The RESOURCEUTILIZATION parameter will accept numbers higher than 10, they're
not supported, of course.
Orville L. Lantto
________________________________
From: ADSM: Dist Stor Manager on behalf of Wanda Prather
Sent: Wed 9/10/2008 18:16
To: ADSM-L AT VM.MARIST DOT EDU
Subject: Re: [ADSM-L] How does VCB backups handle resource utilization?
Well, now you've confused me, as well...
When I set RESOURCEUTILIZATION 10, I get 8 sessions, but 4 are producers and
4 are consumers - so how did you get 8 tape mounts?
On Wed, Sep 10, 2008 at 5:54 PM, Schneider, John
<John.Schneider AT mercy DOT net>wrote:
> Ok, now we are getting down to the nitty gritty. Your example
> completely contradicts what is in the Performance Guide, which provides
> a table which I reproduce below. I hope email doesn't mess up the
> columns. It looks correct to me, I assure you. :-)
>
> RESOURCEUTILIZATION value Maximum number Unique number of
> Threshold
> of sessions producer sessions
> (seconds)
> 1 1 0 45
> 2 2 1 45
> 3 3 1 45
> 4 3 1 30
> 5 4 2 30
> 6 4 2 20
> 7 5 2 20
> 8 6 2 20
> 9 7 3 20
> 10 8 4 10
> 0 (default) 2 1 30
>
> A Resourceutil of 4 is a max of three sessions, and only one "producer"
> session, i.e. a tape mount. A Resourceutil of 5 is required for 2 tape
> mounts, and so on. If my client maxnummp=2, then a resourceutil of 4
> should not overrun it.
>
> UNLESS... either the manual is wrong and the algorithm is not what is
> stated. Or does the algorithm work differently in a Lan-free client
> situation? We have another Lan-free client in a different TSM
> environment, and we used to have a Resourceutil of 10 for a certain
> client there, and I would swear there were times when I saw 8 tape
> mounts. (The client maxnummp must have been high enough to permit
> this). So does Resourceutil really work like the table above, or do
> Lan-free clients or proxynode clients operate under a different set of
> rules? Anyone able to enlighten me?
>
> Best Regards,
>
> John D. Schneider
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: ADSM: Dist Stor Manager [mailto:ADSM-L AT VM.MARIST DOT EDU] On Behalf
> Of
> Bos, Karel
> Sent: Wednesday, September 10, 2008 11:48 AM
> To: ADSM-L AT VM.MARIST DOT EDU <mailto:ADSM-L AT VM.MARIST DOT EDU>
> Subject: Re: [ADSM-L] How does VCB backups handle resource utilization?
>
> It's late and it's long ago, but I seem to remember something about
> these mount point and resourceutil things in the line of:
>
> Resource 4, # mountpoint
> - 1 admin session
> - 1 mountpoint for diskpools
> - 2 mountpoint max for tape mounts
>
> So in you case, going directly to tape, you will get a max of 3
> mountpoints (because there is no diskpool) to tape.
>
>
> Regards/Met vriendelijke groet,
>
> Karel
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: ADSM: Dist Stor Manager [mailto:ADSM-L AT VM.MARIST DOT EDU] On Behalf
> Of
> Schneider, John
> Sent: woensdag 10 september 2008 18:27
> To: ADSM-L AT VM.MARIST DOT EDU <mailto:ADSM-L AT VM.MARIST DOT EDU>
> Subject: Re: How does VCB backups handle resource utilization?
>
> Howard,
> But resourceutilization is 4 now. It should give me fewer mount
> points, not more. So why I am overrunning the client's maximum mount
> points of 2 when resourceutilization is 4?
> The reason I can't just increase the client's maximum mount
> points until the message goes away is that there is a maximum of 64
> virtual tape drives, so I can't have every client grabbing 4 virtual
> tapes drives at once. There is also no reason to have all these small
> clients mounting multiple tape drives at once, since most of them don't
> have much data or take long to back up.
> I also just have this concept in my head that TSM is designed
> according to logical rules, and works as designed. So if it is not
> behaving the way I think it will, perhaps I don't understand the rules
> properly, and I need to fix my understanding.
>
> Best Regards,
>
> John D. Schneider
> Phone: 314-364-3150
> Cell: 314-750-8721
> Email: John.Schneider AT Mercy DOT net <mailto:John.Schneider AT Mercy DOT
> net>
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: ADSM: Dist Stor Manager [mailto:ADSM-L AT VM.MARIST DOT EDU] On Behalf
> Of
> Howard Coles
> Sent: Wednesday, September 10, 2008 10:39 AM
> To: ADSM-L AT VM.MARIST DOT EDU <mailto:ADSM-L AT VM.MARIST DOT EDU>
> Subject: Re: [ADSM-L] How does VCB backups handle resource utilization?
