Hi Dave. The two situations where I am experiencing this are non-dedupe
environments. Both installations have a copypool using devclass=vv (devclass
vv is a server device type device class). In both situations there is a
vvpool -> vvtape storage pool hierarchy on the target server such that
prepare devc=vv_small pops the RPF archive object onto a device class disk
storage pool and the large device class vv archive objects can be directed
either to disk or the next storage pool based on maxsize for the vvpool. In
one installation the next storage pool is device class LTO, and in the other
installation it's device class SATA which is a device type FILE device
class. Both installations were v5 to v6 upgrades. In the tape-less
environment, I have set delgraceperiod to 0 because of disk space
constraints. Our problem in both environments is a superset of

http://www-01.ibm.com/support/docview.wss?uid=swg21395087

which talks only about the database backups.

As to being able to stuff the archive objects into a dedupe pool, I assume
that this is now allowed, based on

http://www-01.ibm.com/support/docview.wss?uid=swg1IC64970

The question is, will the archive objects actually be deduped (assuming that
the target server has DEDUPREQUIRESBACKUP NO set in dsmserv.opt).

There is a PMR in the process of being submitted, once I have the PMR number
I will send it to your LN ID.

Joerg Pohlmann
250-686-3711

-----Original Message-----
From: ADSM: Dist Stor Manager [mailto:ADSM-L AT VM.MARIST DOT EDU] On Behalf Of
Dave Canan
Sent: Wednesday, July 14, 2010 10:30
To: ADSM-L AT VM.MARIST DOT EDU
Subject: Re: [ADSM-L] TSM v6 - virtual volume deletion leaves archive
objects on target server

Joerg, I checked with development on this. Are you doing this with a dedup
storage pool? They did have one APAR for that 2 months ago. I would first
suggest getting a PMR opened; if you do that, I can pursue it.



Dave Canan
IBM Advanced Technical Support
TSM Performance
ddcananATUSDOTIBMDOTCOM

On Mon, Jul 12, 2010 at 6:16 PM, J. Pohlmann <jpohlmann AT shaw DOT ca> wrote:

> I am just wondering if other folks have encountered this problem where
> the deletion of a virtual volume (for example as result of
> reclamation) on the source server leaves the archive object "dangling" on
the target server.
> Delgraceperiod is the default of 5 days. Reconcile volumes fix=yes
> cleans it all up again. I have seen this on TSM v6.1 and v6.2. TSM v5
> works fine with this default. Does anyone have a fix for this? I have
> been doing ad-hoc periodic reconcile volumes for months on a v6
> virtual volume environment because I first suspected server-to-server
> communications problems, but then saw the same thing happen in other
> installations.
>
>
>
> Joerg Pohlmann
>
> 250-585-3711
>