ADSM-L

Re: Tier'ed library

2004-06-18 12:36:49
Subject: Re: Tier'ed library
From: "Rushforth, Tim" <TRushforth AT WINNIPEG DOT CA>
To: ADSM-L AT VM.MARIST DOT EDU
Date: Fri, 18 Jun 2004 11:36:34 -0500
Yes, file level fragmentation (not internal TSM).   If you scroll down you
will see it is Windows 2003.  The file system was NTFS.

Tim
-----Original Message-----
From: Steve Harris [mailto:Steve_Harris AT HEALTH.QLD.GOV DOT AU]
Sent: June 17, 2004 6:05 PM
To: ADSM-L AT VM.MARIST DOT EDU
Subject: Re: Tier'ed library

Thanks for the post Tim.

When you say fragmented, do you mean that the blocks making up this file are
scattered all over the filesystem or some sort of internal  TSM
fragmentation.

>From your earlier posts, I think that you are in a Windows shop.  What
OS/Filesystem are we talking here?

Regards

Steve


Steve Harris
AIX and TSM Admin
Queensland Health, Brisbane Australia

>>> TRushforth AT WINNIPEG DOT CA 18/06/2004 1:05:21 >>>
Using sequential-access File volumes with TSM seems to result in a lot of
file level fragmentation.  We are doing a mini-pilot with 25GB File volumes
for the storage pool volumes for some nodes.  These volumes end up very
fragmented (some of the files are in 9000 fragments).

This could have performance implications.

Tivoli may be looking at this for futures?

A VTL may address this.

I did a quick restore test of a node as follows:

36 GB restored
219,170 objects

On fragmented File Volumes:
Time 34.6 minutes
17.7 MB/sec

After defragmenting the file Volumes:
Time 21.9 minutes
27.9 MB/sec

It was not a controlled test as it was run on a production server so there
could have been other things affecting the two tests.

TSM Server 5.2.2.4 on Windows 2003
TSM Client 5.2.2.9 on Windows 2003

Tim Rushforth
City of Winnipeg
-----Original Message-----
From: Tab Trepagnier [mailto:Tab.Trepagnier AT LAITRAM DOT COM]
Sent: June 16, 2004 8:48 AM
To: ADSM-L AT VM.MARIST DOT EDU
Subject: Re: Tier'ed library

Milton,

Thanks for the info.  I briefly looked at Sepaton, but I had no idea they
were that inexpensive.  I will probably give them a second look.

But one thing that I'm struggling with is "why a VTL?"

Between random-access DISK volumes and sequential-access FILE volumes what
does a VTL buy me that I couldn't implement using those two volume types
in TSM?

Thanks.

Tab Trepagnier
TSM Administrator
Laitram, L.L.C.



****************************************************************************
*******
This email, including any attachments sent with it, is confidential and for
the sole use of the intended recipient(s).  This confidentiality is not
waived or lost, if you receive it and you are not the intended recipient(s),
or if it is transmitted/received in error.

Any unauthorised use, alteration, disclosure, distribution or review of this
email is prohibited.  It may be subject to a statutory duty of
confidentiality if it relates to health service matters.

If you are not the intended recipient(s), or if you have received this email
in error, you are asked to immediately notify the sender by telephone or by
return email.  You should also delete this email and destroy any hard copies
produced.
****************************************************************************
*******

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>