They are reclaimed the same as physical volumes. Just like physical volumes,
they need to be 100% empty before they return space and can be reused.
The reclamation process will move the data off eligible volumes (volumes under
the reclamation threshhold) in order to make them 100% empty.
This is where one additional point comes to mind - that of the size of virtual
volumes which is controlled with MAXCAP on the device class definition on the
source server. You can change the value MAXCAP any time. The larger the virtual
volume, the more white space you carry at the target
supporting it.
Regards,
Shawn
Shawn Drew
Internet
warbo...@indiana.edu
Sent by: ADSM-L@VM.MARIST.EDU
03/10/2011 04:43 PM
Please respond to
ADSM-L@VM.MARIST.EDU
To
ADSM-L
cc
Subject
Re: [ADSM-L] Does Move Data recover space on virtual volumes
We are running TSM 6.2.2.2 on RHEL 5.
It is my understanding that all the space used by a virtual volume is kept
until every file on it has been expired. Virtual volumes don't shrink in size,
just like physical cartridges, even though their pct_utilization may go down.
Therefore, if some file
: Dist Stor Manager [mailto:ADSM-L@vm.marist.edu] On Behalf Of
Keith Arbogast
Sent: Thursday, March 10, 2011 10:08 AM
To: ADSM-L@vm.marist.edu
Subject: [ADSM-L] Does Move Data recover space on virtual volumes?
We are running TSM 6.2.2.2 on RHEL 5.
It is my understanding that all the space used
Jim,
You must mean FULL rather than FILLING, and PENDING rather than SCRATCH,
yes/no?
Thanks again,
Keith
Sorry. Move data does send volumes to 'scratch'. In the case of virtual
volumes they are not reused.
Keith
: [ADSM-L] Does Move Data recover space on virtual volumes?
Sorry. Move data does send volumes to 'scratch'. In the case of virtual
volumes they are not reused.
Keith
This e-mail, including attachments, may include confidential and/or
proprietary information, and may be used only by the person
: Thursday, March 10, 2011 10:46 AM
To: ADSM-L@vm.marist.edu
Subject: Re: [ADSM-L] Does Move Data recover space on virtual volumes?
Jim,
You must mean FULL rather than FILLING, and PENDING rather than SCRATCH,
yes/no?
Thanks again,
Keith
jschnei...@ussco.com
Sent by: ADSM-L@VM.MARIST.EDU
03/10/2011 11:15 AM
Please respond to
ADSM-L@VM.MARIST.EDU
To
ADSM-L
cc
Subject
Re: [ADSM-L] Does Move Data recover space on virtual volumes?
Yes.
I use 'move data' to consolidate virtual filling volumes and reduce 'Pct
Migr
: Thursday, March 10, 2011 12:22 PM
To: ADSM-L@vm.marist.edu
Subject: Re: [ADSM-L] Does Move Data recover space on virtual volumes?
Why wouldn't normal reclamation be used for this? It's the automatic
move data intended to consolidate empty space.
As long as expiration is running on both source
I think it might be abnormal that you have filling virtual volumes. Are
you using scratch in your virtual volume pool? or are you pre-defining the
volumes?
I use scratch volumes so it just creates new volumes dynamically. It then
deletes them when empty. Once a session creates a virtual
My specific problem is with a tape pool that is a target for virtual volumes
created by a remote TSM server. The number of cartridges in use by the pool
goes up and up, at a faster rate than the data growth on the remote server. I
suspect there are many virtual volumes in the target pool
-
From: ADSM: Dist Stor Manager [mailto:ADSM-L@VM.MARIST.EDU] On Behalf Of
Keith Arbogast
Sent: Thursday, March 10, 2011 2:47 PM
To: ADSM-L@VM.MARIST.EDU
Subject: Re: [ADSM-L] Does Move Data recover space on virtual volumes?
