ADSM-L

Re: Split Storage Pool across Devclass

2005-12-09 17:06:01
Subject: Re: Split Storage Pool across Devclass
From: Steven Harris <steve AT STEVENHARRIS DOT INFO>
To: ADSM-L AT VM.MARIST DOT EDU
Date: Sat, 10 Dec 2005 08:05:48 +1000
Hi Pretorius.

no, you can't directly spread a tape pool across multiple libraries,
if that is what you are asking.

You have two choices,

The first is to split the hierarchy into multiple node -> diskpool ->
tapepool streams.  Data is directed into one or the other streams
using different managementclasses, which are assigned via client
options (options file or client option sets), or you can set up more
than one policy domain and have the classes in one domain point to
one hierarchy and in the other point to the second, then assign nodes
to domains to split the load.

The easier option may be to set up your second tape device as the
next pool in the hierarchy

e.g.  diskpool->tape1pool->tape2pool

and just as you would from disk to tape you can set tape1 to tape2
migration thresholds, force migrations and so on.

A couple of caveats though,  you can if i recall correctly, only use
one migration process per sequential storage pool, so the tape to
tape migration may be slow and tie up drives for along time.  Also,
when migrating, TSM moves the node that has the most data in this
storagepool first, and this may be undesirable depending on the
particlular cirumstances on your server.

Of course, combinations of these two approaches are also possible.


HTH
Steve


Steven Harris

AIX and TSM Administrator
steve AT stevenharris DOT info


On 10/12/2005, at 7:27 AM, Pretorius Louw <louw AT sun.ac DOT za> wrote:

Hi guys, I dont know if this is a stupid question but I cant find this
anywhere.

Im running low on space and want to split my Tapepool across more
than 1
TapeDevice, is this possible?

Cheers

Louw Pretorius

_______________________________

Informasie Tegnologie

Stellenbosch Universiteit



There are only 10 kinds of people in the world: Those who understand
binary and those who don't





<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>