Hi,
You didn't mention which platform you are running on, but check for
backint version 2.3.x.x.x which can do multiplexing in client side.
BR:
Timo
> We have seen the same thing when trying to run in parallel to a
collocated
> tape pool. When a client goes to back up, it goes through these 5
steps
> looking for a tape. If it sees there is one being used that is not
full, it
> will wait for it. This chunk of text is from the Administrator's
Guide.
>
> How the Server Selects Volumes with Collocation
Enabled
> When collocation at the client node level is enabled for a storage
pool
> (COLLOCATION=YES) and a client node backs up, archives, or migrates
files to
> the
> storage pool, the server attempts to select a volume using the
following
> selection order:
> 1. A volume that already contains files from the same client node
> 2. An empty predefined volume
> 3. An empty scratch volume
> 4. A volume with the most available free space among volumes that
already
> contain
> data
>
> It gets stuck on #1.
>
> One way around it is to run a "move data ####" just to move a
couple
> of files to a couple of other scratch tapes and then cancel the
process.
> That it will move a little data to those new tapes "to mark them as
that
> nodes territory". Next time you run multiple streams, it will see
those
> other tapes that are "his/hers ;-)" and go to them instead of waiting
for
> the mounted ones.
> It's a kludge, but in those cases where you don't want to turn
off
> collocation on that storage pool, it will work. At least it would get
you
> through your testing.
>
>
> Ben
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Roig Georges [mailto:Georges.Roig AT UNICIBLE DOT CH]
> Sent: Wednesday, November 25, 1998 10:09 AM
> To: ADSM-L AT VM.MARIST DOT EDU
> Subject: Parallel sessions with backint
>
>
> Hi,
>
> I'm working to increase the speed of my SAP backup, and for the moment
the
> performance I realized is 20GB/h direct to tape with
> 1 parallel session.
> I 'm trying to run backint witn 2 parallel sessions direct to tape,
but
> only one session is backed up by the tape, the other one is in MediaW
> status.
> When the first session is finish, the second session continue, and the
same
> for the third session until the second session is finish etc....
>
> Does anyone has an idea why the both sessions doesn't really running
in
> parallel ?
>
> Georges
>
> (BACKINT 2.2)
>
|