My specific problem is with a tape pool that is a target for virtual
volumes
-
From: Keith Arbogast warbo...@indiana.edu
Date: Thursday, March 10, 2011 3:48 pm
Subject: Re: [ADSM-L] Does Move Data recover space on virtual volumes?
To: ADSM-L@VM.MARIST.EDU
My specific problem is with a tape pool that is a target for
virtual volumes created by a remote TSM server
Shawn,
Your mention of the 50 GB MAXCAP on the device class was a jolt. Ours is 1 TB,
and I see that could be exacerbating the problem. The bigger virtual volumes
are, the more space they lock and the greater chance they contain active files,
which results in longer lifespans for them.
What
Joerg,
The nut of the problem, if I have this right, is that virtual volumes aren't
reclaimed the same way as physical volumes. They have to be 100% reclaimable
before they return any space. Their pct_utilization does go down, but the empty
space in them is locked until they are completely
respond to
ADSM-L@VM.MARIST.EDU
To
ADSM-L
cc
Subject
Re: [ADSM-L] Does Move Data recover space on virtual volumes?
Joerg,
The nut of the problem, if I have this right, is that virtual volumes
aren't reclaimed the same way as physical volumes. They have to be 100%
reclaimable before they return
volumes?
To: ADSM-L@VM.MARIST.EDU
My specific problem is with a tape pool that is a target for
virtual volumes created by a remote TSM server. The number of
cartridges in use by the pool goes up and up, at a faster rate
than the data growth on the remote server. I suspect there are
many virtual
Subject
Re: [ADSM-L] Virtual Volumes won't die!
Try:
q server f=d
Check delgraceperiod parameter
John Monahan
This message and any attachments (the message) is intended solely for
the addressees and is confidential. If you receive this message in error,
please delete it and immediately
Shawn,
I can't find the reference, but if I remember right (which is always
suspect) Virtual Volumes are stored using an archive copy group on the
target server, but ignores the Retain Version of the copy group.
I'd been hunting for confirmation of this too - here goes:
http://www-01.ibm.com
) That's not the case this time.
I can't find the reference, but if I remember right (which is always
suspect) Virtual Volumes are stored using an archive copy group on the
target server, but ignores the Retain Version of the copy group. The
copy group for this is set to the default of 365 days, but I
-Original Message-
From: ADSM: Dist Stor Manager [mailto:ads...@vm.marist.edu] On Behalf
Of Shawn Drew
Sent: Tuesday, March 30, 2010 3:00 PM
To: ADSM-L@VM.MARIST.EDU
Subject: Virtual Volumes won't die!
I recently migrated about 5TB of data off of a VirtualVolume/Server
based
The target pools have a 'Delay Period for Volume Reuse:' for the virtual
volumes. Your retry period is 10 days.
Also the 'source virtual volumes' are stored on the 'target as archive
files', expiration must complete on the target for archives to be deleted.
Occasionally the pools get out
Ian Blair wrote:
The target pools have a 'Delay Period for Volume Reuse:' for the virtual
volumes. Your retry period is 10 days.
Also the 'source virtual volumes' are stored on the 'target as archive
files', expiration must complete on the target for archives to be deleted.
You hit
I'm testing out virtual volumes at our site, and I'm trying to figure
out how to get virtual volumes deleted from the target server. When I do
migration on the source server from the target server, the occupancy on
the source server goes down but the target server stays the same. I'm
using a DISK
Hi Skylar,
I'm confused by your question. You say you are doing migration from the
target to the source. But that doesn't make sense. In server-to-server
virtual volumes, data is sent from the source to the target. Your
configuration shows that you have a storage pool called ONSITE-MALI
Hello,
You should use File Device Class for DB backups.
Alper
-Original Message-
From: ADSM: Dist Stor Manager [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of jonesrn
Sent: 14 Kasım 2007 Çarşamba 23:44
To: ADSM-L@VM.MARIST.EDU
Subject: [ADSM-L] Virtual Volumes DB Backup
I have two TSM 5.4
Of
jonesrn
Sent: Wednesday, November 14, 2007 4:44 PM
To: ADSM-L@VM.MARIST.EDU
Subject: [ADSM-L] Virtual Volumes DB Backup
I have two TSM 5.4 servers using SATA drives as their targets. (They are
named TSM3 and TSM4) I do not have any tape drives or libraries set up.
