Very nice explanation, Thanks you
On Wed, Jul 7, 2010 at 11:00 PM, Richard Sims <[email protected]> wrote: > Specifying 3592C would be a change from your DRIVES specification, but it > does not necessarily represent any change over how TSM has been writing data > to tape for you: a spec of DRIVE *should* use compression. Specifying 3592C > explicitly tells TSM what you want, with no ambiguities or vagueness, to > assure what you will be getting. > > If your TSM clients are performing compression in sending the data to the > TSM server, or the data was in a compressed state to start with, then what > you are seeing is the limit of what you will get on each tape. For > perspective: in our shop with 3592C and a good mix of data, we typically get > 400 - 500 GB per 3592JA tape, where native capacity is 300 GB. > > Richard Sims > > On Jul 7, 2010, at 8:51 AM, Mehdi Salehi wrote: > > > I was wondering if there is a way to increase the capacity of the storage > > pool without adding volumes. I thought changing devclass format to > > compressed will affect the existing volume capacities and I could gain > lots > > of space by reclamation. > > > > What I conclude from your post is that only for new volumes the new > format > > applies, furthermore existing volumes stay unchanged "forever". Please > > correct me if I am mistaken. >
