ADSM-L

Re: Throttling back TSM client

2006-04-25 17:30:12
Subject: Re: Throttling back TSM client
From: Helder Garcia <helder.garcia AT GMAIL DOT COM>
To: ADSM-L AT VM.MARIST DOT EDU
Date: Tue, 25 Apr 2006 18:26:18 -0300
Paul,

If the tsm clients are running under linux, you could use CBQ (Class
Based Queueing) to perform traffic shapping on the output traffic of
the nic. This works pretty well.

Google for CBQ Linux. .

On 4/25/06, Andrew Raibeck <storman AT us.ibm DOT com> wrote:
> > Seems that every action has some re-action.
>
> Sounds like Raibeck's Rule #37: "There is no free lunch"   :-)
>
> Regard,
>
> Andy
>
> Andy Raibeck
> IBM Software Group
> Tivoli Storage Manager Client Development
> Internal Notes e-mail: Andrew Raibeck/Tucson/IBM@IBMUS
> Internet e-mail: storman AT us.ibm DOT com
>
> IBM Tivoli Storage Manager support web page:
> http://www-306.ibm.com/software/sysmgmt/products/support/IBMTivoliStorageManager.html
>
> The only dumb question is the one that goes unasked.
> The command line is your friend.
> "Good enough" is the enemy of excellence.
>
> "ADSM: Dist Stor Manager" <ADSM-L AT VM.MARIST DOT EDU> wrote on 2006-04-25
> 13:40:27:
>
> > Thanks Richard, et al,
> >
> > I thought the default RESOURCEUTIL was also the minimal value, so I
> > don't think we could lower that any more than it already is.  Using
> > MEMORYEFFICIENTBACKUP is a good idea, as is using 'nice' to
> deprioritize.
> >
> > We have actually been working hard to improve TSM performance so that
> > we can restore data more quickly.  Seems that every action has some
> > re-action.  Reducing the TSM Server as a bottleneck serves to move
> > the bottleneck to the client, where it can interfere with other
> applications.
> >
> > ..Paul
> >
> > At 02:37 PM 4/25/2006, Richard Sims wrote:
> > >Certainly, "de-tuning" the TSM backups will reduce the impact, where
> > >the most obvious tactic is to minimize RESOURceutilization. And you
> > >can get more drastic via MEMORYEFficientbackup Yes. Depending upon
> > >the file population, the influx of the Active files list at the
> > >beginning of an incremental will always have a "fixed" impact. Beyond
> > >that, you can deprioritize the TSM client process at the OS level.
> >
> >
> > --
> > Paul Zarnowski                            Ph: 607-255-4757
> > Manager, Storage Systems                  Fx: 607-255-8521
> > 719 Rhodes Hall, Ithaca, NY 14853-3801    Em: psz1 AT cornell DOT edu
>


--
Helder Garcia

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>