Because of this, and if you want to use TSM dedup, you could access your
storage over NFS as a FILE device pool. That is, instead of using a VTL
interface over fiberchannel you could bring up a NFS server on the Linux box
and access it as a TSM FILE device pool over ethernet.
Whether to use TSM dedup or VTL sftw dedup may depend on which provides better
dedup ratio. You might want to perform a test with a large sample of your data
to see what ratio you get with each.
Rick
-----Original Message-----
From: ADSM: Dist Stor Manager [mailto:ADSM-L AT VM.MARIST DOT EDU] On Behalf Of
Ehresman,David E.
Sent: Friday, June 13, 2014 7:53 AM
To: ADSM-L AT VM.MARIST DOT EDU
Subject: Re: TSM and VTL Deduplication
Just so we're all clear here.
You cannot TSM dedup to virtual tape, even though the virtual tape is actually
disk. TSM dedup has to go to a TSM defined FILE storage pool, not a TSM
defined tape storage pool.
If you write to a virtual tape storage pool, the data will be written to those
virtual tapes un-deduped by TSM. It the virtual tape does dedup, it will do so
but TSM will have no part in that operation and will in fact not know that it
has been done.
David
-----Original Message-----
From: ADSM: Dist Stor Manager [mailto:ADSM-L AT VM.MARIST DOT EDU] On Behalf Of
Dan Haufer
Sent: Thursday, June 12, 2014 4:31 PM
To: ADSM-L AT VM.MARIST DOT EDU
Subject: Re: [ADSM-L] TSM and VTL Deduplication
Yes, one of the two. If TSM deduplication is enabled and the target is a
virtual tape, i doubt if the VTL can deduplicate anything from the write data.
--------------------------------------------
On Thu, 6/12/14, Ehresman,David E. <deehre01 AT LOUISVILLE DOT EDU> wrote:
Subject: Re: [ADSM-L] TSM and VTL Deduplication
To: ADSM-L AT VM.MARIST DOT EDU
Date: Thursday, June 12, 2014, 12:51 PM
Unless you have a
specific requirement, I would suggest you choose either TSM dedup to disk or
go straight to virtual tape. There is not usually a need to do both.
David
-----Original Message-----
From: ADSM: Dist Stor Manager [mailto:ADSM-L AT VM.MARIST DOT EDU] On Behalf
Of Dan Haufer
Sent: Thursday, June
12, 2014 2:41 PM
To: ADSM-L AT VM.MARIST DOT EDU
Subject: Re: [ADSM-L] TSM and VTL
Deduplication
Thanks for
all the answers. So SSDs (Looking at SSD caching) for the database storage
and 10GB per TB of total backup data on the safer side.
--------------------------------------------
On Thu, 6/12/14, Erwann Simon <erwann.simon AT FREE DOT FR>
wrote:
Subject: Re:
[ADSM-L] TSM and VTL Deduplication
To: ADSM-L AT VM.MARIST DOT EDU
Date: Thursday, June 12, 2014, 8:47 AM
Hi,
I'd rather say 6 to 10 times, or 10 GB of
DB for each 1 TB of data (native, not
deduped) stored.
--
Best
regards / Cordialement /
مع تحياتي
Erwann SIMON
-----
Mail
original -----
De: "Norman
Gee" <Norman.Gee AT LC.CA DOT GOV>
À: ADSM-L AT VM.MARIST DOT EDU
Envoyé: Jeudi 12 Juin 2014 16:55:29
Objet: Re: [ADSM-L] TSM and VTL
Deduplication
Be prepare
for your database
size to double or triple if you are using
TSM deduplication.
-----Original Message-----
From: ADSM: Dist
Stor Manager [mailto:ADSM-L AT VM.MARIST DOT EDU]
On Behalf Of Prather, Wanda
Sent: Thursday,
June 12, 2014 7:15 AM
To: ADSM-L AT VM.MARIST DOT EDU
Subject: Re: TSM and VTL Deduplication
And if you are on the
licensing-by-TB model, when it gets un-deduped (reduped,
rehydrated, whatever), your costs
go up!
-----Original
Message-----
From: ADSM: Dist Stor Manager
[mailto:ADSM-L AT VM.MARIST DOT EDU]
On Behalf Of Dan Haufer
Sent:
Thursday, June
12, 2014 9:48 AM
To: ADSM-L AT VM.MARIST DOT EDU
Subject: Re: [ADSM-L] TSM and VTL
Deduplication
Understood.
Thanks !
--------------------------------------------
On Thu, 6/12/14, Ehresman,David E. <deehre01 AT LOUISVILLE DOT EDU>
wrote:
Subject: Re:
[ADSM-L] TSM and VTL
Deduplication
To: ADSM-L AT VM.MARIST DOT EDU
Date: Thursday, June 12, 2014, 5:33 AM
If TSM moves data from
a
(disk) dedup pool to tape, TSM has to un-dedup
the data as it reads it
-----------------------------------------
The information contained in this message is intended only for the
personal and confidential use of the recipient(s) named above. If
the reader of this message is not the intended recipient or an
agent responsible for delivering it to the intended recipient, you
are hereby notified that you have received this document in error
and that any review, dissemination, distribution, or copying of
this message is strictly prohibited. If you have received this
communication in error, please notify us immediately, and delete
the original message.
|
