Mail Archive Search: <+subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*Reclamation\s+of\s+Copypool\s+$which\s+is\s+offsite$\s*$/>

Results:

References: [ +subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*Reclamation\s+of\s+Copypool\s+$which\s+is\s+offsite$\s*$/: 6 ]

Total 6 documents matching your query.

1. Reclamation of Copypool (which is offsite) (score: 1): Author: "Landreville, Frederic" <Fred_Landreville AT RJRI DOT COM>; Date: Fri, 17 Sep 1999 07:39:11 +0200; Here is our setup: We have ADSM Version 2 running on an AS400 model 640 with V4R1 and 3 3590 drives. Everything run great, backup, DBB, Copytapes etc... When we try the Reclaimation job for the COPYT; /usr/local/webapp/mharc-adsm.org/html/ADSM-L/1999-09/msg00797.html (11,611 bytes)
2. Re: Reclamation of Copypool (which is offsite) (score: 1): Author: "Kelly J. Lipp" <lipp AT STORSOL DOT COM>; Date: Fri, 17 Sep 1999 10:22:12 -0600; The reclamation of copypool tapes is inherently slower than other operations. Think about what's going on. A copy pool tape reclamation will get data from primary pool tapes. The copypool volume bein; /usr/local/webapp/mharc-adsm.org/html/ADSM-L/1999-09/msg00814.html (11,753 bytes)
3. Reclamation of Copypool (which is offsite) (score: 1): Author: ADSM: Dist Stor Manager [mailto:ADSM-L AT VM.MARIST DOT EDU]On Behalf Of; Date: Sun, 04 Oct 2015 17:39:21 -0500; Here is our setup: We have ADSM Version 2 running on an AS400 model 640 with V4R1 and 3 3590 drives. Everything run great, backup, DBB, Copytapes etc... When we try the Reclaimation job for the COPYT; /usr/local/webapp/mharc-adsm.org/html/ADSM-L/1999-09/msg00815.html (11,688 bytes)
4. Re: Reclamation of Copypool (which is offsite) (score: 1): Author: "Landreville, Frederic" <Fred_Landreville AT RJRI DOT COM>; Date: Mon, 27 Sep 1999 08:19:29 +0200; Found my problem! For ADSM, we installed a new 3590 tape drive (for a total of 4). Strangely, all "write" operations (Daily copypool copies, DBBs etc) worked fine on the new tape drive. When a Tape R; /usr/local/webapp/mharc-adsm.org/html/ADSM-L/1999-09/msg01190.html (11,493 bytes)
5. Re: Reclamation of Copypool (which is offsite) (score: 1): Author: Kelly J. Lipp [mailto:lipp AT storsol DOT com]; Date: Sun, 04 Oct 2015 17:39:22 -0500; The reclamation of copypool tapes is inherently slower than other operations. Think about what's going on. A copy pool tape reclamation will get data from primary pool tapes. The copypool volume bein; /usr/local/webapp/mharc-adsm.org/html/ADSM-L/1999-09/msg01191.html (11,745 bytes)
6. Re: Reclamation of Copypool (which is offsite) (score: 1): Author: Kenneth Bury <kbury AT CAROLINA.RR DOT COM>; Date: Mon, 27 Sep 1999 20:41:02 -0400; I would check your microcode levels on your drives to make sure that they are all at the same level. That microcode can really make a difference in the performance of the drive. Is this new drive a 3; /usr/local/webapp/mharc-adsm.org/html/ADSM-L/1999-09/msg01250.html (15,566 bytes)

Current List: 1 - 6
Page: [1]