> 3.  I discovered that it did not matter what MC the directories where bond
>     to.  The directory structures are saved in the TSM data base.

You are correct in that most directories are stored in the TSM data base.
They are stored there as long as they can be described in less than some
number of bytes, which I think is 256.  If the name plus the access control
information exceeds the number of bytes, then its written to the dirmc.


On Wed, 9 Jan 2002, Al Narzisi wrote:

> TSM'ers,
>
> I am resending.  Does anybody know what the story is on directories?
>
> Thanks,
> Al
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: Al Narzisi
> To: ADSM: Dist Stor Manager
> Sent: Monday, January 07, 2002 9:57 AM
> Subject: DIRMC
>
>
> I am still not clear where or when the use of DIRMC may have changed from 
> what I understood from the red book "Getting Started with TSM".  In the red 
> book example, a separate management class pointed to by DIRMC in dsmopt of 
> the client was created to send directory structures to a disk storage pool.  
> This would allow rapid restoration of the directory structures during 
> recovery.  During testing, I discovered (Win2K server and Win2K client TSM 
> 4.1):
>
> 1.  Even if you use DIRMC to define the management class of directories, the 
> directories would still default to the management class with the highest 
> retention value.  Only after coding NOLIMIT on the management class pointed 
> to by DIRMC, did the directories get bond to the management class coded for 
> DIRMC.
>
> 2.  After the directories where bonded to the correct management class ( a MC 
> that had a backup copy group with a destination of a disk storage pool 
> defined exclusively for my directories), I discovered that the directories 
> did not go to that storage pool.
>
> 3.  I discovered that it did not matter what MC the directories where bond to.
>     The directory structures are saved in the TSM data base.
>
> So, can anyone enlighten me on when this change occurred?  The red book 
> obviously does not indicate this behavior for the management of directory 
> structures.  Am I missing something here?  Are there any considerations for 
> TSM DB sizing because the directory structures are stored in the DB?  Where 
> is this documented?
>
> Thanks for your input,
> Al
>