Re: q stg hangs -- urgent please
Thanks Richard, Not very sure which processes were running at the time as I had to bounce TSM in the meantime. By the way, where can I find that technote? thanks as always. Daad Richard Sims [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Sep 10, 2007, at 3:48 PM, Daad Ali wrote: Hi, my q stg hangs and when I run the command show locks i get the following ... Most likely, you'll see the causer straight away if you perform Query PRocess, if not Query SEsssion. A running process can tie up resources, as outlined in Technote 1249018. TSM 5.2 If that's 5.2.0, be sure to get the latest maintenance on. Richard Sims - All new Yahoo! Mail - Get news delivered. Enjoy RSS feeds right on your Mail page.
Re: q stg hangs -- urgent please
Hello Daad, I had this same issue. It's IC51826. I had to upgrade the server to 5.3.5.2 to fix this issue. I would still verify this with IBM support, but your situation appears to be the same. Good luck! Joni Moyer Highmark Storage Systems, Storage Mngt Analyst III Phone Number: (717)302-9966 Fax: (717) 302-9826 [EMAIL PROTECTED] Daad Ali [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent by: ADSM: Dist Stor Manager ADSM-L@VM.MARIST.EDU 09/11/2007 10:37 AM Please respond to ADSM: Dist Stor Manager ADSM-L@VM.MARIST.EDU To ADSM-L@VM.MARIST.EDU cc Subject Re: q stg hangs -- urgent please Thanks Richard, Not very sure which processes were running at the time as I had to bounce TSM in the meantime. By the way, where can I find that technote? thanks as always. Daad Richard Sims [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Sep 10, 2007, at 3:48 PM, Daad Ali wrote: Hi, my q stg hangs and when I run the command show locks i get the following ... Most likely, you'll see the causer straight away if you perform Query PRocess, if not Query SEsssion. A running process can tie up resources, as outlined in Technote 1249018. TSM 5.2 If that's 5.2.0, be sure to get the latest maintenance on. Richard Sims - All new Yahoo! Mail - Get news delivered. Enjoy RSS feeds right on your Mail page.
Fw: TSM 5410 - how can I find the volume(s) on which stacked backsets are stored?
In case anyone is interested - a small refinement to the select statement
to omit clutter:
select * from backupsets, volhistory where date(backupsets.date_time) =
date(volhistory.date_time) and volhistory.type in ('BACKUPSET','BACKUPSET
FULL')
Comments from development on how to really find the volume for a backupset
would be appreciated.
Regards,
Joerg
- Forwarded by Joerg Pohlmann/CanWest/IBM on 2007-09-11 09:14 -
Joerg Pohlmann/CanWest/IBM
2007-09-09 13:55
To
ADSM-L@VM.MARIST.EDU
cc
Subject
TSM 5410 - how can I find the volume(s) on which stacked backsets are
stored?
Hi Does anyone know how to determine the volume on which a backupset is
stored when a nodegroup containing several nodegroupmembers (i.e. a
stacked set of backupsets) is used.
For a single node , i.e. generate backupset nodename backupsetprefix ...
the old
select * from backupsets, volhistory where backupsets.date_time =
volhistory.date_time
worked very nicely before 5.4.1.0 (we even used to teach this select
statement in TSM classes). It still works when you do the generate
backupset nodename ... on 5.4.1.0. However, when you do a generate
backupset nodegroupname backupsetprefix ... the date_time stamp in the
backupsets table reflects the start of the backupset creation, whereas the
date_time in the volhistory table reflects the time of the completion of
the generate backupset nodegroupname ... process. If your practice is to
only have one generate backup nodegroupname ... per day, then a
select * from backupsets, volhistory where date(backupsets.date_time) =
date(volhistory.date_time)
will give you correct output. It still does not give you with absolute
certainty the volumes for an individual backupset when you do multiple
generate backupset nodegroupname ... on a given day.
Any help would be appreciated.
