We are using 25 GB volumes right now.  We are also still collocating the 
storage pools that use the file device class by node.  This has worked out fine 
for us.  Sad to admit but I wasn't aware of the Technical Exchange 
recommendation. Is there a white paper from that you could refer me to.

We are contemplating turning on node compression everywhere to also help reduce 
disk space.

Also, I made mention in a previous post that we were reclaiming down to 50% and 
that was fine.  Well, like always when you make a comment like that it makes 
you think and they you go look. I found that we were using around 16 TB's of 
ATA space in all when you look at the "In Use" numbers.  When I looked at the 
actual disk in use it was closer to 21 TB's of data.  I am currently reclaiming 
everything down to 40 and I plan to get down to 25 again.  At that point I will 
compare the numbers and see how much I can reduce the 21 TB's in use.

Also somewhat interesting information.  We have found that the I/O capabilities 
of the latest and greatest servers can really help push a lot more data to 
disk.  We have always been told by our disk vendor that the bottleneck wasn't 
them.  We ruled out many things except them.  Finally we looked at a more 
detailed performance monitor of our systems and we found that the we were 
killing the processor during times when we were pushing a lot of data to disk.  
With these new servers we see migrations from Fibre disk to ATA disk at over 
150 GB/hr.  We do have 60 TB's of ATA space though so we have a lot of disks to 
write to.


"Rushforth, Tim" <TRushforth AT WINNIPEG DOT CA> wrote:
Just curious what size of file volumes are you using? We were originally
using 25 GB, and then I listened to the "Disk Only Backup Strategies"
Technical Exchange where they recommended 2-4 GB volumes.

Thanks,

Tim Rushforth
City of Winnipeg

-----Original Message-----
From: TSM_User [mailto:tsm_user AT YAHOO DOT COM]
Sent: July 27, 2004 6:41 PM
To: ADSM-L AT VM.MARIST DOT EDU
Subject: Re: D2D vs. tape backups with TSM?

Funny, we set ours down to 25% as well just to see what would happen. This
worked but we have since set all of the ATA Pools to 50% and we just leave
them there. Theoretically what could happen is we could be wasting twice as
much space but the fact is the volumes were going from 25% to 50% in a
matter of days and when we looked at how many volumes were between 25% and
50% in our environment we determined there was no need to reclaim down that
far. From all outward signs there was no issues with reclaiming down to 25%
we just didn't think it was worth doing the extra work to get back such a
small amount of disk. Disk is cheap, right! lol


"Rushforth, Tim" wrote:
We've set ours at 25%. We are just piloting an all disk backup pool for
some clients on one of our servers and for small files on another.


---------------------------------
Do you Yahoo!?
Y! Messenger - Communicate in real time. Download now.