Re: [ADSM-L] Moving from TSMV5 to V6 / question on DIRMC

Hi Rainer,
        We had to use DIRMC, even though I've heard the same that it is no 
longer needed. Some of the servers I backup are so large that without DIRMC, 
the restores would take a substantial time to complete, I've also had an issue 
were the GUI had stopped working, and enabling DIRMC on these very large server 
solved the problem (http://www-01.ibm.com/support/docview.wss?uid=swg21162784 )

With only 3 servers using DIRMC, using your query below I have over 5,000,000 
objects in the dirmc stg pool. This really saves time for laying out the 
directory structure when restoring large folders/subfolder.

As far using a different nodeblock format, IBM preferred format is native. Are 
you seeing considerable changes with the nonblock option?
 
What would be the benefit of the two stage storage pool? Are both using a 
devclass of disk?

-Nick



-----Original Message-----
From: ADSM: Dist Stor Manager [mailto:ADSM-L AT VM.MARIST DOT EDU] On Behalf Of 
Rainer Wolf
Sent: Wednesday, October 30, 2013 6:54 AM
To: ADSM-L AT VM.MARIST DOT EDU
Subject: [ADSM-L] Moving from TSMV5 to V6 / question on DIRMC

Hello All,

we are currently using tsm V5 Server and soon will be moving to TSM V6, 
starting again from scratch with a brandnew ts3500 library and the new 3592-c 
drives.

The new TSM-Server Setups are to be reviewed and now I have some questions on 
the DIRMC feature which we distribute so far via server defined clientoptionset.

on dirmc there are two reasons for me why using it:
a) some tape mounts can be avoided using online pools of directories,links,...
        ...we have not much drives
b) the roughly quite easily producable output on the balancing
   between 'normal files' and 'directories + 0-byte-files + links + ...'
   can be shown with simple 'per-storage-pool-basis'
        ( select sum(num_files),stgpool_name from occupancy  group by 
stgpool_name )
   or simply can be displayed on a 'per-node-basis'
         ( with simly 'query occu stg=<diskdirpool>'

Especially the feature b) has often directly helped finding the basic source of 
occuring strange problems.

One question now is : with TSM 6 thre  may be no need to use dirmc anymore, is 
it possibe that directory-entries ( with extended acl-info) are then always 
stored in the database and never going to tapes ?

If it is okay and not quite abnormal to use the dirmc then the other question 
is:
is it still okay to use the following way defining a 2-Stage- Storagepool-setup 
and using the 'DATAFormat=nonblock' for the file-volumes fetching those dikdir 
data ?
  like
   define stg filedirs FILEDIR maxscr=0 reused=3 hi=100 lo=30 COLlocate=group 
reclaim=100 DATAFormat=nonblock
   define STG DISKDIRS DISK hi=60 lo=20 nextstg=filedirs

any hints are welcome
Rainer




--
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Rainer Wolf                          eMail:       rainer.wolf AT uni-ulm DOT de
kiz - Abt. Infrastruktur           Tel/Fax:      ++49 731 50-22482/22471
Universitaet Ulm