Search String: Display: Description: Sort:

Results:

References: [ +subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*What\s+ever\s+happened\s+to\s+Group\s+Collocation\s+\?\s*$/: 10 ]

Total 10 documents matching your query.

1. What ever happened to Group Collocation ? (score: 1)
Author: Zoltan Forray/AC/VCU <zforray AT VCU DOT EDU>
Date: Tue, 4 May 2004 10:54:03 -0400
Any one have any idea on what the target is for this much needed feature ? I thought it was originally targeted for 5.2.2 (unless I missed it somewhere !). I have 125 tapes with less than 10% used, d
/usr/local/webapp/mharc-adsm.org/html/ADSM-L/2004-05/msg00064.html (11,824 bytes)

2. Re: What ever happened to Group Collocation ? (score: 1)
Author: Joerg Pohlmann <jpohlman AT CA.IBM DOT COM>
Date: Tue, 4 May 2004 10:10:17 -0700
Zoltan, why not set up a SMALL_SERVERS policy domain which has MC definitions the same as your normal server PD with one difference - send the data to a different hierarchy where the tape storage poo
/usr/local/webapp/mharc-adsm.org/html/ADSM-L/2004-05/msg00072.html (14,129 bytes)

3. Re: What ever happened to Group Collocation ? (score: 1)
Author: Zoltan Forray/AC/VCU <zforray AT VCU DOT EDU>
Date: Tue, 4 May 2004 16:13:55 -0400
I have already thought of this idea. I was hoping for GROUP COLLOCATION. The problem with this idea/design is I have to essential duplicate *EVERYTHING*, such as admin processes, operator training, e
/usr/local/webapp/mharc-adsm.org/html/ADSM-L/2004-05/msg00077.html (15,550 bytes)

4. Re: What ever happened to Group Collocation ? (score: 1)
Author: "Rushforth, Tim" <TRushforth AT WINNIPEG DOT CA>
Date: Tue, 4 May 2004 15:21:20 -0500
If you want to use less tapes, set maxscratch to a smaller value for your storage pool. If you have more nodes than tapes then they will share tapes. Any one have any idea on what the target is for t
/usr/local/webapp/mharc-adsm.org/html/ADSM-L/2004-05/msg00078.html (12,154 bytes)

5. Re: What ever happened to Group Collocation ? (score: 1)
Author: Ted Byrne <ted.byrne AT ADELPHIA DOT NET>
Date: Tue, 4 May 2004 16:26:26 -0400
One confusion is why do I have sooooo many partially filled tapes ? I don't have this many nodes ? You might want to do some queries against the volumeusage table. That data can be massaged to see wh
/usr/local/webapp/mharc-adsm.org/html/ADSM-L/2004-05/msg00079.html (12,275 bytes)

6. Re: What ever happened to Group Collocation ? (score: 1)
Author: Andrew Raibeck <storman AT US.IBM DOT COM>
Date: Tue, 4 May 2004 17:09:05 -0600
Zoltan, I don't know what you were specifically told about the new feature, but keep in mind that any such disclosures are usually with the caveats "subject to change". :-) To the best of my knowledg
/usr/local/webapp/mharc-adsm.org/html/ADSM-L/2004-05/msg00083.html (13,646 bytes)

7. Re: What ever happened to Group Collocation ? (score: 1)
Author: Joerg Pohlmann <jpohlman AT CA.IBM DOT COM>
Date: Tue, 4 May 2004 16:44:08 -0700
The most likely reason for multiple "filling" tapes for the same node is that a filling tape is in use by reclamation or storage pool backup and migration is starting to run. Migration then cannot ad
/usr/local/webapp/mharc-adsm.org/html/ADSM-L/2004-05/msg00084.html (16,633 bytes)

8. Re: What ever happened to Group Collocation ? (score: 1)
Author: Richard Sims <rbs AT BU DOT EDU>
Date: Tue, 4 May 2004 19:49:48 -0400
... Zoltan, Andy's observations were excellent, as always. I can only add a suggestion to check subject "Shrinking (dwindling) number of available scratch tapes" in ADSM QuickFacts, where I summarize
/usr/local/webapp/mharc-adsm.org/html/ADSM-L/2004-05/msg00085.html (13,617 bytes)

9. Re: What ever happened to Group Collocation ? (score: 1)
Author: Zoltan Forray/AC/VCU <zforray AT VCU DOT EDU>
Date: Thu, 6 May 2004 08:58:47 -0400
Thanks to everyone for their suggestions on how to address this issue. Still waiting for Group Collocation :-) ! Richard Sims <rbs AT BU DOT EDU> Sent by: "ADSM: Dist Stor Manager" <ADSM-L AT VM.MARI
/usr/local/webapp/mharc-adsm.org/html/ADSM-L/2004-05/msg00128.html (13,431 bytes)

10. Re: What ever happened to Group Collocation ? (score: 1)
Author: Remco Post <r.post AT SARA DOT NL>
Date: Thu, 6 May 2004 15:18:54 +0200
I was told by my IBM rep that it was pulled from 5.2.2 because it was a new feature, and new features are only for new major releases, of course the next descion made was to reduce the number of majo
/usr/local/webapp/mharc-adsm.org/html/ADSM-L/2004-05/msg00131.html (14,963 bytes)


This search system is powered by Namazu