>From the movie "Blazing Saddles" ... You use your tongue better than a $20 >...you-know-what. Couldn't have said it better. Heck, I just wish I could have said it as good! Don't ever leave us!!!!!!! :-)
In the case of this 15M+ server, it was the imaging vender that architected this. I've gotten a lot of suggestions from the list over the past days and I'll try some of them, but I will suggest that they split this 2TB filesystem into smaller parts based on the G:\IMAGES\<region>\. Put each region on its own drive. This is also on an EMC Symmetrix. Another upper management mis-decision they have to contend with is that the mainframe and open systems must share the same technology. Hence the EMC Symmetrix and the 3494 with 3590E drives. Both technologies are somewhat limiting their open system options. I don't' mean to dis' the 3494...it's a good box, but the 3590E capacity is hurting them. Plus the speed. Their daily backup is getting large enough that soon they may not be able to meet the vaulting deadline. Bill Boyer "Some days you're the bug, some days you're the windshield" - ?? -----Original Message----- From: ADSM: Dist Stor Manager [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Richard Sims Sent: Saturday, June 18, 2005 8:13 AM To: ADSM-L@VM.MARIST.EDU Subject: Re: 15,000,000 + files on one directory backup All the anguish brought on by this kind of situation brings us back to the old issue of sites lacking guidance in the area of data architecture, as should be promulgated by an IT department. What we are collectively seeing in all these companies is departments buying the new, large (160 GB+) hard drives or disk arrays now on the market and implementing them as one, single, huge storage area, with no thought to the realities involved in the decision. This is largely a problem in the Windows arena, where this often derives from people having had basic experience with a personal computer and who simplistically extrapolate when outfitting larger systems. This is in contrast to the Unix environment, where there is pre-existing conditioning to sanely subdivide disk space by functional categorization and keep file systems manageable. Do whatever you can to stem this poor practice... Feed back to the responsible department; bring it up at meetings; raise awareness in company publications. Carving out multiple volumes allows for categorization and easier administration by their owner, and certainly facilitates backup in terms of time schedule and parallelization opportunities. If necessary, analogize the issue: does one implement a 15-foot high filing cabinet, or three 5-foot high cabinets? It's about practicalities. We TSM administrators need to make ourselves conspicuous in decision making, not be willing victims of uninformed decisions. We safeguard our organizations' data, and can do that only if sane data architectures prevail. Richard Sims