ADSM-L

Re: Useful 'move data' options

1998-07-16 20:13:34
Subject: Re: Useful 'move data' options
From: Bruce Elrick <belrick AT HOME DOT COM>
Date: Thu, 16 Jul 1998 18:13:34 -0600
I hope you didn't think I had any say over the matter!  Other than to
get people on ADSM-L to do "me too"'s to the point that maybe
development would consider it.

An open request to Cyndie Behrens...could this be added to the official
list of requested features?

Could someone intimate with the internals of ADSM comment of the
feasability of my suggestion?

Cheers...
Bruce

Steffan Rhoads wrote:
>
> After some thinking and subsequently meeting a new customer with a large ADSM
> installation (2 sites, 2 UNIX ADSM servers each with middlin DLT libraries, 
> @40
> servers/clients each site) and seeing the mess they have these options would 
> be
> LIFESAVERS!  Were going to have to create all new policy domains, storage 
> pools
> and schedules: you can imagine the processing time that's going to be spent 
> and
> how usefull these additional MOVE DATA options would be.
>
> How soon?
>
> Bruce Elrick wrote:
>
> > Would anyone find the following options to the 'move data' command
> > useful?
> >
> > type
> >    all - all data on volume, default
> >    backup - backup data
> >    archive - archive data
> >    spacemanaged - space managed data
> >    - allow pairs of the above three types
> >
> > node
> >    - specify a list of nodes whose data is to be moved
> >
> > filespace
> >    - specify a list of filespaces whose data is to be moved - may
> > require
> >    the node option specified
> >
> > Since migration from sequential storage pools to sequential storage
> > pools
> > already moves collocation clusters, the implementation of the latter two
> >
> > options should be trivial.  The implementation of the first option might
> > be
> > more difficult but would be immensely valuable.  I've seen a number of
> > situations where backup, archive, and space managed data are mixed in
> > a storage pool (bad idea from a data integrity point of view) and there
> > is
> > currently no way to separate the data.
> >
> > Anyone agree on this?
> >
> > Cheers...
> > Bruce
>
> --
> Steffan Rhoads
> Lead Technical Consultant
> Think Enterprise Solutions
> 10 Holland
> Irvine, California  92618-2504
> srhoads AT westernmicro DOT com