I want to backup the database
servers for virtual
volumes. When I defined the storage pool on the target server I
specified the devclass as DISK. As in define stgpool sourcepool
disk. However, on the source server the devclass targetclass seems
to want a sequential device. I am guessing that this is why it seems
On Thu, 15 Nov 2007 15:02:58 +0100, Remco Post [EMAIL PROTECTED] said:
do NOT (repeat do NOT!) create circular dependencies between
servers, keep backups of at least one database on disk, tape or
whatever on physical volumes.
What he said! A bunch!
If you designate one server as -only-
Strategy: Sequential
Storage Pool Count: 0
Device Type: SERVER
At this point I am leaning toward creating a devtype of FILE and putting it on
an NFS mount. (The NFS mount would be on a NAS in a different location.)
However, I'd still like to get Virtual Volumes working for data migration, etc
the virtual device class on the source server
2. run prepare devclass=virtual_device_class on the source server
3. on the target server do a query files
4. if you have space on the disk perform a db backup from the source
5. look at the volhist on the source server and you will see the virtual
volumes
One
that test tomorrow. I want to see what other fun things I
can do with virtual volumes.
Thanks all, I really appreciate your help!
Rob Jones
Network Administrator
Lafayette College
+--
|This was sent by [EMAIL PROTECTED] via
- required volume was not mounted.
ANR0985I Process 91 for DATABASE BACKUP running in the BACKGROUND completed
with completion state FAILURE at 03:47:09 PM.
My strategy was to set up source and target servers for virtual volumes. When I
defined the storage pool on the target server I specified
Richard Rhodes wrote:
Here are just some of the problems . . .
Rick,
Yes, we see the exposure, but aren't the ones managing the budget.
The completed DR architecture, when it's in place, will include on-
site and off-site copies of both data centers.
Thanks for your insights,
Keith Arbogast
Allen Rout wrote:
I'm having difficulty figuring out why this still feels not-answered
to you.
Allen,
That statement, i.e. ...my dilemma, was more an justification of my
original post than a commentary on the answers I had received. The
simplest version of my question would have been, What am I
Richard,
You asked thought provoking questions, but didn't answer mine.
Hi, again . . .
I guess I don't quite understand the situation.
You have a remote site with a server you want to backup to your TSM server.
Then, you ask why you would need VV's back at the remote site. What I
don't
Hi Keith,
virtual volumes used to be a big benefit while bridging big distances for
DR of backup data via fc/scsi was extremely expensive.
Today, I use the feature in our multi-site infrastucture to do my
additional db-snapshots to one (central) tsm-server. No tape is involved in
this part
I'm curious. We've never relied on storing the TSM db backup to tape. We
backup to disk and rcp it to a 2nd site.
That's seems the simplest method. Anyone else do the same?
[EMAIL PROTECTED] 08/23/2007 9:00:35 AM
Richard,
You asked thought provoking questions, but didn't answer mine.
Hi,
Nicholas Cassimatis wrote:
With all of the features in TSM, there are a number of them that
don't work for specific situations. Simultaneous writes on backup/
migration, virtual volumes, NDMP backups, 3rd mirrors of DB and Log
volumes, adding documentation to your Prepare file - lots of features
Richard Rhodes wrote:
I guess I don't quite understand the situation.
Richard,
I'm sorry I haven't made our situation clearer. In the current phase
of the project we are building a TSM server in Bloomington to backup
local clients to disk which will be migrated to virtual volumes
Richard,
I'm sorry I haven't made our situation clearer. In the current phase
of the project we are building a TSM server in Bloomington to backup
local clients to disk which will be migrated to virtual volumes in
Indianapolis. After migrating local clients to the new server, we
plan
I said . . .
