MEMORYEFFICIENTBACKUP YES will indeed cause backups to run slower (it's a
trade-off between TSM memory requirements and performance).
You might take a look at article 1197422 on the IBM web site, which
describes memory requirements for the client. I suspect that the
"out-of-memory" issues you are seeing are because you are exceeding the 2
GB limit that TSM has for allocating memory when MEMORYEFFICIENTBACKUP NO
(the default) is used. While this does not represent a formal announcement
or commitment, we are targeting a change to the Windows client that will
permit it to use up to 3 GB of memory as long as the system is booted with
the /3GB option in boot.ini (consult Microsoft for more info about the
/3GB option). This change should afford approximately 50% increase in the
number of files that can be supported without having to resort to
MEMORYEFFICIENTBACKUP YES.
If you can divide the volume into 2 or more logical shares, as you
propose, then you should be able to go back to MEMORYEFFICIENTBACKUP NO
and buy back some performance. Unless there is a compelling reason to do
so, in general, I'd suggest carving the drive up into as few shares as
possible in order to make them more easily manageable (just a thought...).
Note that having the TSM client read data across the network for backup
will inherently incur a performance penalty.
Note that setting RESOURCEUTILIZATION to a value > 10 is undocumented.
Regards,
Andy
Andy Raibeck
IBM Software Group
Tivoli Storage Manager Client Development
Internal Notes e-mail: Andrew Raibeck/Tucson/IBM@IBMUS
Internet e-mail: storman AT us.ibm DOT com
The only dumb question is the one that goes unasked.
The command line is your friend.
"Good enough" is the enemy of excellence.
"ADSM: Dist Stor Manager" <ADSM-L AT VM.MARIST DOT EDU> wrote on 2005-08-01
09:19:21:
> I am backing up a large number of files and directories located on a
> Network Appliance. I am using a Windows 2000 client to do this. It is
> taking over 40 hours to do the backup. I also run out of memory at
> times (ANS1028S). Journaling worked great when the files were on a
> Windows system, but journaling works only on a local file system. I
> don't think I can use NDMP because the tape library is connected only to
> the Tivoli server. Most of the time (and memory) is spent determining
> what files should be backed up. There are over 1 million directories.
>
>
> Total number of objects inspected: 7,819,693
> Total number of objects backed up: 260,984
> Total number of bytes transferred: 36.22 GB
> Data transfer time: 4,579.15 sec
> Elapsed processing time: 40:10:58
>
> There are about 36 "root" directories so I could configure the Network
> Appliance to have 36 shares and back up each separately if that would
> help. I think this would help with the memory problem. I would
> probably need to run multiple backups simultaneously though.
>
> I have added the following to the dsm.opt file
>
> RESOURceutilization 14
> MEMORYEFFICIENTBACKUP yes
>
> Any suggestions on how to speed the backup up?
>
>
> Windows 2000 SP2 with 512 Meg of Memory
> Client Version 5, Release 1, Level 7.0
> Server Version 5, Release 1, Level 9.0
>
> Scott Foley
|