ADSM Storage Management 102

Date:     January 26, 1996            Time:    07:53
From:    Jerry Lawson
    ITT Hartford Insurance Group
    (203) 547-2960    jlawson AT itthartford DOT com
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
First - I want to thank all of you who responded to my earlier "Storage
First - I want to thank all of you who responded to my earlier "Storage
Management 101" question.  I'm now ready to move on to a harder issue!

We have decided that we need to split up am existing storage pool setup (and
associated management classes) into two separate pools.  This is being done
primarily because of changes we need to make in how tapes are managed, but the
net effect will be a separation of our existing large pool into two pools; one
for servers, and one for desktop machines.  Thanks to the earlier answers, we
now have the  new pools setup on our MVS Server.  (Both pools will be on the
same server.)

Now for Storage Management 102:

It appears that there are 3 ways to do this:

1.  We can run Export/Import and move everything associated with a node from
one pool to another.

2.  We can use the GUI interface, and simply change the Policy Domain that a
node is assigned, giving it a new Policy Domain in the new pool.

3.  I can change the Backup definitions for a Policy Domain, substituting the
new pool name for the old one.  This would do all the nodes in a Policy Domain
at one time, as opposed to the above method, which is by node.

I have concerns about what happens with all of the above three methods.  The
first one (Import/Export) seems to have a lot of overhead associated with it
that might be unnecessary, since we are not really moving anyone off of the
server - just within pools.  It appears that I can control the assignment of
the node to a new Policy Domain and/or Storage pool with this method; however,
since these are server backups, and we use 3480 tape, there are many, many
tape volumes associated with each node.

The second and third choices seem much better suited to my needs, since we are
staying on the same server.  I ran a test of the second method, and it looked
to be reasonable efficient, with only a rebinding of the data to the new
Policy Domain when the next incremental was run.  However, it appears to me
that I now have data spread across 4 storage pools - the DASD and Tape pools
from the original Domain, and the DASD and tape pools from the new domain.  Is
this a problem?

We have rejected Move Data as an option, since it works on a pool level,
rather than a node level.  I haven't got a clue which tape volumes are
involved here, since there is no easy way to check which tapes contain data
for which clients without listing the contents of each of the 600 tapes we
already have in use.

Have any of you tried to do this?  Do you have a suggestion that I have missed
or a better way of doing this?

Thanks for your time - this was a rather long post.

Jerry Lawson
ITT Hartford Insurance Group
jlawson AT itthartford DOT com