On Sun, Jan 16, 2005 at 02:02:08PM -0600, Stapleton, Mark wrote:
Storage pools that act as DIRMC management class destinations [...]
contain redundant data; the normal client data destination pool also
contains a copy of all directory and file structure data.
I wasn't aware of this. Is this
The server originally was set up with a large enough DIRPOOL
of type DISK. Later, DIRPOOL was reduced in size, and a
DIRFILE stgpool was added that consists of FILE volumes.
Clients still back up to DIRPOOL, but that pool is migrated
daily to DIRFILE.
Is this sort of setup still necessary
On Mon, Jan 17, 2005 at 10:51:55AM -0600, Rushforth, Tim wrote:
Also, ADSM.QuickFacts says that sequential volumes have
advantages in a database restoral situation.
Yes. This is also documented in the 5.2/5.3 ADMIN guide describing
difference between DISK and FILE pools.
I asked this here,
From: ADSM: Dist Stor Manager [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Jurjen Oskam
I have a question about which devclass to use for a
storagepool that is exclusively used as DIRMC destination.
The server originally was set up with a large enough DIRPOOL
of type DISK. Later, DIRPOOL was reduced
Hi there,
I have a question about which devclass to use for a storagepool
that is exclusively used as DIRMC destination.
The server originally was set up with a large enough DIRPOOL
of type DISK. Later, DIRPOOL was reduced in size, and a DIRFILE
stgpool was added that consists of FILE volumes.
