Sure is!  Thanks...
We're wondering why we didn't think of it!
Julie

Kelly J. Lipp wrote:
>
> Great idea!
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From:   Jay P. Weidner [SMTP:jpw AT VETMED.WSU DOT EDU]
> Sent:   Tuesday, November 11, 1997 5:21 PM
> To:     ADSM-L AT VM.MARIST DOT EDU
> Subject:        Re: Database size in Version 3
>
> I don't know your application that needs these 182 million files but it
> would seem unlikely that it would need them all concurrently.  Would it
> work to use tar to combine a 1000 or 100000 of these small files into one
> file that could be accessed and untarred as necessary in the future?  We
> have done this followed by a gzip of the tarred file when we have wanted
> to keep the data semi-accessable.  We used scripts to tar and zip the
> files at time of archive and have other scripts to unzip and extract
> required files on demand either manually or preferrably by a menu driven
> scripts within the application.
>
> With one application I'm currently using this method and converting
> 850-900 files in a directory into one file.  The single file is 520 Mbytes
> and compresses to 73.4 Mbytes.  The tar takes under 5 minutes but the gzip
> can take over 30 minutes.  Since it occurs locally it doesn't affect my
> net traffic and the subsequent backup of the single 73 Mb file decreases
> net traffic substantially.  With your scenario if you could use a similar
> strategy you could not only derease net traffic but also decrease your
> ADSM database by a factor of 1000 or greater.
>
> Jay P. Weidner
> College Of Veterinary Medicine
> Washington State University
>
> On Tue, 11 Nov 1997, Julie Phinney wrote:
>
> > We have a need to keep 100,000 new files from one client every day, 5
> > days a week, for 7 years.  This is 182 million files.  By my calculation
> > (the utilization I'm currently getting on the database) this would take
> > 118 GB of ADSM database space. (This would include keeping one offsite
> > copy).
> > Does anyone know if the way ADSM stores small files with V3 is any
> > different?  I know it can move them differently, with small file
> > aggregation, but is the database structure any different?
> > IBM... will I use just as much database with V3 as V2?
> > THANKS!
> > Julie Phinney
> > JPHINNEY AT HUMANA DOT COM