Let me see if I fully understand . . . .
Bloomington
TSM-a
local clients backup to disk pool
disk pool migrates to TSM-b/VV at Indianapolis
== primary tape pool is on TSM-b/VV at Indianapolis
vv server - contains primary pool from TSM-b
Indianapolis
TSM-b
, which is more efficient on space.
At the cost of some reliability. What happens if the particular tape
the virtual volumes are on goes bad, and you're in a disaster
needing a DB restore?
Once you've sent data to a VV, (which looks like just-a-file to the
target server) you can then copy
On Thu, 23 Aug 2007 09:40:28 -0400, Keith Arbogast [EMAIL PROTECTED] said:
Knowing when they do and when they don't is the crux of my dilemma.
The virtual volume methodology is presented in IBM designed training
classes, Administrator's manuals, and in a very recent TSM Webcast
as if it is
Richard Rhodes said
Let me see if I understand...
Rick,
Yes, you understand very well. We will not have offsite copy pools
until there are 3584's at both data centers. It is a huge concern for
those who understand the implications.
All the best,
Keith
I am not understanding the crucial advantage(s) of using virtual
volumes to backup a data center to a remote site. Why not backup
nodes in a remote data center to a TSM server in a local data center?
We have two data centers about 60 miles apart. If we backup nodes in
one data center directly
I am not understanding the crucial advantage(s) of using virtual
volumes to backup a data center to a remote site. Why not backup
nodes in a remote data center to a TSM server in a local data center?
Sure, do it, we backup many remote sites to our central datacenter.
The question is, what
Richard,
You asked thought provoking questions, but didn't answer mine. What
is the compelling reason to use virtual volumes? Offsite copypools
and certain restorability of the TSM database are essential. Thank
you for spotlighting those points. However, I can do those without
virtual volumes
Well I would say, then, the reason for VV is to eliminate the need for
real volumes: using virtual volumes on a remote TSM server eliminates
the need to move real tape volumes to the remote server in the event of
a disaster. Are they useful: that's a matter or opinion.
Somebody made the very
I think orinally, it was because intersite SCSI/FC was impossible or too
expensive, while IP was cheap. (Or maybe one TSM server had scsi tape
drives and a second did not.)
Virtual volumes are basically treating one TSM server as a client and
archiving to the other TSM server over IP
situations. Simultaneous writes on backup/migration, virtual
volumes, NDMP backups, 3rd mirrors of DB and Log volumes, adding
documentation to your Prepare file - lots of features that don't always
make sense to use. But they're there, if you want/need them.
Nick Cassimatis
happens if the particular tape
the virtual volumes are on goes bad, and you're in a disaster needing
a DB restore?
I'd rather spend the extra money on tapes and know that if something
goes bad, we'll at least be able to recover some of the data ...
(I'm seeing installations getting over 2TB
Mark Stapleton wrote:
ADSM: Dist Stor Manager ADSM-L@VM.MARIST.EDU wrote on 09/08/2006
07:19:25 AM:
we backup a storage pool to a copy pool on a target server (virtual
volumes).
Yesterday I deleted 10 virtual volumes from the copypool
DELETE VOL ... DISCARD=YES
The virtual volumes are seen
Hi,
we backup a storage pool to a copy pool on a target server (virtual volumes).
Yesterday I deleted 10 virtual volumes from the copypool
DELETE VOL ... DISCARD=YES
The virtual volumes are seen as archive data on the target server, the
target server should delete these archive files.
So I
ADSM: Dist Stor Manager ADSM-L@VM.MARIST.EDU wrote on 09/08/2006
07:19:25 AM:
we backup a storage pool to a copy pool on a target server (virtual
volumes).
Yesterday I deleted 10 virtual volumes from the copypool
DELETE VOL ... DISCARD=YES
The virtual volumes are seen as archive data
when
having disk-cache as Primary StoragePools and the next-storagepool
is on a remote-tsm-server's virtual volumes ?
