Re: Opinions anyone?

I always thought TSM is not so much CPU intensive. The main CPU
consumption is to drive I/O. In the past in IBM manuals there was info how
much load each adapter can put on the processor. Even if I have not seen
such info recently, does not automatically mean it does not exist. CPUs
are getting faster but the adapters are faster too.

Back to the topic: I would expect 2x [email protected] GHz be fine for your
load. 4 processors can be better but maybe not necessary right now. As you
need 2-way box with room for upgrade to 4-way, you may also consider
pSeries 630.

The disks: if you are having Shark (IBM ESS) and are already using it for
TSM - better stay with it. FAStT 700 is not bad but ESS is better. I would
disagree in part with Roger - I agree that TSM DB performance is over the
half of the deal but would rather recommend to keep TSM DB on Shark and
use FAStT for diskpool(s). ESS with its big memory cache shines on random
reads/writes while FAStT is good for streams of incoming backups or
migrated data. One or two ranks of ESS, preferable not shared (having no
other LUNs) with other applications, would serve you just fine.

If you move all those 0.5 TB over the LAN - use more than one LAN adapter.
If you have servers making big part of daily backups - consider moving
them to LAN-free.

Zlatko Krastev
IT Consultant






Leonard Lauria <Leonard AT UKY DOT EDU>
Sent by: "ADSM: Dist Stor Manager" <ADSM-L AT VM.MARIST DOT EDU>
31.05.2003 17:39
Please respond to "ADSM: Dist Stor Manager"


        To:     ADSM-L AT VM.MARIST DOT EDU
        cc:
        Subject:        Opinions anyone?


You can respond direct to me instead of the list
if you wish.  Thanks!

We are considering an IBM P650, either 2 or 4-way
system as our replacement TSM server.  4 to 8 GBs
of memory and around 1 terabyte of disk (FastT700?)
for database, log and disk pools.

Our current config is a Sun E4500 with 4 400 MHz
processors, 2 GB of memory, and 500 GB of disk
(mostly on a shark).

Our TSM database is 60 GBs, we manage approx 130
million files and 70 terabytes of storage.  We move
500 GBs per 24 hour period, with most occuring during
the night-time hours.

My questions are these:  The new system would be much
faster with either 2 or 4 1.2 GHz (or faster) processors,
but fast processors doesn't seem to be a huge factor
at our site.  Are 2 enough?  Can TSM efficiently use
4 processors?  Any site of simular size running on
the above platform?

I appreciate any information you can provide.

Thanks

leonard