Hello, 

one reason why I updated to version 5.3 was that there is the
possibility to create collocation groups. 

I have now packed all small servers (about 20 of them) in one group,
about 10 medium servers in another group and I made groups for large
servers with about 1-3 nodes each. So now no server is spread across
more than 1-4 tapes (except for the really large ones) and the tapes
have a good utilization.

One problem still existing is that for each collocation group (we have 6
of them) there is one tape send to the offsite location each day (we
have collocation=group turned on the copy pool). And as we do offsite
reclamation only on the weekend we have 5*6=30 tapes that are very
little utilized at the end of the week. But I think there is no way
around this.   

I'm not sure if this might work, but couldn't you just use the "move
data STGPOOL_NAME"-command to move the data from your 1% utilized
volumes?

regards,


Volker Maibaum
Tel: +49 711 939 0972
Fax: +49 711 939 160972
volker.maibaum AT eberspaecher DOT com
 

Am Donnerstag, den 25.08.2005, 16:56 -0700 schrieb Roark Ludwig:
> I have been handed a TSM system in the past week that has been running for
> a year.  IT has collocation = yes for TAPEPOOL and COPYPOOLS.   this system
> is running TSM 5.2.2.
> 
> We have run out of tapes as the setting for collocation (yes) is trying to
> use a tape for each node (as I understand it, ,,please correct me if I am
> wrong)..
> 
> We have decided that since we have about  80 volumes with less then 1%
> utilized and 20 or so with large utilization %'s to set COLLOCATION=NO for
> the TAPEPOOL and COPYPOOLS.
> 
> We are expecting to add another set of nodes and don't wish to consume more
> of our volumes (with small percent utilization) as we add the nodes.
> 
> Question ..
> 
> Will this setting COLLOCATION=NO stop the addition of volumes?  (I expect
> the answer is YES,, please correct me if I am wrong.)
> 
> Now to the second question.
> 
> I see no easy way to have Space Reclamation condense the volumes included
> in the two pools as it will only process "FULL" volumes. (Again Please jump
> in here).
> 
> QUESTION:  is it acceptable to set the status from "FILLING" to "FULL" for
> the volumes with low percentage utilized to force Space Reclamation ?
> 
> OR
> 
> is there an easier way to accomplish the GOAL of reducing the number of
> volumes needed for the pools?    (given that we have set COLLOCATION=NO)
> or should we simply wait out the natural filling of the volumes and allow
> normal Space Reclamation as time proceeds?
> 
> 
> Has anyone done this in the past?
> 
> How have others dealt with this??
> 
> 
> Thanks for any input.
>