Further investigation with support on this particular question and the
number of db volumes per spindle, I received the following reply:

"We have no recommendation on that, because it can be so environment
specific."

The hardware is IBM so why not have a recommendation?

I find it awful disappointing to know that after all these years IBM has
absolutely no performance recommendations to give on their own product. With
all the hardware they make and money to test on, at least the platforms they
support, you'd think they'd have some recommendation or at least venture to
speculate. After all, how many of these performance tickets do you think
they've had since the inception of ADSM?

Thanks,

Geoff Gill
TSM Administrator
PeopleSoft Sr. Systems Administrator
SAIC M/S-G1b
(858)826-4062
Email: geoffrey.l.gill AT saic DOT com



-----Original Message-----
From: Gill, Geoffrey L.
Sent: Monday, August 21, 2006 2:48 PM
To: 'ADSM: Dist Stor Manager'
Subject: RE: poor performance

> What size disks?  were these the same disks as on your previous setup?

All disks are 36GB. Yes, these are the same size as the previous setup.

Available space is 132GB assigned capacity is 120GB.

The difference would be in the number of db volumes. The old system has 9, 3
on each 36GB disk the new just 4, one on each on the 4 disks. Sounds like I
should work on splitting those volumes and put 3 on each disk since they are
36GB each.

I guess I didn't expect, (IF this a huge source of my problems) that this
would make that much difference.

Thanks,

Geoff Gill
TSM Administrator
PeopleSoft Sr. Systems Administrator
SAIC M/S-G1b
(858)826-4062
Email: geoffrey.l.gill AT saic DOT com