To be clear...
Server-side inline compression shipped in 7.1.5 (March) however the
"client-side" LZ4 compression piece of this shipped in 7.1.6 (June).
Del
----------------------------------------------------
"ADSM: Dist Stor Manager" <ADSM-L AT VM.MARIST DOT EDU> wrote on 08/22/2016
10:11:08 AM:
> From: David Ehresman <david.ehresman AT LOUISVILLE DOT EDU>
> To: ADSM-L AT VM.MARIST DOT EDU
> Date: 08/22/2016 10:12 AM
> Subject: Re: deleing data from a containerpool
> Sent by: "ADSM: Dist Stor Manager" <ADSM-L AT VM.MARIST DOT EDU>
>
> I can assure you that compression was NOT part of the earlier
> releases on 7.1.5 on AIX. I had to painfully tear down a system we
> were trying to convert to because compression was not included in
> the early 7.1.5 releases and dedup alone was not meeting saving
expectations.
>
> David
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: ADSM: Dist Stor Manager [mailto:ADSM-L AT VM.MARIST DOT EDU] On
> Behalf Of Del Hoobler
> Sent: Monday, August 22, 2016 10:02 AM
> To: ADSM-L AT VM.MARIST DOT EDU
> Subject: Re: [ADSM-L] deleing data from a containerpool
>
> Minor correction.
>
>
>
> Inline compression for container pools was added in March in 7.1.5.
>
>
>
>
>
> IBM Spectrum Protect 7.1.5 - Inline compression:
>
> - Performed in-line after deduplication to provide additional storage
>
> savings
>
> - Negligible impact on resources – uses latest and most efficient
>
> compression algorithms
>
> - Can potentially double (or more) your storage savings after
>
> deduplication
>
>
>
>
>
> Del
>
>
>
> ----------------------------------------------------
>
>
>
>
>
> "ADSM: Dist Stor Manager" <ADSM-L AT VM.MARIST DOT EDU> wrote on 08/22/2016
>
> 09:53:08 AM:
>
>
>
> > From: "Loon, Eric van (ITOPT3) - KLM" <Eric-van.Loon AT KLM DOT COM>
>
> > To: ADSM-L AT VM.MARIST DOT EDU
>
> > Date: 08/22/2016 09:53 AM
>
> > Subject: Re: deleing data from a containerpool
>
> > Sent by: "ADSM: Dist Stor Manager" <ADSM-L AT VM.MARIST DOT EDU>
>
> >
>
> > Indeed, TSM 7.1.0 to 7.1.5 only supported deduplication, additional
>
> > compression was introduced in 7.1.6.
>
> > Kind regards,
>
> > Eric van Loon
>
> > Air France/KLM Storage Engineering
>
> >
>
> > -----Original Message-----
>
> > From: ADSM: Dist Stor Manager [mailto:ADSM-L AT VM.MARIST DOT EDU] On
>
> > Behalf Of David Ehresman
>
> > Sent: maandag 22 augustus 2016 15:12
>
> > To: ADSM-L AT VM.MARIST DOT EDU
>
> > Subject: Re: deleing data from a containerpool
>
> >
>
> > At the most recent levels of TSM, it both dedups and compresses but
>
> > make sure you are at a level that does both. There was a level that
>
> > only did dedup but not compression.
>
> >
>
> > David
>
> >
>
> > -----Original Message-----
>
> > From: ADSM: Dist Stor Manager [mailto:ADSM-L AT VM.MARIST DOT EDU] On
>
> > Behalf Of Rhodes, Richard L.
>
> > Sent: Monday, August 22, 2016 9:07 AM
>
> > To: ADSM-L AT VM.MARIST DOT EDU
>
> > Subject: Re: [ADSM-L] deleing data from a containerpool
>
> >
>
> > >But I totally agree, everyone who is using file device
>
> >
>
> > >classes or expensive backend deduplication (like Data Domain or
>
> Protectier)
>
> >
>
> > >should seriously consider switching to container pools.
>
> >
>
> >
>
> >
>
> >
>
> >
>
> > We currently use DataDomains.
>
> >
>
> > With a DD it dedups what it can, then compresses the rest.
>
> >
>
> > Does TSM also try and compress what is leftover after dedup?
>
> >
>
> >
>
> >
>
> >
>
> >
>
> >
>
> >
>
> >
>
> >
>
> >
>
> >
>
> >
>
> >
>
> > -----Original Message-----
>
> >
>
> > From: ADSM: Dist Stor Manager [mailto:ADSM-L AT VM.MARIST DOT EDU] On
>
> > Behalf Of Loon, Eric van (ITOPT3) - KLM
>
> >
>
> > Sent: Tuesday, August 16, 2016 3:39 AM
>
> >
>
> > To: ADSM-L AT VM.MARIST DOT EDU
>
> >
>
> > Subject: Re: deleing data from a containerpool
>
> >
>
> >
>
> >
>
> > Hi Stefan!