If you want to get this kind of distinction working on the other side
of a virtual-volume link, you're going to have to split things up by
node on the virtual-volume target side
of the group-collocation-feature when
having disk-cache as Primary StoragePools and the next-storagepool
is on a remote-tsm-server's virtual volumes ?
...or does it just has no effect - setting this server-device-class-storage pool
with those virtual volumes to 'collocation=group' ?
best regards
On Mon, 22 May 2006 16:14:28 +0200, Rainer Wolf [EMAIL PROTECTED] said:
the question is now:
is it possible to make use of the group-collocation-feature when
having disk-cache as Primary StoragePools and the next-storagepool
is on a remote-tsm-server's virtual volumes ?
I think your
Hello
Other than offsite reclamation, is there any way to easily consolidate
offsite virtual volumes?
Currently I have a server which is electronically vaulting to a remote
TSM server. There are in the region of 3000 volumes in the copy pool,
some 5 MB and smaller in size.
Backup storage pool
Move data?
Regards,
Karel
-Original Message-
From: ADSM: Dist Stor Manager [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of
Smith, I (Ian)
Sent: dinsdag 28 februari 2006 13:15
To: ADSM-L@VM.MARIST.EDU
Subject: Offsite Virtual Volumes
Hello
Other than offsite reclamation, is there any way
: +44 (0)20 7809 3046
f: +44 (0)20 7809 3599
m: +44 (0)7843 689914
Mailto: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
-Original Message-
From: ADSM: Dist Stor Manager [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of
Bos, Karel
Sent: 28 February 2006 12:27
To: ADSM-L@VM.MARIST.EDU
Subject: Re: [ADSM-L] Offsite Virtual Volumes
, February 28, 2006 7:29 AM
To: ADSM-L@VM.MARIST.EDU
Subject: Re: [ADSM-L] Offsite Virtual Volumes
Move data just seems to create a new virtual volume, as when each VV is
written to- it gets closed and can't be extended due to its logical
nature.
_
Ian Smith
SAN/TSM
] Offsite Virtual Volumes
What is the est/max capacity on the device class used for the offsite
storage pool. Is collocation enabled? These could both contribute to
more smaller volumes.
John
-Original Message-
From: ADSM: Dist Stor Manager [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of
Smith
On Tue, 28 Feb 2006 12:38:52 -, Smith, I (Ian) [EMAIL PROTECTED]
said:
No collocation
Est capacity is set to 494365 G (A compressed LTO2 tape)
Reclamation will probably be your only option; it's the only process I
can think of which will keep the target volume open across various
Volumes
Hello
Other than offsite reclamation, is there any way to easily consolidate
offsite virtual volumes?
Currently I have a server which is electronically vaulting to a remote
TSM server. There are in the region of 3000 volumes in the copy pool,
some 5 MB and smaller in size.
Backup storage
On Mon, 16 Jan 2006 15:04:03 +1000, Steven Harris [EMAIL PROTECTED] said:
Now, there used to be an idea that you could do this with
server_to_server communications that used the loopback interface on
so that the source and the destination servers are the same actual
TSM instance. There was
Hi All,
I have a client that needs monthly backupsets for his BA clients and exports
for his TDP clients. The device for this is a stand alone LTO2 drive that
is separate from the main tape library (I'm eliding the detail here, trust
me, there are valid reasons why he want it done this way).
Hi Nick,
Thanks for the info
Robert
-Original Message-
From: ADSM: Dist Stor Manager [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Nicholas
Cassimatis
Sent: ד 31 אוגוסט 2005 15:04
To: ADSM-L@VM.MARIST.EDU
Subject: Re: Virtual volumes question
Robert,
Yes, that's how I've done
Hi to all
I am in a process of changing my drives from SDLT to LTO on a library
connected to TSM server 1 , I created server to server virtual volumes with an
another server TSM server 2 with a library attached already with LTO drives.
