• Please help support our sponsors by considering their products and services.
    Our sponsors enable us to serve you with this high-speed Internet connection and fast webservers you are currently using at ADSM.ORG.
    They support this free flow of information and knowledge exchange service at no cost to you.

    Please welcome our latest sponsor Tectrade . We can show our appreciation by learning more about Tectrade Solutions
  • Community Tip: Please Give Thanks to Those Sharing Their Knowledge.

    If you receive helpful answer on this forum, please show thanks to the poster by clicking "LIKE" link for the answer that you found helpful.

  • Community Tip: Forum Rules (PLEASE CLICK HERE TO READ BEFORE POSTING)

    Click the link above to access ADSM.ORG Acceptable Use Policy and forum rules which should be observed when using this website. Violators may be banned from this website. This notice will disappear after you have made at least 3 posts.

ONE BIG INSTANCE IN LARGE SERVER OR MULTIPLE SMALL INSTANCES ON THAT LARGE SERVER

[email protected]

ADSM.ORG Member
Joined
Jan 4, 2014
Messages
31
Reaction score
2
Points
0
Question regarding Efficient Hardware Usage: we have a physical server which is large Scale as per blueprints ( 20 cores CPU , 600 GB mem , 4x10 GB nic , 4 X 4 16 GB hba etc ) ... Problem is as per recommendations its best to use one instance per server but to utilize this much of resources the database size is going to be around 4 TB which is not good either...
so in this kind of scenario where hardware is too big for one instance is it better to have ONE BIG INSTANCES IN LARGE SERVER OR MULTIPLE SMALL INSTANCES ON THATLARGE SERVER
 

Trident

TSM/Storge dude
ADSM.ORG Moderator
Joined
Apr 2, 2007
Messages
525
Reaction score
58
Points
0
Location
Oslo, Norway
Website
www.basefarm.no
Hi,

With the usual rule, your milage may vary.

If you have mostly lots of static data with low change rate, then the system can be split into multiple smaller ones.
 

marclant

ADSM.ORG Moderator
Joined
Jun 16, 2006
Messages
3,595
Reaction score
576
Points
0
Location
Canada
Website
www-947.ibm.com
It's more important that the server or servers be sized properly for the workload.

database size is going to be around 4 TB which is not good either...
Why is that not good?

ONE BIG INSTANCES IN LARGE SERVER OR MULTIPLE SMALL INSTANCES ON THATLARGE SERVER
One large instance. I would not do multiple instance unless there was a legal requirement to separate the clients. For example, you sell backup as a service, Customer1 backups go to Server1, Customer 2 go to Server2.

Otherwise, you are just adding complexity and extra management.
 

[email protected]

ADSM.ORG Member
Joined
Jan 4, 2014
Messages
31
Reaction score
2
Points
0
It's more important that the server or servers be sized properly for the workload.


Why is that not good?


One large instance. I would not do multiple instance unless there was a legal requirement to separate the clients. For example, you sell backup as a service, Customer1 backups go to Server1, Customer 2 go to Server2.

Otherwise, you are just adding complexity and extra management.

Thanks for the update ,

Why is that not good ?

Well , as the database size grows your going to have performance issues with it right i have seen it mentioned
in lot of forums as well.
 

marclant

ADSM.ORG Moderator
Joined
Jun 16, 2006
Messages
3,595
Reaction score
576
Points
0
Location
Canada
Website
www-947.ibm.com
Well , as the database size grows your going to have performance issues with it right i have seen it mentioned
in lot of forums as well.
Only if you don't have the proper storage. And 4 databases of 1 TB or 1 database of 4 TB will require the same IOPS.

Follow the blueprint recommendations for how to carve up the database and you will be fine. I have worked with customers with 8 TB databases, some have terrible performance because of the way they configured the storage, some have had great results because they did things differently.
 

[email protected]

ADSM.ORG Member
Joined
Jan 4, 2014
Messages
31
Reaction score
2
Points
0
Hi,

With the usual rule, your milage may vary.

If you have mostly lots of static data with low change rate, then the system can be split into multiple smaller ones.
so if the change rate is higher you think its better to have one large instance ?

At this point i dont know if our change rate is high or not , for example one of instances total occupancy size is 562 TB ( before dedupe ) our daily change rate is approx 13.5 TB . if there are 2 instances like that then what would be your suggestion
 

[email protected]

ADSM.ORG Member
Joined
Jan 4, 2014
Messages
31
Reaction score
2
Points
0
Only if you don't have the proper storage. And 4 databases of 1 TB or 1 database of 4 TB will require the same IOPS.

Follow the blueprint recommendations for how to carve up the database and you will be fine. I have worked with customers with 8 TB databases, some have terrible performance because of the way they configured the storage, some have had great results because they did things differently.

Thanks marclant ,

for your inputs.
 

Trident

TSM/Storge dude
ADSM.ORG Moderator
Joined
Apr 2, 2007
Messages
525
Reaction score
58
Points
0
Location
Oslo, Norway
Website
www.basefarm.no
so if the change rate is higher you think its better to have one large instance ?

At this point i dont know if our change rate is high or not , for example one of instances total occupancy size is 562 TB ( before dedupe ) our daily change rate is approx 13.5 TB . if there are 2 instances like that then what would be your suggestion
That big node is probably worth a dedicated SP host/instance, 13.5 TB ingest per day is quite high. in particular if that is after clients has done dedup and compression.

If you are going to use multiple instances/host, then your hardware and os may dictate some limitations. AIX/Power and x86 have different options.


I have mostly AIX systems that runs SP. S922 and S822 with 20 cores/2cpu and 512 Gb RAM
These are split into two partitions, each with dedicated nics and hba's. I try to keep my DB size to about 2 Tb per partition. The bottlenecks are mostly disk systems.

For DB size, I try to keep it below 2 Tb.

I know this is a grey answer, but building SP host depends upon your workloads, your available hardware/os/disks/lan/fabric/tape and so on.
 

Advertise at ADSM.ORG

If you are reading this, so are your potential customer. Advertise at ADSM.ORG right now.

UpCloud high performance VPS at $5/month

Get started with $25 in credits on Cloud Servers. You must use link below to receive the credit. Use the promo to get upto 5 month of FREE Linux VPS.

The Spectrum Protect TLA (Three-Letter Acronym): ISP or something else?

  • Every product needs a TLA, Let's call it ISP (IBM Spectrum Protect).

    Votes: 18 18.4%
  • Keep using TSM for Spectrum Protect.

    Votes: 60 61.2%
  • Let's be formal and just say Spectrum Protect

    Votes: 12 12.2%
  • Other (please comement)

    Votes: 8 8.2%

Forum statistics

Threads
31,734
Messages
135,284
Members
21,733
Latest member
valdemiroalves
Top