For your first general question, as always, it depends. For economy of tape usage, the way you are doing is best. If you don't have to do much restoring, this is o.k. Seems like you say you do have long restores.
First step would be to analyse the restores. Is it mainly a few nodes that are getting most of the restores? Is it a particular type of node, Oracle DB, Netware File Server, etc. If this can be narrowed down then determine what to do with these nodes data. Examples you could do: 1. Put Oracle DB's, and Netware servers, each type in separate tape pool. 2. If they have a LOT of data, then even consider collocation by node for the large nodes. (I have LTO1 tapes also. I have collocation by node for two nodes that each do a full DB backup of propietary DB of about 100GB each every day, and some incrementals during the day. That way, I can do a restore of either one or both onsite without tape contention between them or other nodes). I have collocation by node for the offsite tape pool for these nodes also. They are our most critical systems. If there are really BIG you could consider collocation by filespace for those nodes. Your second question, I haven't needed to do that, so don't have an opinion. I understand the basic reasoning behind that strategy, just haven't had experience to say what's best, except you would also want to analyse nodes data to see which ones and why you would want to do this. This would most likely consume extra disk space too. David B. Longo System Administrator Health First, Inc. 3300 Fiske Blvd. Rockledge, FL 32955-4305 PH 321.434.5536 Pager 321.634.8230 Fax: 321.434.5509 [EMAIL PROTECTED] >>> [EMAIL PROTECTED] 02/24/04 09:14PM >>> Just curious. ... We have all disk storage pools using a single tape pool as the 'next pool'. If the pools have significantly different sizes of data, does it make sense to have multiple 'next pool's of tapes. One for very large files (like TDP for Mail files) and another for 'smaller' files? We have fairly large tapes (LTO-1's) so it seems like we are doing recovery forever. second idea: I was even toying with the idea of having multiple disk pools, with size restrictions on the first pool, so big files go to the second. both would still backup to the same tape pool. Suggestions for a best practice? .... TIA ... Jack ############################################################## This message is for the named person's use only. It may contain confidential, proprietary, or legally privileged information. No confidentiality or privilege is waived or lost by any mistransmission. If you receive this message in error, please immediately delete it and all copies of it from your system, destroy any hard copies of it, and notify the sender. You must not, directly or indirectly, use, disclose, distribute, print, or copy any part of this message if you are not the intended recipient. Health First reserves the right to monitor all e-mail communications through its networks. Any views or opinions expressed in this message are solely those of the individual sender, except (1) where the message states such views or opinions are on behalf of a particular entity; and (2) the sender is authorized by the entity to give such views or opinions. ##############################################################
