ADSM-L

Re: SLOOOOOOW backup stgpool process

1998-06-06 03:55:12
Subject: Re: SLOOOOOOW backup stgpool process
From: Sheelagh Treweek <sheelagh.treweek AT COMPUTING-SERVICES.OXFORD.AC DOT UK>
Date: Sat, 6 Jun 1998 08:55:12 +0100
You might find that it is the long think time adsm has in deciding what
files to add to your copypool that is apparently slowing things up.  If
you have an established primary pool and the catchup to create the
copypool is large then you can see adsm sit there for about an hour
before any tapes are even mounted.  Have a look at your act log and
checkout the times things happen.

If that is the case then I would just plough on, when you have caught up
the initial delays for think time go down to a few minutes.  I tried to
pursue this last year via a PMR with IBM but gave up because after so
many weeks had gone by it was done and we had established no "cause"!

Hope this helps, Sheelagh
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Sheelagh Treweek                         Email: sheelagh.treweek AT oucs.ox.ac 
DOT uk
Sheelagh Treweek                         Email: sheelagh.treweek AT oucs.ox.ac 
DOT uk
Oxford University Computing Services     Tel:   +44 (0)1865 273205
13 Banbury Road, Oxford, OX2 6NN, UK     Fax:   +44 (0)1865 273275
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> From owner-adsm-l AT VM.MARIST DOT EDU  Fri Jun  5 23:29:41 1998
> From owner-adsm-l AT VM.MARIST DOT EDU  Fri Jun  5 23:29:41 1998
> X-Lotus-FromDomain: ILGW@AG@OUTBOUND
> Mime-Version: 1.0
> Content-Disposition: inline
> Date: Fri, 5 Jun 1998 12:55:50 -0600
> From: Len Kutz <Len_Kutz AT VALIC DOT COM>
> Subject: SLOOOOOOW backup stgpool process
> To: ADSM-L AT VM.MARIST DOT EDU
>
> Has anyone ever experienced slow backup stgpool processes?
>
> I'm creating an offsite stgpool, but when I run "backup stgpool nightly
> nightly_offsite".  My throughput is only about 300meg. and hour, but when I
> run tape reclamation I get about 4gig throughput and hour.  The ADSM
> support group is looking at it, but so far they don't seem to have a clue
> where to start.
>
<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>