I want to migrate my storage pool on tapes from TSM
@VM.MARIST.EDU wrote on 08/31/2005
06:29:16 AM:
Hi to all
I am in a process of changing my drives from SDLT to LTO on a
library connected to TSM server 1 , I created server to server
virtual volumes with an another server TSM server 2 with a library
attached already with LTO drives.
I want to migrate
Just to be sure I am not missing something obvious:
With server-to-server configured, is it true that you can only have one
diskpool or tapepool on the remote server as the destination for the
virtual volumes?
I have several diskpools on my source server that get backed up to local
copypools
Edward, set up multiple policy domains on your target server. Each Policy
domain has a node (type=server) that is used for the virtual volumes by
the source server. The default MC in each policy domain can then point to
different hierarchies such that you have different physical tapes use
and never even saw any discussion that hinted at this
approach.
-Original Message-
From: ADSM: Dist Stor Manager [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of
Joerg Pohlmann
Sent: Thursday, June 30, 2005 3:26 PM
To: ADSM-L@VM.MARIST.EDU
Subject: Re: [ADSM-L] Virtual volumes and multiple diskpools
Subject: Re: Reclaimation of virtual volumes
Hi -
Take a look at the devclass on the remote server that points to the
local server (people often call is SERVERCLASS) or something like that.
You might need to increase the value of mountlimit. It will need to be
at least two for reclamation
Manager [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf
Of
Laura Buckley
Sent: Monday, June 06, 2005 7:14 PM
To: ADSM-L@VM.MARIST.EDU
Subject: Re: Reclaimation of virtual volumes
Hi -
Take a look at the devclass on the remote server that points to the
local server (people often call is SERVERCLASS
Hi All,
I'm working with TSM server 5.2.3.5 (remote) and TSM server 5.2.1.2
(local) - all on win2k server. I've set up virtual volumes such that
the remote server is utilizing the local server's diskpool for both
Database and File backups.
Remote Disk -- Local Disk -- Local Tape.
The volumes
Hi -
Take a look at the devclass on the remote server that points to the
local server (people often call is SERVERCLASS) or something like that.
You might need to increase the value of mountlimit. It will need to be
at least two for reclamation to work with virtual volumes.
Laura
I'm trying to set up virtual volumes for DB Backups. I have, in this order,
upd server targetserver serverpa=pw nodename=sourceserver
def dev dbbackup devt=server servername=targetserver
reg no sourceserver pw t=server
When I run
ba db t=full dev=dbback
it fails with ANR0424W - invalid password
Hi,
In order to reclaim space on a copy pool that is a server to server
virtual volumes you must:
1) run reclamation on the source copy pool. It must finish reclaiming
and delete the volume.
2) run expire inventory on the target server. This will show up as
deleting archives (because
Thanks Michael et al
It is now ok
Mark
-Original Message-
From: ADSM: Dist Stor Manager [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of
Wheelock, Michael D
Sent: 13 December 2004 14:54
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Virtual Volumes Not Being Deleted
Hi,
In order to reclaim space on a copy
-Original Message-
From: ADSM: Dist Stor Manager [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of
Mark Fergusson
Sent: zaterdag 11 december 2004 21:56
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Virtual Volumes Not Being Deleted
Hi TSM'rs
I have two TSM servers TSM1 and TSM2 running TSM 5.2.3.2 on Redhat ES3.
TSM1
Hi TSM'rs
I have two TSM servers TSM1 and TSM2 running TSM 5.2.3.2 on Redhat ES3.
TSM1 is the primary server having a copypool on TSM2 as file based virtual
volumes.
When reclamation runs on the source server the volumes, also file based, are
deleted.
Even though the activity report indicates
?
ray
On Tue, 28 Sep 2004, Coats, Jack wrote:
Is there a retention set?
-Original Message-
From: -ray [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Monday, September 27, 2004 8:02 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Empty Virtual volumes
Anyone ever seen this? Using virtual volumes, my primary
Is there a retention set?
