Does tape reclamation tend to collocate files in a non-collocated
sequential storage pool?

Well, I'd guess that the answer is "no".

I have a bunch of relatively low priority machines that I have to back
up to tape, but which don't need to have dedicated tapes.  I'd like to
have their storage pool share a device class (i.e., library) with a
collocated pool, and to be able to have lots of scratch tapes available
for the the collocated pool.  What I'd like to see is that over time,
as tapes are reclaimed, that some degree of file consolidation happens.

I have two 3570-B11 libraries (i.e., one tape drive each).  Another
option would be to have lib1 contain the collocated storage pools, and
the other contain the non-collocated pools (i.e., this basic primary pool
I'm talking about, and the copy pool for the server).

What strategies would you suggest?

Thanks,
Rich

Richard C. Dempsey                 email: dempsey AT kodak DOT com
Public Online Services             pager: 716-975-3539
11th Floor, Bldg 83, RL            phone: 716-477-3457
Eastman Kodak Company              fax:   716-722-3885
Rochester, NY 14650-2203