Check out DD OS 5.0 and "mtrees" for some enhancements around snapshot
granularity.

-----Original Message-----
From: ADSM: Dist Stor Manager [mailto:ADSM-L AT VM.MARIST DOT EDU] On Behalf Of
Richard Rhodes
Sent: Friday, June 17, 2011 12:23 PM
To: ADSM-L AT VM.MARIST DOT EDU
Subject: Re: [ADSM-L] tsm and data domain

We debated having a copy pool when doing our DD setup.  We finally
decided
that using a daily DD snapshot was an acceptable solution.  We take a
snapshot a little while after the TSM db backup completes (tsm db backup
is on the DD in it's own filepool).  Snapshots are kept for 3 days which
is our tsm db backup retension and also our reuse delay.   The DD
snapshot
feature was a disappointment.  It's all or nothing, covering the entire
DD
filesystem.  To be useful it needs to be made per some defined
subdirectory or replication context.

Rick




From:   Rick Adamson <RickAdamson AT WINN-DIXIE DOT COM>
To:     ADSM-L AT VM.MARIST DOT EDU
Date:   06/17/2011 11:10 AM
Subject:        Re: tsm and data domain
Sent by:        "ADSM: Dist Stor Manager" <ADSM-L AT VM.MARIST DOT EDU>



Steven,
  I agree, you comment is regard to the copy pools is something I am a
little concerned with. I am preparing the move from 5.5 to ver 6.2 now
and am in conversations with management on that very subject so I can
procure the needed resources.
  The talks are somewhat challenging to say the least as the DD reps had
already told them that the copy pools were not necessary. My concern led
to the age-old question "what are the chances that something like that
would happen to us?"
Just in case I do have the proverbial warning email archived away.


~Rick


-----Original Message-----
From: ADSM: Dist Stor Manager [mailto:ADSM-L AT VM.MARIST DOT EDU] On Behalf Of
Steven Langdale
Sent: Friday, June 17, 2011 10:30 AM
To: ADSM-L AT VM.MARIST DOT EDU
Subject: Re: [ADSM-L] tsm and data domain

>
> I have had DD implemented for about a year now, but I fail to
understand
> why anyone would utilize the DD VTL license when using TSM?
>
> Mine are setup as a simple SAN device with defined directories that
> correspond to my TSM primary storage pools. I have the device calss in
> TSM set as the type "file" and let TSM manage the virtual volumes as
it
> would any other disk storage. There is another DD system that is
located
> at our DR facility, and all data including TSM DB backups are
replicated
> to that location. This allows me to no longer have copy pools.
>
>
Rick

A not uncommon configuration, I have also used DD's of NFS for disk
pools as
well.  Then only time I've seen them as VTL's is when LAN Free was
required.

I would however think again about not having a copy pool as you are
leaving
yourself open to TSM logically corrupting data and having no backup.




-----------------------------------------
The information contained in this message is intended only for the
personal and confidential use of the recipient(s) named above. If
the reader of this message is not the intended recipient or an
agent responsible for delivering it to the intended recipient, you
are hereby notified that you have received this document in error
and that any review, dissemination, distribution, or copying of
this message is strictly prohibited. If you have received this
communication in error, please notify us immediately, and delete
the original message.



The information contained in this transmission may contain privileged and 
confidential information. 
It is intended only for the use of the person(s) named above. If you are not 
the intended  
recipient, you are hereby notified that any review, dissemination, distribution 
or  
duplication of this communication is strictly prohibited. If you are not the 
intended recipient, 
please contact the sender by reply email and destroy all copies of the original 
message. 
To reply to our email administrator directly, please send an email to 
postmaster AT sbsplanet DOT com.