On Wed, 18 Feb 2009 08:02:57 -0600, Mary R. Ott <[log in to unmask]> wrote:

>>How are other computing services managing the data lifecycle on their 
tapes in the above scenario?  Any additional information as to cost, 
employee time, quantity of tapes, etc. - would be helpful.  How do your 
records retention schedules document similar situations? 

Mary, mainframe tape usage patterns are significantly different to the open
systems world.

The scenario you describe is pretty much common place around the world's
mainframe shops.

Technically though, scratch tapes are not reused randomly. Scratch tapes
(also know as non-specifics) are flagged as expired on a daily basis and
placed in scratch pools. In an automated environment these pools are
virtual, but in a manual library the scratch pool is usually stored in a
scratch rack.

In practice the scratch tapes are used (and re-slotted) from the position
closest to the tape library or drive (operators are renowned for their
laziness). This means that tapes at the end of the rack may never get
overwritten unless there is a scratch tape shortage one day.

As for costs, a lot depends on the size of the mainframe and how many tapes
are under management. In the US mainframe tape library size ranges from the
high hundreds to the millions.

Happy to provide more info on or off list if you can be more specific with
your questions.

Gerard

List archives at http://lists.ufl.edu/archives/recmgmt-l.html
Contact [log in to unmask] for assistance
To unsubscribe from this list, click the below link. If not already present, place UNSUBSCRIBE RECMGMT-L or UNSUB RECMGMT-L in the body of the message.
mailto:[log in to unmask]