Hi Del. W,r,t Arnaud's q1 - perhaps you could convince your colleagues to
also open container storage pools for virtual volume (that is the archive
objects at the target server). I have some folks that like the idea of
backing up the database to VVs and also to produce the recovery plan file on
VVs, That way, the DRM set spcifications automate the retention of DBB and
RFP objects. Right now, they are using file device class volumes to store
the archive objects that back the VVs.
Best regards,
Joerg Pohlmann
-----Original Message-----
From: ADSM: Dist Stor Manager [mailto:ADSM-L AT VM.MARIST DOT EDU] On Behalf Of
Del
Hoobler
Sent: Thursday, May 04, 2017 10:26
To: ADSM-L AT VM.MARIST DOT EDU
Subject: Re: [ADSM-L] Questions related to Container pools
Hi Arnaud,
For question #1 ... The reason the information is in the document is because
Spectrum Protect restricts it. Stay tuned though, this could be allowed
soon.
For question #2 ... The only reason we recommend using 1 pool is strictly
for the best possible deduplication rates AND the because container pools
can grow much larger in size than its legacy counterparts. For legacy pools,
the housekeeping that was required on the pool made it impossible to grow a
pool too large (identify, reclamations, etc..). With container pools, this
is no longer an issue, so we wanted to call that out. If you want to split
container pools up, knowing the potential dedup rates fallout, that's
perfectly fine ... there are no other repercussions/issues. We have a lot of
customers who have done this, primarily around the partitioning of data
sources (VE, TDPs, BA, etc.)
Thank you,
Del
=====================================
"ADSM: Dist Stor Manager" <ADSM-L AT VM.MARIST DOT EDU> wrote on 05/03/2017
10:47:52 AM:
> From: PAC Brion Arnaud <Arnaud.Brion AT PANALPINA DOT COM>
> To: ADSM-L AT VM.MARIST DOT EDU
> Date: 05/03/2017 10:49 AM
> Subject: Questions related to Container pools Sent by: "ADSM: Dist
> Stor Manager" <ADSM-L AT VM.MARIST DOT EDU>
>
> Hi Team !
>
> IBM recently released an interesting document summarizing best
> practices with regards to container storage pools (https://
> www.ibm.com/developerworks/community/wikis/home?lang=en#!/wiki/Tivoli
> Storage Manager/page/Container Pool Best Practices ) and some of the
> information in it triggered two questions, which I would like some
> Spectrum Protect insider (Del ?) or anyone having good knowledge of
> this to answer ...
>
> First question : page 14 of the PDF document, chapter 1.4 , states
> that it is not appropriate to use container pools in the case of NDMP
> backups. What is the reason for it ? My understanding is that it is
> possible to make use of NDMP without a tape based storage pool, thus I
> don't get the point here ...
>
> Second question : several references in the book are seeming to stress
> that one should make use of ONE SINGLE container storage pool for a
> whole TSM server (chapter 1.2.5.1.2 page 13, chapter 1.5.1 page 15). I
> do understand that deduplication is made at storage pool level, and
> that segregating backup data in several storage pools will weaken
> deduplication rates, but are there some other reasons which are not
> explained in the book, that would justify the use of only ONE
> container pool (like more hammering on the TSM DB during backup times
> if we make use of several storage pools, or others I did not think
> about) We plan to build a new TSM environment which will be based only
> on container storage pool(s ?), and I feel kind of uncomfortable to
> send all of my data in the same bucket (less granularity for
> reporting, auditing, protecting and so on ...). Does someone have
> arguments (pro or cons) or experience to share about this ?
>
> Thanks in advance for your feedback !
>
> Cheers.
>
> Arnaud
>
>
****************************************************************************
**************************************************
> Backup and Recovery Systems Administrator Panalpina Management Ltd.,
> Basle, Switzerland, CIT Department Viadukstrasse 42, P.O. Box 4002
> Basel/CH
> Phone: +41 (61) 226 11 11, FAX: +41 (61) 226 17 01
> Direct: +41 (61) 226 19 78
> e-mail: arnaud.brion AT panalpina DOT com<mailto:arnaud.brion AT panalpina
> DOT com>
> This electronic message transmission contains information from
> Panalpina and is confidential or privileged. This information is
> intended only for the person (s) named above. If you are not the
> intended recipient, any disclosure, copying, distribution or use or
> any other action based on the contents of this information is strictly
> prohibited.
>
> If you receive this electronic transmission in error, please notify
> the sender by e-mail, telephone or fax at the numbers listed above.
Thank you.
>
****************************************************************************
**************************************************
>
|
