I am still not clear where or when the use of DIRMC may have changed =
from what I understood from the red book "Getting Started with TSM".  In =
the red book example, a separate management class pointed to by DIRMC in =
dsmopt of the client was created to send directory structures to a disk =
storage pool.  This would allow rapid restoration of the directory =
structures during recovery.  During testing, I discovered (Win2K server =
and Win2K client TSM 4.1):

1.  Even if you use DIRMC to define the management class of directories, =
the directories would still default to the management class with the =
highest retention value.  Only after coding NOLIMIT on the management =
class pointed to by DIRMC, did the directories get bond to the =
management class coded for DIRMC.
=20
2.  After the directories where bonded to the correct management class ( =
a MC that had a backup copy group with a destination of a disk storage =
pool defined exclusively for my directories), I discovered that the =
directories did not go to that storage pool.

3.  I discovered that it did not matter what MC the directories where =
bond to.  The directory structures are saved in the TSM data base. =20
=20
So, can anyone enlighten me on when this change occurred?  The red book =
obviously does not indicate this behavior for the management of =
directory structures.  Am I missing something here?  Are there any =
considerations for TSM DB sizing because the directory structures are =
stored in the DB?  Where is this documented?

Thanks for your input,=20
Al    =20