>The single biggest caveat to this notion is that ADSM apparently doesn't
>"spread" the database evenly over the multiple disks as it grows.  Is
>there a way that this can be forced?

It really doesn't much matter, because having it optimized for one type of
operation would render it degraded for another.  What would probably help
most would be RAID data striping, as in RAID-5, to try to return data
faster by parallelizing access.  In general, this whole topic gets into
database architecture study, and given that the ADSM database is of
proprietary nature, it is incumbent upon IBM to publish information for
optimizing performance...and we are hearing an abundance of customer need
in this area, as ADSM is being employed for larger systems, as it is
being marketed for.  Larger shops may want to consider a hierarchy of
servers, which is the gist of ADSM v.3, and thus distribute the load over
multiple servers but with the facilities of v.3 have common terminal and
report views.  There are possibilities available.  We as customers have to
grow out of the "single ADSM server" thinking of the past, particularly as
client volumes grow unweildy for a single server.
    Richard Sims, Boston University OIT