>
> Either increase the maximum allowed mountpoints or put a line in the
> client DSM.OPT along the lines of resourceutilization 5 (5 works well
> with 2 mountpoints allowed)
>
> See Ya'
> Howard
>
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: ADSM: Dist Stor Manager [mailto:ADSM-L AT VM.MARIST DOT EDU] On Behalf
> > Of Schneider, John
> > Sent: Wednesday, September 10, 2008 10:35 AM
> > To: ADSM-L AT VM.MARIST DOT EDU <mailto:ADSM-L AT VM.MARIST DOT EDU>
> > Subject: [ADSM-L] How does VCB backups handle resource utilization?
> >
> > Greetings,
> > We are running TSM 5.4.3.0 server on AIX 5.3ML5. The Lan-free VCB
>
> > proxy is running TSM client 5.5.0.6.
> > We are getting an unexpected result with our VMWare Consolidated
> > Backups. We are just starting to run these in volume, and we are
> > getting frequent messages:
> >
> > 09/10/08 00:02:06 ANR0539W Transaction failed for session 4448 for
> > node
> > EPCEMI11. This node has exceeded its maximum
> > number of
> > mount points. (SESSION: 4448)
> >
> > 09/10/08 00:02:06 ANR0539W Transaction failed for session 4449 for
> > node
> > EPCSTL11. This node has exceeded its maximum
> > number of
> > mount points. (SESSION: 4449)
> >
> > 09/10/08 00:02:07 ANR0539W Transaction failed for session 4439 for
> > node
> > EPCSGF01RO. This node has exceeded its maximum
> > number of
> > mount points. (SESSION: 4439)
> >
> > 09/10/08 00:02:07 ANR0539W Transaction failed for session 4444 for
> > node
> > EPCSGF01RO. This node has exceeded its maximum
> > number of
> > mount points. (SESSION: 4444)
> >
> >
> > The destination storage pool is a virtual tape library, which is why
> > mount points are involved.
> >
> > In the Lan-free proxy server running VCB, the Resourceutilization is
> > set to 4, and the maximum mount points is 8. On the proxy clients
> > themselves, I understand they inherit the Resourceutilization of the
> > proxy server, so they would be 4 also. Their maximum mount points is
> > set to 2. When Resourceutilization is 4, aren't the maximum mount
> > points of 2 enough? According to the Performance Tuning Guide,
> > Resourceutilization of 4 should not allow more than one mounted tape.
> >
> > We aren't getting the error for all clients, just a fraction of them.
> > So maybe it is only happening for larger clients where the
> > Resourceutilization algorithm to mount another tape kicks in? We
> > could
> > always just jack the maximum mount points for the clients up and up
> > until the problem goes away, but I don't understand why the client is
> > trying to mount more than 2 tapes with Resourceutilization set to 4.
> >
> >
> > Best Regards,
> >
> > John D. Schneider
> > Lead Systems Administrator - Storage
> > Sisters of Mercy Health Systems
> > 3637 South Geyer Road
> > St. Louis, MO 63127
> > Phone: 314-364-3150
> > Cell: 314-750-8721
> > Email: John.Schneider AT Mercy DOT net <mailto:John.Schneider AT Mercy DOT
> > net>
> >
> >
> > This e-mail contains information which (a) may be PROPRIETARY IN
> NATURE
> > OR
> > OTHERWISE PROTECTED BY LAW FROM DISCLOSURE, and (b) is intended only
> > for the use of the addressee(s) named above. If you are not the
> > addressee, or the person responsible for delivering this to the
> > addressee(s), you are notified that reading, copying or distributing
> > this e-mail is prohibited. If
> you
> > have
> > received this e-mail in error, please contact the sender immediately.
> This e-mail contains information which (a) may be PROPRIETARY IN NATURE
> OR OTHERWISE PROTECTED BY LAW FROM DISCLOSURE, and (b) is intended only
> for the use of the addressee(s) named above. If you are not the
> addressee, or the person responsible for delivering this to the
> addressee(s), you are notified that reading, copying or distributing
> this e-mail is prohibited. If you have received this e-mail in error,
> please contact the sender immediately.
>
>
>
> This e-mail contains information which (a) may be PROPRIETARY IN NATURE OR
> OTHERWISE PROTECTED BY LAW FROM DISCLOSURE, and (b) is intended only for
> the
> use of the addressee(s) named above. If you are not the addressee, or the
> person responsible for delivering this to the addressee(s), you are
> notified
> that reading, copying or distributing this e-mail is prohibited. If you
> have
> received this e-mail in error, please contact the sender immediately.
>
This email and any files transmitted with it are confidential and intended
solely for the use of the individual or entity to whom they are addressed. If
you have received this email in error please notify the system manager. This
message contains confidential information and is intended only for the
individual named. If you are not the named addressee you should not
disseminate, distribute or copy this e-mail.
|
