Richard,

That is right on.  I knew it had to be something simple.  I copy the
disk pool before migration, and then sync up the tape pools.  But, I
migrate down to 1%, and there was about 40GB of data still in the disk
pool that got copied, but not migrated.  I knew it had to be something
simple, but I just couldn't come up with it.  Thanks.

On Wed, 17 Mar 2004, Richard Sims wrote:

> ...
> >I cannot figure out why the copypool would ever have more data in it
> >than the primary pool.  Any ideas?
> ...
>
> The most simple explanation would be that the copy storage pool was the
> target of a primary storage pool other than what you expect, at some
> time in the past.  You can perhaps most readily pursue this by looking
> into Occupancy values for the various nodes and filespaces which
> participate in that copy pool.
>
>     Richard Sims
>