We have an STK 9710 with 5 DLT drives and 3 3490 drives in it.
The way that works is to create two separate LIBRARY definitions.
The fact that they are within the same physical box doesn't bother ADSM at
all.

So you create 1 library, and define drives to it, then create another
library and define drives to it.

And you define two devclasses, one pointing to each library, and point your
COPY pool at whichever one you want.

And it works fine.  So you could separate your drives that way if you are
trying to guarantee that the copy pool drives are never used for primary
tapes, etc.  The only drawback is that then you have to check in tapes
separately to each library.

So the answer is it will work, but I think Dwight's solution of just setting
appropriate mount limits is better!

===============================================================
Wanda Prather
Johns Hopkins Applied Physics Lab
443-778-8769
wanda_prather AT jhuapl DOT edu

"Intelligence has much less practical application than you'd think."
              - Scott Adams/Dilbert
===============================================================


> ----------
> From:         Amerman, Anthony S.[SMTP:ASAmerman AT leggmason DOT com]
> Sent:         Tuesday, June 23, 1998 4:14 PM
> To:   ADSM-L AT vm.marist DOT edu
> Subject:      Using separate tape drives for stgpools.
>
> Hi,
>  I want to know if anyone has tried this and if it can work or not...
>  We have 6 drives in our STK9714 library, I want to know if I can assign
> 2 of the 6 tape drives to be used for making an offsite copy pool.  So
> the normal scheduled backups are done on 4 of the drives and the offsite
> copy pool is made with the other 2.
> Would this work?
>
> Thanks in advance,
>
> Shane
>
>
> Anthony Shane Amerman
> Legg Mason, Corporate Technology
> UNIX Systems Engineer
> 410-454-3081 25th Floor
>