>
> >
>
> > Our database is on SSD in an IBM V3700, but the time needed for a
>
> > del filespace can be significant though. But I totally agree,
>
> > everyone who is using file device classes or expensive backend
>
> > deduplication (like Data Domain or Protectier) should seriously
>
> > consider switching to container pools. We are working on a design
>
> > for our next TSM servers and we are able to lower our costs per TB
>
> > by 75% compared to the old design based on the Data Domain!
>
> >
>
> > Kind regards,
>
> >
>
> > Eric van Loon
>
> >
>
> > Air France/KLM Storage Engineering
>
> >
>
> >
>
> >
>
> > -----Original Message-----
>
> >
>
> > From: ADSM: Dist Stor Manager [mailto:ADSM-L AT VM.MARIST DOT EDU] On
>
> > Behalf Of Stefan Folkerts
>
> >
>
> > Sent: dinsdag 16 augustus 2016 8:33
>
> >
>
> > To: ADSM-L AT VM.MARIST DOT EDU
>
> >
>
> > Subject: Re: deleing data from a containerpool
>
> >
>
> >
>
> >
>
> > Yes, I too have noticed this and it is something to keep in mind.
>
> >
>
> > At the same time, I think almost everybody using this pool will be
>
> > using SSD's for the database the impact will be overseeable.
>
> >
>
> > But the directory containerpool is still the best thing to happen to
>
> > Spectrum Protect since replication came along if you ask me. great
>
> > performance increase over fileclass restores, no more stopping
>
> > reclaims during the day to increase restore performance, no more
>
> > messing with numopenvolsallowed and reclaim values and number of
>
> > processes to optimize daily operations and restore speed...oh, and
>
> > compression that saves an easy 30-50% storage and license cost on
>
> > top of the deduplication!
>
> >
>
> >
>
> >
>
> >
>
> >
>
> >
>
> >
>
> >
>
> >
>
> > On Mon, Aug 15, 2016 at 11:20 AM, Loon, Eric van (ITOPT3) - KLM <
>
> > Eric-van.Loon AT klm DOT com> wrote:
>
> >
>
> >
>
> >
>
> > > Hi all!
>
> >
>
> > > After doing some extensive testing with a directory container
>
> >
>
> > > storagepool I noticed a significant change compared to the old
>
> >
>
> > > traditional storage pools.
>
> >
>
> > > In a traditional storage pool TSM stores a file like an object. In
>
> >
>
> > > most cases one file is one object as far as I could see. Deleting
this
>
>
>
> >
>
> > > data is very fast: a delete filespace runs rather fast because TSM
>
> >
>
> > > only has to delete the objects. So deleting a large database client
>
> >
>
> > > with multiple TBs takes a few seconds or maybe a few minutes.
>
> >
>
> > > When you are using a container storage pool everything changes.
Files
>
> >
>
> > > are still stored as objects, but objects are split into chunks. The
>
> >
>
> > > average size of a chuck is approx. 100 KB and TSM performs dedup on
>
> >
>
> > > this chuck level. So if you now delete a large file, TSM has to
>
> >
>
> > > inspect every chunk to see if it is unique or not. When it is unique
>
> >
>
> > > it will be deleted, otherwise not. If you delete a file which is for
>
> >
>
> > > instance 40 GB in size, TSM has to inspect around 420,000 chucks
>
> >
>
> > > before the object can be deleted. I noticed that this takes several
>
> >
>
> > > seconds to complete, so one has to take into consideration that the
>
> >
>
> > > deletion of large clients requires significant more time to
>
> > complete than one is used to.
>
> >
>
> > > Deleing a client with little more than 1 TB of Oracle data was
running
>
>
>
> >
>
> > > for more than 20 minutes. So a delete filespace for really large
>
> >
>
> > > database clients can run for hours! Has anyone else noticed this
>
> > behavior too?
>
> >
>
> > > Kind regards,
>
> >
>
> > > Eric van Loon
>
> >
>
> > > Air France/KLM Storage Engineering
>
> >
>
> > > ********************************************************
>
> >
>
> > > For information, services and offers, please visit our web site:
>
> >
>
> > > https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?