Regards,
Joerg Pohlmann
250-245-9863
Netware restore requirement question
We have a client with a couple old Netware 4.11 servers running TSM client 4.2.3.0. These nodes will be retired and the hardware will go away. But there is a requirement to keep the data for possible future restores. We were thinking of installing a newer version of Netware as a VMware virtual machine using a newer supported client. The current 4.11 filespaces are all NTW:LONG. Can we restore (using either FROMNODE or VIRTUALNODENAME) from the old 4.11 node's data to this new node? What are the compatibility, or more specific the INcompatibilities in doing restores across Netware releases. Bill Boyer Select * from USERS where CLUE0 0 rows returned
Re: Netware restore requirement question
Novell has a Server Consolidation Utility that allows you to move data from old servers to newer ones. It's a free download. We attempted to preform a backup and restore and ran into issues with the volume sizes being different. Kevin William Boyer [EMAIL PROTECTED] 09/11/07 12:52 PM We have a client with a couple old Netware 4.11 servers running TSM client 4.2.3.0. These nodes will be retired and the hardware will go away. But there is a requirement to keep the data for possible future restores. We were thinking of installing a newer version of Netware as a VMware virtual machine using a newer supported client. The current 4.11 filespaces are all NTW:LONG. Can we restore (using either FROMNODE or VIRTUALNODENAME) from the old 4.11 node's data to this new node? What are the compatibility, or more specific the INcompatibilities in doing restores across Netware releases. Bill Boyer Select * from USERS where CLUE0 0 rows returned
Re: Maximum throughput with Windows 2003
Hi Block size, queue depth, sequential v random read, back end spindles/design, array cache size, other array traffic etc will all play a part. On an Windows system with default NTFS block size, with queue depth of 16, on a dedicated HDS array I can quite easily sustain approx 400MBs on a sequential read, load balanced over two paths. Obviously Pre fetch is coming into play to sustain this type of throughput on a sequential read. Its different hardware but it does show the capability of the OS. I actually believe Exchange uses a 4K block size, and therefore despite having larger IOPS, you will see quite a hit on throughput. The ability of your array front end processors will start to play a part. Also, 10K disks probably aren't the best. RAID 5 can be better suited to some IO profiles for Exchange and maybe worth while checkin log v db disk requirements. Based on this, the read of the data may be more of an issue than the write out to VTL. Will the VTL be doing any in-line de-dup etc? which may affect the ability to write into the VTL? Ian Smith Andy Huebner [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent by: ADSM: Dist Stor Manager ADSM-L@VM.MARIST.EDU 11/09/2007 17:53 Please respond to ADSM: Dist Stor Manager ADSM-L@VM.MARIST.EDU To ADSM-L@VM.MARIST.EDU cc Subject Re: [ADSM-L] Maximum throughput with Windows 2003 I do not believe the OS will be a limiting factor. In the past x86 hardware was an issue due to limited PCI busses, but with PCI Express that problem should be resolved for the card count you have. I suspect your limiting factor will be the number of I/Os per second, if it makes sense for the app, set you NTFS block size to 64k to match the DMX3. The highest throughput I have seen from a DMX2000 is around 100 MB/Sec, which is about half of the 2Gb HBA. Your throughput will be very dependant on the hyper layout on the disks, the other traffic on the FA, and how efficient the PCI Express bus really is. I would guess you will see 150+MB/sec from a single stream. I would also say it should be tweakable to go faster. Do you know what the sustained throughput is for the physical hard drives? Andy Huebner -Original Message- From: ADSM: Dist Stor Manager [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Kenny Sent: Tuesday, September 11, 2007 8:58 AM To: ADSM-L@VM.MARIST.EDU Subject: Re: [ADSM-L] Maximum throughput with Windows 2003 Hi Andy, Thanks for commenting. I do plan on using PCIe HBA's. I also am evaluating a 4GB VTL. I do not think the bottleneck will be at the VTL or the disk array (DMX3). I am trying to determine the single stream performance. If I mount a single BCV (NTFS) assuming no bottleneck on the disk array or VTL, what throughput can I expect? If I mounted 2 BCV NTFS volumes, can I expect a increase in throughput? I am not sure what the maximum throughput that can be achieved with a Windows 2003 box versus the maximum throughput that can be obtained with TSM running on that same