We use Raw LVs with great success and performance as well. Dumb question, but 
why would you want OS mirroring when you have TSM do the mirroring between two 
Raw LV's

-----Original Message-----
From: David E Ehresman [mailto:deehre01 AT LOUISVILLE DOT EDU]
Sent: Tuesday, October 07, 2003 1:15 PM
To: ADSM-L AT VM.MARIST DOT EDU
Subject: Re: WRONG Answer: dsmfmt file size


You could just format a bunch of 2G storage pool volumes.  You know what
size they are and they format a lot faster.

>>> rogerd AT UIC DOT EDU 10/7/2003 1:30:06 PM >>>
Yes, I am too easy to satisfy. That's because after a weekend of
dsmfmt-ing, I'm declaring the thing BROKEN worse than before. I take
back those nice things I said last Friday.

I'm not using raw LVs because I want to use OS mirroring on my disk
storage pools. Also the ITSM Administrator's Guide goes to some length
to convince you not to use Raw LVs, and I tend to believe the basic
manual for any product when they come out and say something and are
that
sure of it.

What bewilders me now about dsmfmt is two questions:

1) Why does the error message tell me how big to specify for some
disks
and not for others? The Logical Volumes are identical except for size.
On a 72gb disk, if I overestimate, it says how big to use. On a 36gb
disk, it's like before, where I get to guess, and then wait several
hours to find out if I guessed right or not.

2) Why is it's calculated number so low? After dsmfmt was done, the
Unix
df command showed that filesystem only 94% full, with nearly 5gb
showing
free on df on a 72gb disk. That's a lot of waste! I'm not so sure this
new feature is such a great idea if it is going to forbid me from
getting my disk as full as possible. By the old method of trial and
error and waiting for hours, I could usually get it well over 99%
full,
according to the Unix df command.

Now I really want that option you suggest - use it all (I mean, really
use it all) and tell me how much space I've got when I'm done. The
current state of affairs in V5.1 is worse than just wasting a lot of
my
time; now it is wasting my disk space as well, and it is behaving
inconsistently.

A consistently-behaving, easy to use to allocate all of something,
version of dsmfmt is VITAL to disaster recovery capabilities!

Roger Deschner      University of Illinois at Chicago
rogerd AT uic DOT edu


On Fri, 3 Oct 2003, Joel Fuhrman wrote:

>You are to easy to satisfy.  I would like an option which says to use
it all
>and tell me what was used.  That way I only have to do the dsmfmt
once.