I don't have much experience with filesystems outside of nss/ntfs, but I
haven't noticed any slowness at our site because of it. One difference from
Debbie's situation is that we do have the directories getting backed up to
disk, never going to tape. I ran a quick test (that's still running). So far
after one hour, I've restored 52,873 files with a total size of 26.5GB. The
tsm server is on a gigabit switch with the restore server. Our tsm server is
v5.2.2.2, and the client is running v5.3.
My first inkling is that she either needs to change where her directories get
backed up, or check out the dsm.opt & dsmserv.opt settings.
Troy Frank
Network Services
University of Wisconsin Medical Foundation
608.829.5384
>>> tsm AT COMPARECOMPUTERS DOT NL 8/4/2005 8:57:20 AM >>>
Hi Debbie,
If your diskpool is big enoufh, you can try a "move nodedata <nodename>
from=<tapepool> to=<diskpool>" first, so you can restore from disk. Than you
know if the problem is in the library or not.
I also know that Netware is not so fast in building big directory structures,
so you can also win alot with dirmc, than TSM restores the directory stucture
first, and than the files. If posible you can even use a small diskpool for
dirmc's only, what you don't migrate to tape, this is also a big winner when
restoring "slow" FS's as Netware and NTFS.
Regards,
Maurice
----- Original Message -----
From: Debbie Bassler
To: ADSM-L AT VM.MARIST DOT EDU
Sent: Wednesday, August 03, 2005 10:19 PM
Subject: Re: [ADSM-L] Technote 1200328
Oops, I meant to include that in the email. The bottom of this doc shows the
transfer rates..
Lawrence Clark < Larry_Clark AT THRUWAY.STATE.NY DOT US >
Sent by: "ADSM: Dist Stor Manager" < ADSM-L AT VM.MARIST DOT EDU >
08/03/2005 04:10 PM
Please respond to "ADSM: Dist Stor Manager"
To: ADSM-L AT VM.MARIST DOT EDU
cc:
Subject: Re: [ADSM-L] Technote 1200328
What did the tranfer rate show as?
1024 x 6.24 = 6389MB (megabyte)
Network is usually in Megabit, yes?
6389MB x 8 = 51112 (megabit)
>>> Deborah_Bassler AT PAPAJOHNS DOT COM 08/03/2005 3:49:17 PM >>>
This doc offers alot of information about improving performance. I'm
especially interested in this because it took 56 minutes to restore
6.24G
of data, from Novell server to Novell server, over a 100MB pipe.
Our TSM version is 5.1.1 ( I know,,,we need to upgrade)...and the
client
version is 5.2.
In the dsmserv.opt file the MIRRORWRITE DB = SEQUENTIAL. According to
this
doc, we'll get better performance is we change MIRRORWRITE DB to
PARALLEL.
I thought I would do this then add the DBPAGESHADOW = YES parameter.
(the
MIRRORWRITE LOG = PARALLEL)
My plan is to make small changes to see if there is an impact, positive
or
negative. We have 2G of virtual memory, so I changed the bufpoolsize
from
262144 to 524288 and thought I'd make the MIRRORWRITE DB change also.
Has anyone made these changes and seen any performance
improvements/degredations? Any experiences or advice is welcome.....
Thanks for any input,
Debbie
Confidentiality Notice follows:
The information in this message (and the documents attached to it, if any)
is confidential and may be legally privileged. It is intended solely for
the addressee. Access to this message by anyone else is unauthorized. If
you are not the intended recipient, any disclosure, copying, distribution
or any action taken, or omitted to be taken in reliance on it is
prohibited and may be unlawful. If you have received this message in
error, please delete all electronic copies of this message (and the
documents attached to it, if any), destroy any hard copies you may have
created and notify me immediately by replying to this email. Thank you.
|
