ADSM-L

Re: Reclaimed to a different pool?!

2015-10-04 17:41:28
Subject: Re: Reclaimed to a different pool?!
From: Adam Slesinger <aslesinger AT US.BNSMC DOT COM>
To: ADSM-L AT VM.MARIST DOT EDU <ADSM-L AT VM.MARIST DOT EDU>
Date: 28 July 1999 21:55
>Sorry if I wasn't clear enough.  During reclamation of the offsite tape
copy pool, TAPECOPYPOOL, a volume from our primary onsite
>tape pool, TAPEPOOL, was grabbed and used as the output volume for the
reclamation process.  Can anyone tell me why on earth ADSM
>would do this?  It should have created a new tape in TAPECOPYPOOL and have
written the data to that volume to be taken offsite,
>right?  My concern is that TAPECOPYPOOL is now not an exact duplicate of
TAPEPOOL because the reclamation removed the data from
>the four offsite tapes in TAPECOPYPOOL and consolidated it onto a tape in
TAPEPOOL .  Does anybody have any ideas?  Thank you!
>
>adam
>__________________
>Adam Slesinger
>Corporate Information Systems
>Brown & Sharpe, RI
>Phone: (401) 886-2236
>Pager: (800) 913-5395
>Email: aslesinger AT us.bnsmc DOT com
>
>
>
>Richard Cowen wrote:
>
>> >We have a primary tape pool (TAPEPOOL) and a copy pool (TAPECOPYPOOL)
>> >both made up of DLT tapes.  We're in the process of creating processes
>> >to send and retrieve the copy pool tapes to our offsite location without
>> >the help DRM.  We created a schedule to kick off reclamation of the copy
>> >pool tapes on Sunday, so there would be tapes to return on Monday.  When
>> >I checked the activity log for the reclamation, it had identified 4
>> >offsite tapes in TAPECOPYPOOL that were eligible to be reclaimed.  The
>> >weird thing is that it grabbed and wrote the data to a private volume in
>> >TAPEPOOL!  I was under the impression that a new tape volume would be
>> >defined in TAPECOPYPOOL, the data would be written to that tape, we'd
>> >send that tape offsite, and bring the other 4, now empty, tapes back.
>> >Could someone tell what a possible reason exists for it to have grabbed
>> >a tape from a different pool as the output of the reclamation??
>>
>> What pool did it go to?
>> Sample of one of mine:
>>
>> 07/23/99   11:39:20      ANR2202I Storage pool BACKUP3590_OFFSITE
updated.
>> 07/23/99   11:39:20      ANR0984I Process 467 for SPACE RECLAMATION
started
>>                           in the BACKGROUND at 11:39:20.
>> 07/23/99   11:39:20      ANR1040I Space reclamation started for volume
M00386,
>>                           storage pool BACKUP3590_OFFSITE (process number
467).
>>
>> ...
>> 07/23/99   11:41:53      ANR1044I Removable volume M00582 is required for
space    <== source of files to copy
>>                           reclamation.
>> 07/23/99   11:41:53      ANR8324I 3590 volume M00582 is expected to be
mounted
>>                           (R/O).
>> 07/23/99   11:43:01      ANR8337I 3590 volume M00368 mounted in drive
DRIVE02
>>                           (/dev/rmt1).
>> 07/23/99   11:43:02      ANR8337I 3590 volume M00582 mounted in drive
DRIVE01
>>                           (/dev/rmt0).
>> ....
>> 07/23/99   11:55:47      ANR8341I End-of-volume reached for 3590 volume
M00368.     <== existing volume in BACKUP3590_OFFSITE
>> 07/23/99   11:55:51      ANR8336I Verifying label of 3590 volume M00368
in drive
>>                           DRIVE02 (/dev/rmt1).
>> 07/23/99   11:56:17      ANR8468I 3590 volume M00368 dismounted from
drive DRIVE02
>>                           (/dev/rmt1) in library MAGSTAR3494.
>> 07/23/99   11:59:35      ANR8337I 3590 volume M00655 mounted in drive
DRIVE02
>>                           (/dev/rmt1).
>> 07/23/99   11:59:37      ANR1340I Scratch volume M00655 is now defined in
storage
>>                           pool BACKUP3590_OFFSITE.
<== new volume in BACKUP3590_OFFSITE
>>
>> Richard
>
>--
<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>