Fragmentation *will* be something you'll want to consider for the database;
but, not for your diskpools, because you should be migrating them off to
tape (nearly) every day... the whole idea is to get backup data onto
portable media to fully protect the environment, one copy stays in the silo,
2nd copy send offsite (for site disaster & media failure protection).
Tivoli db architect recently admitted it would be advisable to re-org the db
once or twice a year, to defrag it.

 -----Original Message-----
From:   Jack McKinney [mailto:jackmc-adsm AT LORENTZ DOT COM]
Sent:   Monday, May 07, 2001 4:41 AM
To:     ADSM-L AT VM.MARIST DOT EDU
Subject:        Re: DISK reclamation?

Big Brother tells me that Mark Stapleton wrote:
>
> If one thinks about it for a moment, it's obvious that disk volumes
> don't need to be reclaimed. Tape volumes go through reclamation so that
> they fall back to scratch status for reuse. Disk storage pools are
> (usually) the primary storage pool--the primary place where your
> clients' data is stored. You sure as hell don't want those volumes going
> to scratch status.

    But you don't want the files fragmented, either, as your database will
get much larger if it has to store a long list of fragment locations for
each file instead of just a single entry for it.  Thus, reclamation _is_
desirable, in as much as it 'defrags' the volume.  Especially since the
defrag algorithm in this particular case is very simple.