Thanks for all the information ... very useful

would anyone mind sharing assessment they have conducted or commission to be
conducted?

On Sun, Mar 14, 2010 at 3:36 PM, Xav Paice <xpaice AT oss.co DOT nz> wrote:

> ----- "yoda woya" <yodawoya AT GMAIL DOT COM> wrote:
>
> > From: "yoda woya" <yodawoya AT GMAIL DOT COM>
> > To: ADSM-L AT VM.MARIST DOT EDU
> > Sent: Sunday, 14 March, 2010 2:47:10 PM
> > Subject: [ADSM-L] assessing the health TSM installation
> >
> > if I were to be looking  to assess the health of TSM, what would be
> > the  top
> > things to look for
>
> off the top of my head (we use a template for this at the office):
> - database backups are frequent enough and allow for the desired recovery
> point of the organisation
> - copy pools and database backups are sent off site (i.e. not left in the
> library or in a cardboard box beside it)
> - performance bottlenecks (there's a client and server commands to check
> this)
> - spread of tapes - if a restore needs 100 tape mounts then it's not going
> to be acceptable
> - daily maintenance routines, is everything getting done or is something
> missing (maybe expiry never gets done or something like that)
> - where is the time of the administrator spent, is there a better way to
> achieve the same result?
> - what's the history of the installation - has it suffered downtime issues
> from something, etc?
> - what's the organisational goals for TSM - do the copygroup settings match
> that, is there wasted space or is data getting missed?
>
> Often I come across installations that are great except for a few minor
> config settings that prevent perfect operation - pulling tapes out of the
> library from the primary stgpool without setting an overflow location, or
> not setting reusedelay on copy pools.
>