Instead of letting your DataDomain replicate your primary storage pool to your 
offsite location, you instead have two copy pools, one of which is off-site? 

I can see some advantages to using a copy storage pool on-site as well as the 
primary storage pool, but why not use the DDR to replicate the copy storage 
pool to off-site instead of defining the second storage pool to TSM? DDRs are 
good at replication, and doing it this way would simplify your TSM processes 
(and, presumably, scripts). 

Nick


On Apr 14, 2013, at 4:38 AM, Grigori Solonovitch <Grigori.Solonovitch AT 
AHLIUNITED DOT COM> wrote:

> Unfortunately, it is quite difficult to move pools offline due to other 
> active operations.
> I have very fast VTL primary and FILE copy pools at HO, but sometime TSM 
> Server is selecting the slowest NFS copy pool from DRS for restore operation.
> 
> Grigori G. Solonovitch
> Senior Systems Architect  Ahli United Bank Kuwait  www.ahliunited.com.kw
> 
> Please consider the environment before printing this E-mail
> 
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: ADSM: Dist Stor Manager [mailto:ADSM-L AT VM.MARIST DOT EDU] On Behalf 
> Of Nick Laflamme
> Sent: 14 04 2013 12:33 PM
> To: ADSM-L AT VM.MARIST DOT EDU
> Subject: Re: [ADSM-L] Using pools during restore
> 
> "UPDATE STG pool1 ACC=UNAVAIL"  would tell TSM not to try to use that 
> particular storage pool. That might be heavy-handed in normal operations, but 
> it works well in DR situations.
> 
> What problem are you really trying to solve? :-) You're going to have the 
> same "rehydrate" performance penalty whether it's VTL or NFS, for example.
> 
> Nick