Zoltan Forray/AC/VCU wrote:
> I thought it was 800-bytes for each entry?
>

I once calculated it to be about 350 for a mainly unix environment...

> We will continue to expand our 3494 library. We can easily add a rack of
> 12-3592 drives.  All it takes is $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$.
>

One other thing to consider is using CDP for files. That eases off a lot
of your TSM server database load and per default probably only backs up
the files you want to keep.

>
>
> Remco Post <r.post AT PLCS DOT NL>
> Sent by: "ADSM: Dist Stor Manager" <ADSM-L AT VM.MARIST DOT EDU>
> 04/28/2008 05:51 PM
> Please respond to
> "ADSM: Dist Stor Manager" <ADSM-L AT VM.MARIST DOT EDU>
>
>
> To
> ADSM-L AT VM.MARIST DOT EDU
> cc
>
> Subject
> Re: [ADSM-L] TSM server scaling/sizing for lots (>20000) nodes
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Zoltan Forray/AC/VCU wrote:
>> Crazy project time...........
>>
>> I have been asked to research the
>> feasability/probability/scaleability/sizing of TSM to possibly handle
>> backing up thousands (actually close to 20,000 or more) desktops!
>>
>> Anybody have experience doing very, very large scale backups of so many
>> nodes?   Don't expect much in storage occupancy since we would exclude
>> things like MP3, etc.  It would just be the ##### of files/database size
>> (sounds like this would have to wait for V6 since DB2 should scale much
>> better).
>>
>> Does anyone run their TSM servers, open?   Trying to
>> administer/register/monitor this many clients would be a nightmare.
>>
>> They are talking about budgeting close to $1M, which would include more
>> bodies as well as the equipment/software!
>
> Well, you are an experienced TSM admin, so I guess you know the drill,
> about 500 bytes for each version of each file. Get a rough estimate of
> the number of files. The number of nodes you mention is an issue, even
> if each stores just a few files (they won't I guess).
>
> You'll need lots of TSM instances, and lots of db spindles. Really,
> there is a use for 15k RPM 72 GB  (or even 36 GB) disks in raid1, and
> you just found one.
>
> In my experience, there are a few things to make life easier, Gresham
> EDT is one of them, with autolabeling and decent library sharing, you
> really gain over TSM's native library sharing. On the plus-side, you are
> limited to ACSLS libraries, which you'll probably need anyway for larger
> amounts of data (how many options are there, really? ;-) ).
>
> --
>
> Met vriendelijke groeten,
>
> Remco Post


--
Met vriendelijke groeten,

Remco Post, PLCS