I did some NFS testing last year:
=================================
Test 1: I wanted to determine the feasibility of using a Deduplication
device that was NAS attached to the server
Equipment
TSM V6 on AIX6
DataDomain - DDR510
1Gb Ethernet
I was using 2GB File devices on an NFS mount from the DDR as primary
pool
Data Transfer speed was acceptable for testing but was not an objective
of the test.
Deduplication was around 46% for a couple of Windows workstations and
the TSM server.
============================
Test2: Can I run an entire environment on NFS rather than Fiber Channel?
Equipment
TSM V6 on AIX5.3
NetApp 3040 using 250GB SATA drives and deduplication
1Gb Ethernet
2Gb fiber Channel
Test - TSM 5.5 upgrade to V6.1, InsertDB operation for 4GB TSM Database
Fiber Channel = 9122MB/hour
NFS = 7491MB/hour
- The entire TSM environment EXCEPT the binaries & configuration files
were located on NFS. This allowed for simple and quick DB backup and
recovery using snapshots through the DB2 interface.
- Deduplication of the DB was significant but the small test data set I
was using may not have been representative of an operation environment.
==================================================
Conclusions:
- NFS may be viable for some environments and may actually be preferable
to local or SAN storage. The simple protection offered by DB2
integrated snapshots can provide that extra level of protection that
lets you sleep well.
- If you don't have a SAN infrastructure, and don't want to build out a
bunch of local disks, the NFS is easly scalable.
This testing only applied to an AIX environment.
- Deduplication performed on a NAS device is probably superior to the
native deduplication of TSM. The TSM server does not have to spend CPU
and memory and the TSM database does not have to track it.
I stress again - Wanda's trueism - Your Mileage May Vary. You have to
know your environment and determine what best fits. I will soon migrate
my V5 environment to a couple of 750GB V6 databases and I am hesitant to
put it all on the bleeding edge. The library manager might be an
excellent candidate for NFS because of the low data volume but need for
quick recoverability in the event of problems.
=================================================
Some references I used during this testing:
SNIA "Running Database Applications on NAS: How and Why?" by Stephen
Daniel
http://snia.org/images/tutorial_docs/Applications/StephenDaniel_Running_
Database_Application_NAS.pdf
NetApp TR-3654 - "Planning for the Unplanned: DB2 9 Disaster Recovery
with a NetApp Storage System"
http://www.netapp.com/us/library/technical-reports/tr-3654.html
NetApp TR-3668 - "Using Integrated Snapshot Backup Feature of IBM DB2
9.5 with NetApp Storage System"
http://www.netapp.com/us/library/technical-reports/tr-3668.html
NetApp TR-3581 - "Performance Study of IBM DB2 9 on AIX 5L With NFS,
ISCSI and FCP using IBM N Series"
http://www.netapp.com/us/library/technical-reports/tr-3581.html
IBM - "Setup and Configuration of the DB2 Snapshot Backup with IBM
N-Series Storage in an SAP Environment" by Thomas Mattha and Sergiy
Malikov
http://www.sdn.sap.com/irj/scn/index;jsessionid=(J2EE3417200)ID177681265
0DB11015948196948835748End?rid=/library/uuid/0019590b-658d-2b10-24bd-9c6
882b2b009&overridelayout=true
Cheers,
Neil Strand
Storage Engineer - Legg Mason
Baltimore, MD.
(410) 580-7491
Whatever you can do or believe you can, begin it.
Boldness has genius, power and magic.
-----Original Message-----
From: ADSM: Dist Stor Manager [mailto:ADSM-L AT VM.MARIST DOT EDU] On Behalf Of
Dale Jolliff
Sent: Wednesday, August 04, 2010 9:31 AM
To: ADSM-L AT VM.MARIST DOT EDU
Subject: Re: [ADSM-L] FILE Device class over NFS
I have to preface any statements I make here with the following
disclosure:
I work for EMC, and worked for Data Domain before EMC acquired us.
This hopefully will not be construed as any sort of advertising.
I have been involved in a number of Data Domain/TSM implementations over
the last couple of years. I don't know the exact number off the top of
my head, but there are a lot of folks out there using FILE device class
via NFS.
