I don't think I've been able to find a way to find which volumes these are
> without actually running the expiration or move data and failing the
mount.
> Is there a good way to find this information out?

My assumption here is that all the tapes are in the same storage pool.
Because normally reclamation threshold value of the storage pool is used to
kick off reclamation.. would it be possible to run select statement to
generate the list of tapes in that pool with pct reclaim value.

For example

select volume_name,stgpool_name,access,pct_reclaim, from volumes where
stgpool_name='MYSTORAGENAME' order by pct_reclaim desc

After that you can generate list of tapes you will need to reclam for given
% and see if those tapes are onsite or offsite.

Sung Y. Lee
----- Forwarded by Sung Y Lee/Austin/IBM on 02/24/2005 09:21 AM -----

"ADSM: Dist Stor Manager" <ADSM-L AT VM.MARIST DOT EDU> wrote on 02/23/2005
02:31:18 PM:

> Greetings.  I've got another reclamation-related question.  I've gotsome
copy
> stgpools which, though they are theoretically onsite pools, I'm having to
> check out of the library.  In the past, I've worked with this by
re-inserting
> the volumes which are interesting from a reclamation perspective, but
there's
> a problem with this strategy:
>
> In order to reclaim a given volume, you really need three different ones:
The
> target volume, and the volumes "adjacent" to the target: The one with the
> other half of the aggregate which comes first on the target volume, and
the
> one with the other half of the aggregate that comes last.
>
> I don't think I've been able to find a way to find which volumes these
are
> without actually running the expiration or move data and failing the
mount.
> Is there a good way to find this information out?
>
> Ideally, I'd like to have my temporary tapehandling methods go something
like:
>
> (early in day) Check in all volumes necessary for optimistic
> reclamation workload
>
> (day) Reclaim volumes
>
> (late in day) check out all copy-pool volumes which are 'FULL' and in the
>               library.
>
>
> Does this make sense? Anyone got a hole in that logic?
>
>
> - Allen S. Rout