Thank you Richard, this sound like the possible solution, I will try it
tomorrow.
But I have now a big doubt. Will each and every filespace use a different
tape?
This will create a unnecessary load in the 3494, and a lot of tapes being
used, normal filespaces that not belong to Oracle DB are small. The 200GB
compacted can even fit in one 3590 cartridge. They would like to divide
evenly the filespaces among the two drives. This is what they used to do
with Legato.
I imagine that if we have two clients in the same machine and distribute the
domains between them the way we like could be the best solution, but I do
not know how to do that. Can you help?
Thanks
Maria
----- Original Message -----
From: Richard Sims <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Thursday, July 27, 2000 7:53 PM
Subject: Re: Backup in parallel from one big node
> Maria - I accumulate such tips in my ADSM functional directory,
> at http://people.bu.edu/rbs.
>
> You say that you have "collocation turned on" - but what kind?
> Collocation by node is insufficient for your purposes.
> From my tips:
>
> Parallelize backups Going to a disk pool first is one
way;
> then the data migrates to tape.
> To go directly to tape: You may
need to
> define your STGpool with
> COLlocation=FILespace to achieve
such
> results; else *SM will try to fill
one
> tape at a time, making all other
> processes wait for access to the
tape.
> Richard Sims, BU
