It has more to do with LTO tapes becuase they don't handle the
"little files spoon fed one at a time" as well as say 3570 tapes.
I have both here and can compare. The root cause is TSM design
though. (I still like LTO, it is really great in my view! Now that I
understand what's happening, I just adjusted things so this one
problem is not much of a problem.)
They are correct, keeping on disk will speed up restores especially
if you do a lot. But balance this out for each sites requirements.
If you don't do many restores and the reclamation is difficult
to complete, then keep less on disk. Similar to other "tuning"
that we do with TSM.
David Longo
>>> [EMAIL PROTECTED] 06/26/02 05:03PM >>>
I did try it and it does move a lot faster.. So this has nothing to do
with the fact that my diskpool is on a SAN drives right? So keeping data
on diskpool is not a good idea in small installations? I was told by
Tivoli techs to try and keep a couple of days of backups on disk if
possible to speed up restores... Is this not a good idea?
Thanks for the help,
Etienne Brodeur
Bill Boyer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent by: "ADSM: Dist Stor Manager" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
06/26/2002 11:55 AM
Please respond to "ADSM: Dist Stor Manager"
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
cc:
Subject: Re: Slow Reclamation from disk
When the primary location of a file is in a primary DISK random access
storage pool, then this is "working as designed." (That's the answer we
got
from Tivoli) In this case the reclamation task processes 1 file at a time
per transaction. When the primary storage pool is a SEQUENTIAL media
(either
tape or FILE) then the files are batched up by the
MOVEBATCHSIZE/MOVESIZETHRESH parameters. Move the files to a SEQENTIAL
primary pool before running reclamation.
Bill Boyer
DSS, INc.
-----Original Message-----
From: ADSM: Dist Stor Manager [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of
Etienne Brodeur
Sent: Wednesday, June 26, 2002 9:54 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Slow Reclamation from disk
I am suddenly having the same problem...
Reclamation is very slow. I barely manage to reclaim 1 GB/hour, which
wasn't the case in the beginning (I think after all in the beginning I
didn't have so much data outside). I update the stg to reclaim=60. I
have a diskpool on a SAN (FastT500) and an LTO 3583 (also SAN attached
through a San data GW). My server is on AIX 5 (TSM 4.2.1.9).
Is there any reason why this should take forever like this?
Thanks for the help.
Etienne Brodeur
Daniel Sparrman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent by: "ADSM: Dist Stor Manager" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
03/11/2002 11:25 AM
Please respond to "ADSM: Dist Stor Manager"
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
cc:
Subject: Re: Slow Reclamation from disk
Hi
How is your diskpool configured? Is it placed locally on the machine, or
is
it SAN attached?
Best Regards
Daniel Sparrman
-----------------------------------
Daniel Sparrman
Exist i Stockholm AB
Bergkdllavdgen 31D
192 79 SOLLENTUNA
Vdxel: 08 - 754 98 00
Mobil: 070 - 399 27 51
David Longo
<David.Longo@HEALTH To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
-FIRST.ORG> cc:
Sent by: "ADSM: Subject: Slow
Reclamation from disk
Dist Stor Manager"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]
DU>
2002-03-11 17:23
Please respond to
"ADSM: Dist Stor
Manager"
I have old TSM server 3.7.4.0 on AIX 4.3.3 with 3575-L32 library with
C-XL drives. New server is TSM 4.2.1.9 on AIX 4.3.3 ML09 and
IBM 3584-L32 library with 8 FC-AL drives.
Having the 3584 running for about 6 weeks now, I see what some of
the talk about slownes in the last year actually is. On BOTH TSM
systems there is slowness in offsite tape reclamation WHEN some
of the files being reclaimed are still on the Disk stgpool.
When tape reclamation starts, it figures out which tapes to reclaim and
where the data is - understand. Then when it actually starts it
will copy files that are STILL in disk stgpool first before files that
are only on tape - makes sense. Then move to files that are only on
tape. However, when it is copying files from disk it is MUCH slower
than when copying from tape - I would say 10 times slower.
But when doing a MIGRATION disk to tape or BACKUP STGPOOL
fromdisk to tape on either system, it's like going from idle to 4th gear!
This slownes can happen on thses system when there is NO OTHER
ACTIVITY but this single reclamation.
Having two different systems to compare at the same time seems
to indicate that this is NOT a disk problem or a tape problem (except
that the 3584 may not handle it quite as well). Also our old system
tended to have disk pool emptier when reclaimation started and this
wasn't really noticed on that system until I started paying close
attention.
I again point out that my 3584 really smokes when doing everything
else BUT reclamation from disk to tape. So does the 3575 - relatively
speaking.
(My 3584 library is library F/W 2360 and drives are 18N2 as delivered,
I don't think this is problem but included for completeness).
It seems that this is some inherent Tivoli design flaw/feature in the
RECLAMATION process. Anyone with detail knowledge of
Reclamation can provide some insite? Andy Raibeck?
Thanks,
David B. Longo
System Administrator
Health First, Inc.
3300 Fiske Blvd.
Rockledge, FL 32955-4305
PH 321.434.5536
Pager 321.634.8230
Fax: 321.434.5525
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
"MMS <health-first.org>" made the following
annotations on 03/11/02 11:37:16
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
--
This message is for the named person's use only. It may contain
confidential, proprietary, or legally privileged information. No
confidentiality or privilege is waived or lost by any mistransmission. If
you receive this message in error, please immediately delete it and all
copies of it from your system, destroy any hard copies of it, and notify
the sender. You must not, directly or indirectly, use, disclose,
distribute, print, or copy any part of this message if you are not the
intended recipient. Health First reserves the right to monitor all e-mail
communications through its networks. Any views or opinions expressed in
this message are solely those of the individual sender, except (1) where
the message states such views or opinions are on behalf of a particular
entity; and (2) the sender is authorized by the entity to give such views
or opinions.
============================================================================
==
"MMS <health-first.org>" made the following
annotations on 06/26/2002 08:15:33 PM
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
This message is for the named person's use only. It may contain confidential,
proprietary, or legally privileged information. No confidentiality or privilege is
waived or lost by any mistransmission. If you receive this message in error, please
immediately delete it and all copies of it from your system, destroy any hard copies
of it, and notify the sender. You must not, directly or indirectly, use, disclose,
distribute, print, or copy any part of this message if you are not the intended
recipient. Health First reserves the right to monitor all e-mail communications
through its networks. Any views or opinions expressed in this message are solely
those of the individual sender, except (1) where the message states such views or
opinions are on behalf of a particular entity; and (2) the sender is authorized by
the entity to give such views or opinions.
=============================================================================