hardware? Thanks, Pat +-- |This was sent by [EMAIL PROTECTED] via Backup Central. |Forward SPAM to [EMAIL PROTECTED] +-- This e-mail (including any attachments) is confidential and may be legally privileged. If you are not an intended recipient or an authorized representative of an intended recipient, you are prohibited from using, copying or distributing the information in this e-mail or its attachments. If you have received this e-mail in error, please notify the sender immediately by return e-mail and delete all copies of this message and any attachments. Thank you. --- This e-mail may contain confidential and/or privileged information. If you are not the intended recipient (or have received this e-mail in error) please notify the sender immediately and delete this e-mail. Any unauthorized copying, disclosure or distribution of the material in this e-mail is strictly forbidden. Please refer to http://www.db.com/en/content/eu_disclosures.htm for additional EU corporate and regulatory disclosures.
Comparison
I've been asked to compare Backup Exec to Tivoli for upper management and need to find a white paper that describes the differences. I found one on IBM's website but it's dated 2002 which is a little old. Does anyone have a link to a newer one they want to share? Thanks, Mark Confidentiality Note: The information transmitted is intended only for the person or entity to whom or which it is addressed and may contain confidential and/or privileged material. Any review, retransmission, dissemination or other use of this information by persons or entities other than the intended recipient is prohibited. If you receive this in error, please delete this material immediately. Please be advised that someone other than the intended recipients, including a third-party in the Seligman organization and government agencies, may review all electronic communications to and from this address.
Re: Comparison
There is no comparison... ;') Kelly J. Lipp VP Manufacturing CTO STORServer, Inc. 485-B Elkton Drive Colorado Springs, CO 80907 719-266-8777 [EMAIL PROTECTED] -Original Message- From: ADSM: Dist Stor Manager [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Remeta, Mark Sent: Tuesday, September 11, 2007 11:54 AM To: ADSM-L@VM.MARIST.EDU Subject: [ADSM-L] Comparison I've been asked to compare Backup Exec to Tivoli for upper management and need to find a white paper that describes the differences. I found one on IBM's website but it's dated 2002 which is a little old. Does anyone have a link to a newer one they want to share? Thanks, Mark Confidentiality Note: The information transmitted is intended only for the person or entity to whom or which it is addressed and may contain confidential and/or privileged material. Any review, retransmission, dissemination or other use of this information by persons or entities other than the intended recipient is prohibited. If you receive this in error, please delete this material immediately. Please be advised that someone other than the intended recipients, including a third-party in the Seligman organization and government agencies, may review all electronic communications to and from this address.
Re: Comparison
I was going to say the same thing... -Original Message- From: ADSM: Dist Stor Manager [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Kelly Lipp Sent: Tuesday, September 11, 2007 12:25 PM To: ADSM-L@VM.MARIST.EDU Subject: Re: [ADSM-L] Comparison There is no comparison... ;') Kelly J. Lipp VP Manufacturing CTO STORServer, Inc. 485-B Elkton Drive Colorado Springs, CO 80907 719-266-8777 [EMAIL PROTECTED] -Original Message- From: ADSM: Dist Stor Manager [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Remeta, Mark Sent: Tuesday, September 11, 2007 11:54 AM To: ADSM-L@VM.MARIST.EDU Subject: [ADSM-L] Comparison I've been asked to compare Backup Exec to Tivoli for upper management and need to find a white paper that describes the differences. I found one on IBM's website but it's dated 2002 which is a little old. Does anyone have a link to a newer one they want to share? Thanks, Mark Confidentiality Note: The information transmitted is intended only for the person or entity to whom or which it is addressed and may contain confidential and/or privileged material. Any review, retransmission, dissemination or other use of this information by persons or entities other than the intended recipient is prohibited. If you receive this in error, please delete this material immediately. Please be advised that someone other than the intended recipients, including a third-party in the Seligman organization and government agencies, may review all electronic communications to and from this address.
