It's set to NO. Even though the files will exist in the DIRFILE pool, TSM
will use the copies on the DIRPOOL pool for reclamation. Since it's a DISK,
direct access storage pool and assumes the best response time. Restores
don't really suffer with having to get the DIR entries from the sequential
DIRFILE instead of the direct access DIRPOOL. The main benefit of the DIRMC
of keeping the directory entries separate from the data and accessible
without media mounts is still there with the DIRFILE.
Bill Boyer
DSS, Inc.
-----Original Message-----
From: ADSM: Dist Stor Manager [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of
Joel Fuhrman
Sent: Tuesday, November 28, 2000 2:57 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: DIRMC - disadvantages only?
On DIRPOOL, what is the setting for "Cache Migrated Files"?
On Tue, 28 Nov 2000, William Boyer wrote:
> Another disadvantage is reclamation of the copypool for the DIRMC disk
pool.
> If the primary pool is a disk pool, then TSM server only reads 1
> file/directory at a time during reclamation of the offsite copypool for
the
> DIRMC primary pool. This makes the reclamation process REAL slow! Tivoli
> says 'working as designed' and would only take an enhancement request on
it,
> not an APAR. Originally my storage pool was:
>
> DIRPOOL primary DISK
> DIRCOPYPOOL copypool TAPE
>
> To get around this 'feature' a co-worker of mine came up with this new
> stgpool structure:
>
> DIRPOOL primary DISK: NEXTPOOL->DIRFILE
> DIRFILE primary SEQUENTIAL on DISK
> DIRCOPYPOOL copypool TAPE
>
> The DIRPOOL is small, only 50MB. The DIRFILE is set to 100MB filesize. The
> client backkups put the directories in the DIRPOOL and then the daily
server
> processes are:
>
> BA STG DIRPOOL DIRCOPYPOOL
> BA STG DIRFILE DIRCOPYPOOL
> UPD STG DIRPOOL HI=0 LO=0 (Migrate for DIRFILE)
>
> This way when reclamation occurs on DIRCOPYPOOL, the primary pool is a
> SEQUENTIAL pool and then TSM reads them in batches. It's a LOT faster this
> way.
>
> One problem I encountered with DIRMC was with some of the older TSM and
ADSM
> clients. I was getting errors on the client when trying to send a
directory
> entry that the server was out of storage pool space in the DIRPOOL. Turns
> out this is an APAR (Can't remember the number) in the client where it
> calculates the size incorrectly on NT clients with security assigned for
> directories. To fix this upgrade to the latest client, or add
> SKIPNTPERMISSIONS YES to the DSM.OPT file on the client.
>
> Bill Boyer
> DSS, Inc.
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: ADSM: Dist Stor Manager [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of
> France, Don G (Pace)
> Sent: Monday, November 27, 2000 4:24 PM
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: Re: DIRMC - disadvantages only?
>
> < clip >
>
