We have used both methods with varying success.  We did 10M+ files with 
diskcache method, we devoted a file system to the cache, we excluded the file 
system from backups. We also limited the disk cache to specific file systems.

Journaling is also useful if you can get past a first run.

We were able to get to a 64bit OS during an upgrade that made all of the memory 
problems go away.

If it is a VM or the file systems in question are on the SAN there are other 
options.

Andy Huebner


-----Original Message-----
From: ADSM: Dist Stor Manager [mailto:ADSM-L AT VM.MARIST DOT EDU] On Behalf Of 
Prather, Wanda
Sent: Monday, October 14, 2013 12:33 PM
To: ADSM-L AT VM.MARIST DOT EDU
Subject: Re: [ADSM-L] how is memoryefficient diskcachemethod supposed to work

If someone has put RESOURCEUTILIZATION in the dsm.opt, remove it or specify 2, 
so that the client isn't trying to do multiple filesystems at once.  (That, of 
course, will slow things down.  But will use less memory.)

You can also just use a different machine with more memory.
I had a similar problem - an old client, memory starved, old application 
everybody was afraid to touch.
Until we could get the machine converted to a VM, I had to resort to using a 
proxy machine to do the backup via UNC name (CIFS) .

Proxy backups aren't a perfect solution, either, because CIFS can be too slow 
in traversing the directory structure across the network.  But sometimes you 
can get around that by using multiple proxies, one for each filesystem, if it 
isn't one big filesystem.

Or a combination of strategies:  -incrbydate on a daily basis, then a 
long-running, proxied backup without -incrbydate on the weekend?

W

 



---Original Message-----
From: ADSM: Dist Stor Manager [mailto:ADSM-L AT VM.MARIST DOT EDU] On Behalf Of 
Paul Zarnowski
Sent: Monday, October 14, 2013 11:17 AM
To: ADSM-L AT VM.MARIST DOT EDU
Subject: Re: [ADSM-L] how is memoryefficient diskcachemethod supposed to work

If I'm not mistaken (and I very well may be!), the diskcachemethod works on a 
directory by directory basis.  If you have a lot of objects in one "flat" 
directory (without subdirectories), it may not help that much.  Alternatively, 
if your volume is spread well (deeply) across lots of directories, then it will 
be more helpful.

 From the User's Guide:
>Note that for file systems with large numbers (millions) of directories, the 
>client still might not be able to allocate enough memory to perform 
>incremental backup with memoryefficientbackup yes.


Another option would be to use -incrbydate, but that has its own caveats.

..Paul



At 07:29 AM 10/14/2013, Hans Christian Riksheim wrote:
>We have a memory starved Windows 2003 server and incremental fails with 
>"ANS1030E The operating system refused a TSM request for memory allocation."
>
>So we try memoryefficient diskcachemethod.
>
>What we see is that dsmc reports diskcachemethod is in use for all 
>filesystems. We also see that the diskcachelocation is populated.
>
>However the dsmc process still increases to 1,3GB and eventually dies 
>with the error message above. Client is 6.4.0.10 32.bit.
>
>Any ideas before I raise a PMR?
>
>Hans Chr. Riksheim


--
Paul Zarnowski                            Ph: 607-255-4757
Manager of Storage Services               Fx: 607-255-8521
IT at Cornell / Infrastructure            Em: psz1 AT cornell DOT edu
719 Rhodes Hall, Ithaca, NY 14853-3801