Re: [ADSM-L] Re: Migration process

2007-04-10 21:02:28
Subject: Re: [ADSM-L] Re: Migration process
From: David Bronder <david-bronder AT UIOWA DOT EDU>
Date: Tue, 10 Apr 2007 20:02:03 -0500
Richard Sims wrote:
> On Apr 10, 2007, at 7:57 PM, David Bronder wrote:
> > ... However, the
> > automated migrations seem to not be very sensitive to the LOWMIG value
> > (I've been moving it closer to HIGHMIG but the migrations still keep
> > on running). ...
> David -
> See "Migration" in the TSM Concepts redbook, and "LOwmig"
> in .

Richard, Steve,

Yeah, I'm aware of how migration works. :)  I'm pretty sure none of
my nodes are consuming 40% or so of any one of my disk pools most
nights, though.

That said, it's also a subjective observation, and with multiple
migration processes running that impression would be further enhanced
(thus my lament about the lack of a MIGPROCESS override).  It certainly
could be that the times I notice it happen to be the times where the
top 3-4 consumers of the pool do in fact consume 40%+ of the pool.

On the other hand, I did notice in TSM 5.3 that a different threshold,
copy pool reclamation I think, became _more_ sensitive to the value.
Where previous versions would continue the reclamation processing to
conclusion even if the threshold changed, TSM 5.3 cancels the process
almost immediately.

Hello World.                                    David Bronder - Systems Admin
Segmentation Fault                                     ITS-SPA, Univ. of Iowa
Core dumped, disk trashed, quota filled, soda warm.   david-bronder AT uiowa 
DOT edu

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