In <1A16375E84ABD111AF2200203568362F30AF AT calypso.cfr.usf DOT edu>, on 
07/17/98
   at 09:15 AM, "Weeks, Debbie" <debbie AT ADMIN.USF DOT EDU> said:

>I agree!  This type of function might also enable me to only send the
>active versions offsite, something we are truly interested in.

>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Hilton Tina [SMTP:HiltonT AT TCE DOT COM]
>> Sent: Friday, July 17, 1998 8:16 AM
>> To:   ADSM-L AT VM.MARIST DOT EDU
>> Subject:      Re: Useful 'move data' options
>>
>> I think another handy addition to either mov data or reclamation would
>> be to move all the active files to a set of tapes, separate from the
>> inactive files.  It that was done every so often it would reduce the
>> number of tapes needed to restore a node.  I've had some people try to
>> get me to schedule full backups to accomplish this, but I've been able
>> to refuse so far.
>>
>> Anyone else agree?
>>

Slow down and and think this thru a little bit.  To make copypool tapes as
efficiently as possible you should be backing up the disk storagepool
frequently.  I do it 4 times a day.  Since backup storagepool is an
incremental process it only takes the new files which are all active
versions.

Regarding enhancing move data, I know IBM already has a user
requirement for it because I submitted one at a GUIDE conference more than 3
years ago.  Unfortunately it was returned as a suggestion. Perhaps someone
at IBM could look up the number so others
can concur on it.  This is still the best procedure isn't it?

--
-----------------------------------------------------------
-----------------------------------------------------------
Bill Colwell
Bill Colwell
C. S. Draper Lab
Cambridge, Ma.
bcolwell AT draper DOT com
-----------------------------------------------------------
=========================================================================