The reason to reduce randomization to 0 is for large
scale environments where schedmode is set to prompted
and you want to limit the amount of time it takes for
the backups to complete.  If you have the resources
such as CPU, memory, disk, network band width, and
tape devices this is not an issue but if you don't
then I'd set randomization accordingly.  If you have
the resources why not use them is the fore thought.
Where I've reduced randomization is in large
environments such as in a SP Complex on the Switch
network or using large servers such as S80s.  I've
also done this @ IBM w/H50s and F50s using the ATM
network.
Thanks,
Angela
--- Alex Paschal <AlexPaschal AT FREIGHTLINER DOT COM> wrote:
> Basically, if you have one large schedule for lots
> Basically, if you have one large schedule for lots
> of clients and you're in
> polling mode, you don't want to slam your server
> with 500 simultaneous
> sessions.  Randomization lets the sessions start
> scattered randomly across
> the first n% of the schedule.
>
> Of course, if you have few clients per server or
> your operational philosophy
> is to create lots of short schedules with few nodes,
> the randomization
> doesn't have much effect.
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Johnn D. Tan [mailto:jdtan AT MED.CORNELL DOT EDU]
> Sent: Thursday, May 24, 2001 1:03 PM
> To: ADSM-L AT VM.MARIST DOT EDU
> Subject: Re: The TSM FAQ needs your help
>
>
> >As you are probably aware, the TSM mailing list
> does not have a frequently
> >asked questions (FAQ) list.
>
> What does the "Schedule Randomization Percentage"
> mean, exactly? Your
> FAQ-O-Matic says to set this to 0. We have it at 50.
> I've inherited
> this system, so was not the one who set this. But
> what are the
> trade-offs? If it was always better to have it at 0,
> why would they
> give you an option?


__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Get personalized email addresses from Yahoo! Mail - only $35
a year!  http://personal.mail.yahoo.com/