-Original Message-
From: -ray [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Monday, September 27, 2004 8:02 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Empty Virtual volumes
Anyone ever seen this? Using virtual volumes, my primary server keeps EMPTY
volumes around... not sure
volumes
Anyone ever seen this? Using virtual volumes, my primary server keeps EMPTY
volumes around... not sure if they are created empty or become empty through
reclamation. Shouldn't they be deleted after reclamataion? Or at
least reused? It's filling up maxscratch on the stgp and causing
Anyone ever seen this? Using virtual volumes, my primary server keeps
EMPTY volumes around... not sure if they are created empty or become empty
through reclamation. Shouldn't they be deleted after reclamataion? Or at
least reused? It's filling up maxscratch on the stgp and causing
I'm considering changing the way I do my TSM DB backups; I've heard some user
experiences about backing up to remote server volumes, and it appears that
this would simplify a lot of work, and save oodles of space.
Here's how I've got it sketched in my mind right now:
A server instance whose
Well I found out that this is not supported. APAR IC35654 - Virtual
Volumes with source and target servers residing on same server is not
supported.
-Original Message-
From: Rushforth, Tim [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: May 29, 2003 1:19 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Create more
I've been testing a remote Copypool setup,
and now want to clean up ...
As the last thing on the (temporary) source server,
I deleted all virtual volumes, and checked via
RECONCILE VOLUMES that they were all (logically) gone.
On the target server though, I still have the non-empty
archive
delete filespace nodename ADSM.SERVER type=server
That should get rid of the filespace.
Jim Sporer
At 07:15 PM 6/2/2003 +0200, you wrote:
I've been testing a remote Copypool setup,
and now want to clean up ...
As the last thing on the (temporary) source server,
I deleted all virtual volumes
= On Tue, 10 Dec 2002 09:23:42 +1100, Gordon Woodward [EMAIL PROTECTED] said:
Can anyone tell me how you define what storage pools a SOURCE server uses on
a TARGET server when doing SERVER to SERVER operations? I've tried looking
for the answer in the TSM Admin Guide and searching this list
Can anyone tell me how you define what storage pools a SOURCE server uses on a TARGET
server when doing SERVER to SERVER operations? I've tried looking for the answer in
the TSM Admin Guide and searching this list but to no avail.
Currently we have a Primary TSM server and a Backup TSM server,
. If the volume size is larger than your diskpool size, the
data will go straight to tape!
Hope this helps!
-Original Message-
From: Gordon Woodward [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Monday, December 09, 2002 5:24 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Virtual Volumes Storage Pools
Can anyone
Hi there,
We've been experimenting with virtual volumes, being used for backup
storagepools.
The thing we notice is that on the destination server there's no expiration
or deletion of the created volumes
after we delete the copy storagepool volumes on the source server. The
volumes
On TEST2 issue the command DELETE FILESPACE TEST1 * TYPE=SERVER
Jim Sporer
At 02:51 PM 9/27/2002 -0400, you wrote:
I've been playing around with export/import using server-2-server virtual
volumes with some success. We have be migrating one of our clients off OS390
to AIX TSM server..so I wanted
- Original Message -
From: Bill Boyer [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Friday, September 27, 2002 8:51 PM
Subject: Export/Import with virtual volumes
I've been playing around with export/import using server-2-server virtual
volumes with some success. We have be migrating
I've been playing around with export/import using server-2-server virtual
volumes with some success. We have be migrating one of our clients off OS390
to AIX TSM server..so I wanted to be prepared.
I was able to export from TEST1 to TEST2, and then import into TEST2 with no
problems. But now I
drive resource.
Suad
--
On Fri, 2002-09-06 at 00:54, Cook, Dwight E wrote:
This is a real catch-22
BIG virtual volumes means less tsm data base space tied up tracking tons of
little virtual volumes (and files on the remote server) BUT big virtual
volumes also means lots of data transfered over
1 - 100 of 129 matches
Mail list logo
