Richard, That is right on. I knew it had to be something simple. I copy the disk pool before migration, and then sync up the tape pools. But, I migrate down to 1%, and there was about 40GB of data still in the disk pool that got copied, but not migrated. I knew it had to be something simple, but I just couldn't come up with it. Thanks.
On Wed, 17 Mar 2004, Richard Sims wrote: > ... > >I cannot figure out why the copypool would ever have more data in it > >than the primary pool. Any ideas? > ... > > The most simple explanation would be that the copy storage pool was the > target of a primary storage pool other than what you expect, at some > time in the past. You can perhaps most readily pursue this by looking > into Occupancy values for the various nodes and filespaces which > participate in that copy pool. > > Richard Sims >
