Davina Treiber wrote:
>
> On Thu, 17 Apr 2003 07:04:23 -0400, Yura Pismerov <ypismerov AT TUCOWS DOT 
> COM>
> wrote:
>
> >> When you think about it, I suppose it is expected behaviour. Generally
> when
> >> you recycle a tape you would not expect the label to change. If you are
> >> recycling it into a different pool with a different label template this
> is
> >> probably a strange case, and who is to say what is the correct or desired
> >
> >        And why is it strange case ?  I just want to get better
> utilization of
> >the tapes that can be recycled. Why wait until the tape is required for
> >the same pool
> >if another pool needs it ? And this is especially important when you
> >have several
> >pools in a library with not that many slots.
>
> I'm not saying that what you want to do is strange. Recycling between pools
> is perfectly sensible. It's a little atypical because you are not using
> barcode labels as NetWorker labels - if you were then you wouldn't have
> even discovered the problem.
>
> >        Agreed. If I used generic labels then what I said would not make
> sense.
>
> Right. Do you find that having specific label templates for specific pools
> helps you? Do you write physical labels on the tapes to match what

        The problem is I'm not the only guy in the team who has to manage them.
Having internal labels that match actual pools gives a little better
visibility.
Although we don't label them physically with internal labels, it is easy
to match
them by running "mminfo -a -r volume,barcode". May be some day I scratch
it and start using barcodes for internal labels.


> NetWorker has? How would you cope with the situation where the label
> changes when a tape is recycled between pools? I think this is the reason
> that Legato wouldn't want to change this.
>
> >> issue. What has happened in your case is probably something that Legato
> >> have never considered, and I don't expect they would agree that this is a
> >> bug.
> >
> >        No I would not call it a bug.
> >        I guess "feature request" is a better term for it.
> Probably. It would have to be selectable rather than default - because of
> the issue of some users wishing (needing) to keep it the way it is in order
> to match their paper labels.
>
> You could ask them - but don't hold your breath.

Undestood. I know how vendors (generally) treat such requests. :)
Thanks.

>
> --
> Note: To sign off this list, send a "signoff networker" command via email
> to listserv AT listmail.temple DOT edu or visit the list's Web site at
> http://listmail.temple.edu/archives/networker.html where you can
> also view and post messages to the list.
> =*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=

--
Note: To sign off this list, send a "signoff networker" command via email
to listserv AT listmail.temple DOT edu or visit the list's Web site at
http://listmail.temple.edu/archives/networker.html where you can
also view and post messages to the list.
=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=