ADSM-L

Re: Occupancy differences.

2004-09-29 16:47:58
Subject: Re: Occupancy differences.
From: Ben Bullock <bbullock AT MICRON DOT COM>
To: ADSM-L AT VM.MARIST DOT EDU
Date: Wed, 29 Sep 2004 14:42:38 -0600
        Well, I guess I will answer my own question....

        It looks to be a display bug/limitation on the server, as when I
grab the data from the occupancy table with a SQL command it looks
right:

tsm: TSMHOST3>select physical_mb from occupancy where node_name like
'BOFS8-X' 

 PHYSICAL_MB
------------
 51827269.94

        The odd thing is that I checked a couple of the other servers
with multi-TB of archived data and they don't seem to have the same
problem...

Odd...

Ben


>  -----Original Message-----
> From:         bbullock  
> Sent: Wednesday, September 29, 2004 2:31 PM
> To:   'ADSM: Dist Stor Manager'
> Subject:      Occupancy differences.
> 
>       Here is a strange one:
>       
>       We all see differences between the "q auditocc" command and the
> "Q occ" command, but they are typically rather small.
> 
>       On this one host, where all it does is archive some data that
> resides on a NetApp, there is a significant difference. The occ shows
> about 8.8TB and the auditocc shows 51TB:
>       
>       
> tsm: TSMHOST3>q occ BOFS8-X
> 
> Node Name  Type Filespace   FSID Storage    Number of  Physical
> Logical
>                 Name             Pool Name      Files     Space
> Space
>                                                        Occupied
> Occupied
>                                                            (MB)
> (MB)
> ---------- ---- ---------- ----- ---------- --------- ---------
> ---------
> BOFS8-X Arch    /netapp/b-     1 NOCOPY_TA-   143,633 8,874,745
> 8,874,745
>                  ofs8/vol-        PEPOOL                    .70
> .70
>                  /bofs8vo-
> 
>                  l2/X_-                                               
>                  backup
> 
> 
> tsm: TSMHOST3>q auditocc BOFS8-X
> License information as of last audit on 09/29/04 at 14:21:04.
> 
> Node Name                              Backup   Archive Space-Managed
> Total
>                                       Storage   Storage  Storage Used
> Storage
>                                     Used (MB) Used (MB)          (MB)
> Used (MB)
> ----------------------------------- --------- --------- -------------
> ---------
> BOFS8-X                                     0 51,824,41             0
> 51,824,41
>                                                       9
> 9
> 
> 
>       Quick math of the number of tapes and their capacity comes up
> with about 50TB. So it looks like the auditocc is on the money, but
> the occ is way off...
> 
>       Anybody else seen anything like this?
> 
> Thanks,
> Ben

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