We have it set up like you do and like John use mountlimits on the
devclasses and rigorous scheduling of the TSM events (via our MVS
scheduler, ZEKE) to minimize tape drive contention.
David
Boyer
DSS, Inc.
-Original Message-
From: ADSM: Dist Stor Manager [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of
Brian L. Nick
Sent: Tuesday, May 21, 2002 11:38 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: yes/no tape question for os/390 server people
Matt,
Nope. We use 1 device class and let MVS (os/3
> Hello,
> I have been running TSM 4.1 on z/OS for a year and a half now,
> (started on OS390 2.7). I wanted to take advantage of and follow the
> standard usage of our tape systems so I set up the TSM tape system in a way
> that I now question. I would like people to let me know if th
Matt,
Nope. We use 1 device class and let MVS (os/390 2.10) handle allocation.
Be careful on what you set the mountlimit to for each device class. Just a
thought,.
Brian
Brian L. Nick
Systems Technician - Storage Solutions
The Phoenix Companies Inc.
100 Bright Meadow Blvd
Enfield CT. 06082-
Hi Matt,
We set up different device classes, like you did. One for onsite tapes
with an onsite HLQ, one for offsite tapes, with a offsite HLQ. Just like
at your shop, everything here is handled automatically by high level
qualifer. We let CA-1 (and STK Silo's like you) handle the tape movemen
Matt,
Under os390 TSM does not know how many tape drives it has, it just calls for a
tape resource when it wants one.
We have os390 TSM server with DFRMM as the tape manager, but the principle is
the same with dataset name prefix on the device class determining the
destination of the tape.
Basica