I see a lot of advantages with FILE device class, especially with 5.5
and the ability to do multiple mounts of a single volume for read
access, but you do have to weigh the potential issues of network
problems and how NFS behaves.
We have recently had a customer open a PMR with IBM about TSM 5 to get
an official response from IBM. Unfortunately, (in my opinion) the
question to IBM was not optimally stated - the question and response
appeared to confuse TSM DISK class storage pools with FILE device class
- at least the distinction in the answer wasn't clear to me.
I'd agree that TSM DB, LOG and DISK device class storage are not optimal
on NFS for version 5. FILE device class over NFS works, and works well
- in my experience.
That said, I don't see any advantage for IBM to make any statement about
NFS support - the primary IBM offering that competes with Data Domain
storage doesn't offer an NFS option so far as I'm aware. I'm not
suggesting there is an ulterior motive in the vague responses we have
gotten, but that's just my take. Play to your strengths :)
I can't see IBM saying they don't support NFS for version 6 for DB or
LOG volumes for TSM 6 - DB2 specifically supports NFS as storage, and
since the DB behind TSM 6 is DB2 ... It will be interesting to see how
that plays out.
Dale Jolliff - (Not speaking for anyone but myself.)
-----Original Message-----
From: ADSM: Dist Stor Manager [mailto:ADSM-L AT VM.MARIST DOT EDU] On Behalf Of
David McClelland
Sent: Wednesday, August 04, 2010 7:18 AM
To: ADSM-L AT VM.MARIST DOT EDU
Subject: Re: [ADSM-L] FILE Device class over NFS
I couldn't see the original posting in this thread, but I'm interested -
the
only TSM statement I could find in the docs which looks like it might be
NFS-related was:
"Tivoli Storage Manager supports the use of remote file systems or
drives
for reading and writing storage pool data, database backups, and other
data
operations. Remote file systems in particular may report successful
writes,
even after being configured for synchronous operations. This mode of
operation causes data integrity issues if the file system can fail after
reporting a successful write. Check with the vendor of your file system
to
ensure that flushes are performed to nonvolatile storage in a
synchronous
manner."
(http://publib.boulder.ibm.com/infocenter/tivihelp/v1r1/topic/com.ibm.it
smai
xn.doc/anragd5582.htm#disksub1020)
Anyone else seen anything else that addresses NFS support specifically?
//DMc
-----Original Message-----
From: ADSM: Dist Stor Manager [mailto:ADSM-L AT VM.MARIST DOT EDU] On Behalf Of
Richard Rhodes
Sent: 04 August 2010 12:27
To: ADSM-L AT VM.MARIST DOT EDU
Subject: Re: [ADSM-L] FILE Device class over NFS
We don't do this . . .we don't even have a DD (or any other dedup
system).
But my team lead went to a TSM users group meeting were she found
several
companies doing NFS to a DD.
bkupmstr
<tsm-forum@BACKUP
CENTRAL.COM>
To
Sent by: "ADSM: ADSM-L AT VM.MARIST DOT EDU
Dist Stor
cc
Manager"
<[email protected]
Subject
.EDU> FILE Device class over NFS
08/04/2010 12:20
AM
Please respond to
[email protected].
EDU
Ever get an answer to this one Dale.
I guess it wouldn't bode to well for DD if IBM came right out and stated
that they don't support it?
Hmm
+----------------------------------------------------------------------
|This was sent by bkupmstr AT yahoo DOT com via Backup Central.
|Forward SPAM to abuse AT backupcentral DOT com.
+----------------------------------------------------------------------
IMPORTANT: E-mail sent through the Internet is not secure. Legg Mason
therefore recommends that you do not send any confidential or sensitive
information to us via electronic mail, including social security numbers,
account numbers, or personal identification numbers. Delivery, and or timely
delivery of Internet mail is not guaranteed. Legg Mason therefore recommends
that you do not send time sensitive
or action-oriented messages to us via electronic mail.
This message is intended for the addressee only and may contain privileged or
confidential information. Unless you are the intended recipient, you may not
use, copy or disclose to anyone any information contained in this message. If
you have received this message in error, please notify the author by replying
to this message and then kindly delete the message. Thank you.
|
