One relatively minor change to Richard's statement -- > Keep in mind the basic principle that an object remains in the > copypool ONLY as long as it the original object remains in _a_ primary > pool, a tenet which you can use to advantage.
I've seen the same thing -- as long as the data is in a primary pool, it hasn't expired. If it hasn't expired, it won't automatically fall off the copypool tape. And -- if the data was copied to that copypool, it will STAY in that copypool when you run a reclaim on the volume. So wait until the copypool volume qualifies for a reclaim and delete it instead of reclaiming it. The next backup of your primary storage will effectively recreate the deleted volume with just the data that truly belongs in the copypool. Tom Kauffman NIBCO, Inc -----Original Message----- From: ADSM: Dist Stor Manager [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Nick Laflamme Sent: Friday, July 13, 2007 8:01 AM To: [email protected] Subject: Re: separation of copypool tapes Richard Sims wrote: > On Jul 12, 2007, at 3:14 PM, Haberstroh, Debbie (IT) wrote: > >> Deleting all of my copypool volumes could be a problem since I am >> only moving half of the tapepool data and have over 600 copypool >> tapes. I will need to find a better way to remove the data. Thanks >> for the answer about the data still being there, I wasn't sure how >> that would work. > > Keep in mind the basic principle that an object remains in the > copypool ONLY as long as it the original object remains in the primary > pool, a tenet which you can use to advantage. While I know better than to challenge or contradict someone like Richard too often, I'm curious about how I can prove this to myself. We've been doing a lot of MODE NODEDATA commands recently as we move data into pools that collocate by group. The copy storage pools that correspond to the original smaller tape storage pools don't seem to be shrinking and expiring as long as the data is still somewhere on the managed node. We seem to be ending up with three copies of data: the primary, now in the collocated pool; a secondary in the copy pool of the collocated pool, and another secondary in the copy pool of the older, smaller pool. We're running TSM 5.3 on AIX, if that matter, but for something that Richard describes as a "tenet", one would hope this goes back to WDSF on VM days. :) > Richard Sims Nick Laflamme CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: This email and any attachments are for the exclusive and confidential use of the intended recipient. If you are not the intended recipient, please do not read, distribute or take action in reliance upon this message. If you have received this in error, please notify us immediately by return email and promptly delete this message and its attachments from your computer system. We do not waive attorney-client or work product privilege by the transmission of this message.
