Hi Andy,

A 'move data' on a copy stg pool volume works, the primary stg pool volume(s) 
is/are used for the operation. It just does not work for tapes that contain 
NDMP backups (primary or copy).

regards,
Kurt
________________________________________
Van: ADSM: Dist Stor Manager [ADSM-L AT VM.MARIST DOT EDU] namens 
Huebner,Andy,FORT WORTH,IT [Andy.Huebner AT ALCONLABS DOT COM]
Verzonden: donderdag 9 augustus 2012 16:00
Aan: ADSM-L AT VM.MARIST DOT EDU
Onderwerp: Re: [ADSM-L] migrating tape storage pools

You cannot use move data on a copy tape.  I have tried.
I am very interested if you find a good solution.  We are moving some of our 
copies to a different drive type.


Andy Huebner

-----Original Message-----
From: ADSM: Dist Stor Manager [mailto:ADSM-L AT VM.MARIST DOT EDU] On Behalf Of 
BEYERS Kurt
Sent: Thursday, August 09, 2012 3:09 AM
To: ADSM-L AT VM.MARIST DOT EDU
Subject: [ADSM-L] migrating tape storage pools

Good morning,

We are in the process of migrating several tape storage pools, both primary and 
copy, from LTO generation x to LTO generation y.

It is easy for primary storage pools, since the incremental backup mechanism is 
taking all the primary storage pools in scope:

*         Redirect the backups to an LTO_Y storage pool

*         Migrate in the background  the LTO_X storage pool to the LTO_Y with a 
duration of x minutes

However  this does not work for copy storage pools since there is a valid 
reason why a backup would be kept in multiple copy storage pool volumes. But 
this implies that the copy storage pool from generation LTO_Y needs to be 
rebuild from scratch. Which is time consuming and expensive (more tape volumes, 
more slots,more offsite volumes ....). Are there really no other workarounds 
available?

An option might be that given the fact we use dedicated device classes for each 
 sequential storage pool and that multiple libraries will be or are  defined 
for each LTO generation:


*         A DRM volume is linked to a copy storage pool

*         The copy storage pool is linked to a device class

*         Hence change the library in the device class from LTO_X to LTO_Y for 
the copy storage pool

Would this workaround work? Then I could perform a daily move data in the 
background to get rid from the LTO_X copy storage pool volumes. Will test it 
myself of course.

It would be great too if IBM  could consider introducing the concept of a  
'copy storage pool group' consisting of multiple copy storage pools that 
contains only 1 backup of the item.  Perhaps I should raise an RFC for it if 
other TSM users find it also a good feature. So please provide me some 
feedback. Thanks in advance!

Regards,
Kurt





*** Disclaimer ***
Vlaamse Radio- en Televisieomroeporganisatie
Auguste Reyerslaan 52, 1043 Brussel

nv van publiek recht
BTW BE 0244.142.664
RPR Brussel
http://www.vrt.be/gebruiksvoorwaarden

This e-mail (including any attachments) is confidential and may be legally 
privileged. If you are not an intended recipient or an authorized 
representative of an intended recipient, you are prohibited from using, copying 
or distributing the information in this e-mail or its attachments. If you have 
received this e-mail in error, please notify the sender immediately by return 
e-mail and delete all copies of this message and any attachments.

Thank you.
*** Disclaimer ***
Vlaamse Radio- en Televisieomroeporganisatie
Auguste Reyerslaan 52, 1043 Brussel

nv van publiek recht
BTW BE 0244.142.664
RPR Brussel
http://www.vrt.be/gebruiksvoorwaarden