ADSM-L

Re: [ADSM-L] Trying again

2018-02-14 01:43:53
Subject: Re: [ADSM-L] Trying again
From: Erwann SIMON <erwann.simon AT FREE DOT FR>
To: ADSM-L AT VM.MARIST DOT EDU
Date: Wed, 14 Feb 2018 07:40:45 +0100
Hi Steve,

I think that snapdiff is only usefull when there's a large number of files in 
the share, avoiding to have to do a full scan of the share to determine the 
candidates. 
Why are you using snapdiff in your case ? Have you tried the basic progressive 
incremental way ?

-- 
Best regards / Cordialement / مع تحياتي
Erwann SIMON

----- Mail original -----
De: "Steve Schaub" <Steve_Schaub AT BCBST DOT COM>
À: ADSM-L AT VM.MARIST DOT EDU
Envoyé: Lundi 12 Février 2018 15:35:36
Objet: [ADSM-L] Trying again

Didn't see a response to this so I'm trying one more time, cause I think 
someone out there knows the answer.

We have 6 Netapp fileshares that have a small number of large files but TB 
daily change rates.
When Snapdiff runs, we are not seeing the number of sessions we expect after 
setting resourceutilization=10.
Is this due to how TSM is receiving the changed file list from the Netapp?
Would we be better off forcing CreateNewBase=yes on every run to increase 
multi-threading?
Thanks,
-steve



------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Please see the following link for the BlueCross BlueShield of Tennessee E-mail 
disclaimer:  http://www.bcbst.com/email_disclaimer.shtm

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>

ADSM.ORG Privacy and Data Security by KimLaw, PLLC