>
> >
>
>
u=http-3A__www.klm.com&d=AwIGaQ&c=SgMrq23dbjbGX6e0ZsSHgEZX6A4IAf1SO3AJ2bNrHlk&r=dOGCMY197NTNH1k_wcsrWS3_fxedKW4rpKJ8cHCD2L8&m=vUuUnchIk8qp8ANX9ecD5HSZje8iCRgiNUPhmahQWTQ&s=eE7XROkp9Iv02y6CJDM84muZgTbKNhpt7nAgYPrCs-0&e=
>
> > . This e-mail and any attachment may contain
>
> >
>
> > > confidential and privileged material intended for the addressee
only.
>
> >
>
> > > If you are not the addressee, you are notified that no part of the
>
> >
>
> > > e-mail or any attachment may be disclosed, copied or distributed,
and
>
> >
>
> > > that any other action related to this e-mail or attachment is
strictly
>
>
>
> >
>
> > > prohibited, and may be unlawful. If you have received this e-mail by
>
> >
>
> > > error, please notify the sender immediately by return e-mail, and
>
> > delete this message.
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > Koninklijke Luchtvaart Maatschappij NV (KLM), its subsidiaries
and/or
>
> >
>
> > > its employees shall not be liable for the incorrect or incomplete
>
> >
>
> > > transmission of this e-mail or any attachments, nor responsible
>
> > for any delay in receipt.
>
> >
>
> > > Koninklijke Luchtvaart Maatschappij N.V. (also known as KLM Royal
>
> >
>
> > > Dutch
>
> >
>
> > > Airlines) is registered in Amstelveen, The Netherlands, with
>
> >
>
> > > registered number 33014286
>
> >
>
> > > ********************************************************
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > ********************************************************
>
> >
>
> > For information, services and offers, please visit our web site:
>
> > https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?
>
> >
>
>
u=http-3A__www.klm.com&d=AwIGaQ&c=SgMrq23dbjbGX6e0ZsSHgEZX6A4IAf1SO3AJ2bNrHlk&r=dOGCMY197NTNH1k_wcsrWS3_fxedKW4rpKJ8cHCD2L8&m=vUuUnchIk8qp8ANX9ecD5HSZje8iCRgiNUPhmahQWTQ&s=eE7XROkp9Iv02y6CJDM84muZgTbKNhpt7nAgYPrCs-0&e=
>
> > . This e-mail and any attachment may contain confidential and
>
> > privileged material intended for the addressee only. If you are not
>
> > the addressee, you are notified that no part of the e-mail or any
>
> > attachment may be disclosed, copied or distributed, and that any
>
> > other action related to this e-mail or attachment is strictly
>
> > prohibited, and may be unlawful. If you have received this e-mail by
>
> > error, please notify the sender immediately by return e-mail, and
>
> > delete this message.
>
> >
>
> >
>
> >
>
> > Koninklijke Luchtvaart Maatschappij NV (KLM), its subsidiaries and/
>
> > or its employees shall not be liable for the incorrect or incomplete
>
> > transmission of this e-mail or any attachments, nor responsible for
>
> > any delay in receipt.
>
> >
>
> > Koninklijke Luchtvaart Maatschappij N.V. (also known as KLM Royal
>
> > Dutch Airlines) is registered in Amstelveen, The Netherlands, with
>
> > registered number 33014286
>
> >
>
> > ********************************************************
>
> >
>
> >
>
> >
>
> > ********************************************************
>
> > For information, services and offers, please visit our web site:
>
> > https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?
>
u=http-3A__www.klm.com&d=AwIGaQ&c=SgMrq23dbjbGX6e0ZsSHgEZX6A4IAf1SO3AJ2bNrHlk&r=dOGCMY197NTNH1k_wcsrWS3_fxedKW4rpKJ8cHCD2L8&m=_RJobktZCB7zYZCoquf3jomn8Nlbi-
> aGVQ85RnKoIgk&s=qEgmWsTrZupu_NgI3Yv44a1XXiTA_54QtdzaZ-z1Sow&e= .
> This e-mail and any attachment may contain
>
> > confidential and privileged material intended for the addressee
>
> > only. If you are not the addressee, you are notified that no part of
>
> > the e-mail or any attachment may be disclosed, copied or
>
> > distributed, and that any other action related to this e-mail or
>
> > attachment is strictly prohibited, and may be unlawful. If you have
>
> > received this e-mail by error, please notify the sender immediately
>
> > by return e-mail, and delete this message.
>
> >
>
> > Koninklijke Luchtvaart Maatschappij NV (KLM), its subsidiaries and/
>
> > or its employees shall not be liable for the incorrect or incomplete
> > transmission of this e-mail or any attachments, nor responsible for
>
> > any delay in receipt.
>
> > Koninklijke Luchtvaart Maatschappij N.V. (also known as KLM Royal
>
> > Dutch Airlines) is registered in Amstelveen, The Netherlands, with
>
> > registered number 33014286
>
> > ********************************************************
>
> >
>
>
>
>
>
|