I agree.  I have long thought that ADSM is lacking a "hold" function that
could be used manually or automatically to put processes on hold when it is
necessary for other functions to run.  This would not only come in handy
during pre-emption, but when I need to quickly do something with the server
and then resume processing.

No responses have come in on my previous note regarding tapes being marked
unavailable, but as it relates to this, I will mention it again.   If a
process is waiting for a tape when it is pre-empted, the tape it was waiting
for will be marked as unavailable.  If the process could be placed on hold
instead of cancelled it would also prevent the erroneous marking of the tape
as unavailable.

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Abeid Hamad Al-Habsy [SMTP:abeid.ahh.habsy AT PDO.CO DOT OM]
> Sent: Saturday, May 01, 1999 3:04 AM
> To:   ADSM-L AT VM.MARIST DOT EDU
> Subject:      ADSM PRE- EMPTION of processes
>
> We use administrative schedules for backing up  primary storage pools
> to copy storage pools, but  the  backup storage pools processes are
> often pre-empted by higher priority processes such as restore. The ADSM
> server does not keep track of the pre-empted processes and restart them
> later on. I think, It could be better for future ADSM versions to allow
> the customer to have a choice as how the ADSM should behave during
> pre-emptions. I understand that the pre-emption can be disabled, but
> this is not the solution for every customer -  What are your  suggestions
> ?
>
> Regards,
> Abeid Al-Habsy, TCS/11
> Petroleum Development Oman LLC.