject: Re: move data with only 1 dlt
drive
Luc Beaudoin wrote:
Hi all
is there a way to move data from one tape to another when you have only 1
dlt drive ???
if yes ... how can I do that
thanks
Luc
You an copy it to another medium, be it a different tape, hard disk,
etc., and then copy it onto another DLT.
>When I try to move data on a volume that says it is 99.9% reclaimable it
>reports the volume has no data. Q con shows nothing but when trying to
>delete the volume it reports there is still data on the tape.
Please note that this is a long-enduring frequently asked question,
addressed by item 04-
Hi Geoff,
I've had this exact same problem last week, couldn't move data, couldn't
delete the volume. Tried everything, but no result.
Solution: Do an "audit volume fix=yes" on the volume. If the database has a
pointer to non-existing data on the volume, it should be automagically fixed
with this
Run an audit against the tape volume. (audit volser fix=yes). Once the audit
completes you can then delete the volume from TSM.
We have this happen to volume on occasion.
...Monte
-Original Message-
From: ADSM: Dist Stor Manager [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of
Gill, Geoffrey L.
Sen
>There are no errors showing in the logs for any of
>the tapes. Sometimes when I come in in the morning reclamation is
still
>running on the offsite pool
This sounds like you are setting the reclaim level too low. Start by
setting it higher, e.g. 90. If reclaim is able to process that in your
ti
Try running you reclamation at say 90% and see if that doesn't
free a bunch up. You may have so many that it is trying to reclaim
say 100 tapes ansd will take forever as more tapes are added each day.
Try 90% for a couple of days.
David B. Longo
System Administrator
Health First, Inc.
3300 Fi
>I have used the MOVE DATA without any problems. Usually it is
>because of a percieved problem with the offsite tape. But it should work
>for what you want to do.
>WHy doesn't Reclaimation get this done for you?
>Matt
That is a good question. There are no errors showing in the lo
Gill,
I have used the MOVE DATA without any problems. Usually it is
because of a percieved problem with the offsite tape. But it should work
for what you want to do.
WHy doesn't Reclaimation get this done for you?
Matt
-Original Message-
From: Gill, Geoffrey L. [mailto:[E
>To free up a lot of filling tapes I used move data. Strange thing is that
>move data sometimes starts writing to another filling tape (as you would
>expect) but then, _before the target tape is full_ starts writing to a fresh
>scratch volume. I'd only expect move data to request a scratch volume w
I hardly can see any differences in the performance.
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Karel Bos) am 29.07.2002 12:08:26
> Bitte antworten an [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> An: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Kopie: (Blindkopie: Gerhard Wolkerstorfer/DEBIS/EDVG/AT)
> Thema:Re: MOVE DATA - Reconstruct
I hardly can see any differences in the performance.
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Karel Bos) am 29.07.2002 12:08:26
Bitte antworten an [EMAIL PROTECTED]
An: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Kopie: (Blindkopie: Gerhard Wolkerstorfer/DEBIS/EDVG/AT)
Thema:Re: MOVE DATA - Reconstruct Yes/No
Performance??
-Oorspronkelijk bericht-
Van: Gerhard Wolkerstorfer [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Verzonden: maandag 29 juli 2002 7:38
Aan: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Onderwerp: MOVE DATA - Reconstruct Yes/No
Hi all,
is there any reason, why a MOVE DATA command with Reconstruct=No should be
used
?
Th
Yes, with certain criteria. If you make the 2 tapes (or any qty) to
read only and then move data on them, several possibilties
happen. (I have done this before, so this is real experience).
1. If there is any tape in this pool that is read write and filling then
one of these tapes will be the
YES
-Original Message-
From: Qualls, Ted W {PBSG} [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Wednesday, April 03, 2002 5:16 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: move data
I believe that to be correct.
-Original Message-
From: Gill, Geoffrey L. [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Wednesday
I believe that to be correct.
-Original Message-
From: Gill, Geoffrey L. [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Wednesday, April 03, 2002 4:05 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: move data
I can't actually try this since I have processes running so I thought I'd
see if I can get an answer while
No, not directly, but you could mark all of the tapes that you don't want to
use to private. It would then have to pick the one you want. If you have
lots of tapes this is not going to be fun! Another way that might work is
to define the volume to the pool rather than letting TSM take a scratch
nt: Friday, December 14, 2001 12:11 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Move data in 4.2.1.8 AIX Server
If the web wizard on the NT client is run later, what config file is it
looking
at to know whether the web component is to be removed or needs to be
upgraded
as opposed to first time install
installed, if it is run
again it prompts to ether remove or upgrade.
Sam Lovejoy
"Prather, Wanda"
cc:
Sent by: "ADSM: Subject: Re: Move data in 4.2.1.8 AIX
Server
ere
it is documented.
-Original Message-
From: Sam Lovejoy [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Friday, December 14, 2001 10:00 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Move data in 4.2.1.8 AIX Server
Hi,
Is there a way to add the web client in on a 4.1.2 or 4.2.1 NT client
without
running t
Please respond to "ADSM: Dist Stor Manager" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent by: "ADSM: Dist Stor Manager" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
cc:
Subject: Re: Move data in 4.2.1.8 AIX Server
I see the same in 4.2.1.0 - MVS server
"Baines, Paul&quo
Hi,
Is there a way to add the web client in on a 4.1.2 or 4.2.1 NT client without
running the wizard? I want to update 100 systems and it would be easier to run a
script on each system.
Thank you,
Sam Lovejoy
I see the same in 4.2.1.0 - MVS server
"Baines, Paul" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> on 14-12-2001 13:43:17
Please respond to "ADSM: Dist Stor Manager" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
cc:(bcc: Carsten Moldrup/SCA/CSC)
Subject: Move data in 4.2.1.8 AIX Server
I upgraded to 4.2.
Why not create a new primary pool, and back it up to the new copypool? The
old copypool will still be there, and the new one will get the new data.
Then you can, at your own speed, move data from the old primary pool to the
new primary pool, and it will delete from the old copypool and get copied
>but any sort of "move data" or migration from one pool to another would be
>no different than the basic creation of the data with the "backup stg
>primarypool copypool" command.
Well, it would, in the sense that John was trying to effect a move rather
than a copy, which is to say have only one i
John,
If you create a new copy storage pool using the new STK device class you
can issue the 'Back storage command' to backup one storage pool to another.
That is how we migrated from IBM Magstar to STK 9840 devices.
Brian
John Bremer
cc
HI
I feel u can create disk sequential access pool and move data to disk and
then migrate to tapes.
But u need to have large disk re source.
Or create one primary tape pool again and move data to it isnt it?
Balanand
-Original Message-
From: John Bremer [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent
but any sort of "move data" or migration from one pool to another would be
no different than the basic creation of the data with the "backup stg
primarypool copypool" command.
No matter what you are going to have to "read from one volume and write to
another".
I'd just put in the new stuff, create
On Wed, Mar 28, 2001 at 12:12:26PM +0200, Reinhard Mersch wrote:
> Before doing that, I would simply try
>
> tsm: ADSM>audit volume bqy624 fix=yes
I tried that but it would not do anything (the first thing suggested by Tivoli).
I think it's a case of a sick DB. I'm going for the dsmserv audit..
You're probably going to have to do an audit vol fix=yes/no
I've had a couple of these where q content doesn't show anything,
but percent util will show something...
audit has fixed a couple...
Suad Musovich <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
03/28/2001 02:31 AM
1 - 100 of 109 matches
Mail list logo
