Hi Again
Regarding the TSM DB, wouldn't the 'Used' and 'Total Usable Pages' figures
help to point to a fragmentation problem.
The output fro our DB is as follows:-
Available Space (MB): 10,000
Assigned Capacity (MB): 8,500
Maximum Extension (MB): 1,500
Maximum Reduction (MB): 1,492
Page Size (bytes): 4,096
Total Usable Pages: 2,176,000
Used Pages: 1,787,528
Pct Util: 82.1
Max. Pct Util: 82.5
Physical Volumes: 2
Buffer Pool Pages: 32,768
Total Buffer Requests: 10,278,342
Cache Hit Pct.: 98.88
Cache Wait Pct.: 0.00
Our database is 8500Mb assigned, and 82.1% utilised. So how do the figures
of '1,787,528 pages used' and '2,176,000 Usable Pages' work in this case.
If we have used 81% percent of 8500, our usable pages should be much lower
than used pages shouldn't it? Or am I missing something?
Thanks again
Farren Minns - John Wiley & Sons Ltd
Please respond to "ADSM: Dist Stor Manager" <ADSM-L AT VM.MARIST DOT EDU>
Sent by: "ADSM: Dist Stor Manager" <ADSM-L AT VM.MARIST DOT EDU>
To: ADSM-L AT VM.MARIST DOT EDU
cc:
Subject: Re: Fragmented Database Maybe?
>I'm Running TSM 4.2.2.12 on a Solaris 2.7 server (E250 400Mhz, 1GB mem).
>We have been having severe performance issues recently and moved our
database
>volumes off onto a new disk...
You haven't cited the cause-effect case which would motivate such a change.
Are you certain that is the problem area? If this is a substantial server,
then I would first wonder about the 1 GB memory size, which is rather small
these days. More memory is usually the most expeditious way to increase
the performance of a computer system. System performance monitoring should
reveal the bottlenecks.
>Also, is there anyway to see if indeed the database is fragmented?
(Chuckle) By definition, all databases are "fragmented" - it's inevitable,
and the way they operate. You will see numerous postings in the archives
that advise you not to be fixated on this, as it's unavoidable, and efforts
to "fix" it are ephemeral and time-costly.
Richard Sims, BU
|