Re: Comparison
I know that but I have to prove it to 'upper management'. -Original Message- From: ADSM: Dist Stor Manager [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of Kelly Lipp Sent: Tuesday, September 11, 2007 2:25 PM To: ADSM-L@VM.MARIST.EDU Subject: Re: Comparison There is no comparison... ;') Kelly J. Lipp VP Manufacturing CTO STORServer, Inc. 485-B Elkton Drive Colorado Springs, CO 80907 719-266-8777 [EMAIL PROTECTED] -Original Message- From: ADSM: Dist Stor Manager [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Remeta, Mark Sent: Tuesday, September 11, 2007 11:54 AM To: ADSM-L@VM.MARIST.EDU Subject: [ADSM-L] Comparison I've been asked to compare Backup Exec to Tivoli for upper management and need to find a white paper that describes the differences. I found one on IBM's website but it's dated 2002 which is a little old. Does anyone have a link to a newer one they want to share? Thanks, Mark Confidentiality Note: The information transmitted is intended only for the person or entity to whom or which it is addressed and may contain confidential and/or privileged material. Any review, retransmission, dissemination or other use of this information by persons or entities other than the intended recipient is prohibited. If you receive this in error, please delete this material immediately. Please be advised that someone other than the intended recipients, including a third-party in the Seligman organization and government agencies, may review all electronic communications to and from this address. Confidentiality Note: The information transmitted is intended only for the person or entity to whom or which it is addressed and may contain confidential and/or privileged material. Any review, retransmission, dissemination or other use of this information by persons or entities other than the intended recipient is prohibited. If you receive this in error, please delete this material immediately. Please be advised that someone other than the intended recipients, including a third-party in the Seligman organization and government agencies, may review all electronic communications to and from this address.
Re: Fw: TSM 5410 - how can I find the volume(s) on which stacked backsets are stored?
Hello Joerg,
with TSM 5.4, the QUERY BACKUPSET command now has the
detailed format output available (F=D). If you use the detailed format
output, it should display the volume. For example :
tsm: TSM02q backupset mygroup f=d
Node Name: TESTNODE1
Backup Set Name: TEST.102407
Data Type: File
Date/Time: 09/11/2007 14:51:11
Retention Period: 365
Device Class Name: LTOCLASS
Description: No Description
Has Table of Contents (TOC)?: No
Filespace names: \\ABC123\c$
Volume names: TSM010L2
Node Name: TESTNODE2
Backup Set Name: TEST.102407
Data Type: File
Date/Time: 09/11/2007 14:51:11
Retention Period: 365
Device Class Name: LTOCLASS
Description: No Description
Has Table of Contents (TOC)?: No
Filespace names: \\ABC123\c$
Volume names: TSM010L2
This was a backupset generated for the MYGROUP group which contains the
TESTNODE1 and TETSNODE2 nodes.
As for the discrepancy in date/time reported by the backupsets table and
the
volhistory table, this was recently reported and APAR IC53179 is currently
opened on the subject. In the meantime, you can use
QUERY BACKUPSET group F=D
to get the volume name.
Have a great day!
Rejean Larivee
IBM Tivoli Storage Manager support
IBM Global Technology Services
**
Visit our new IBM Tivoli Storage Manager support page:
http://www-3.ibm.com/software/sysmgmt/products/support/IBMTivoliStorageManager.html
Expand IBM Tivoli product knowledge through our Support Technical Exchange.
http://www-306.ibm.com/software/sysmgmt/products/support/supp_tech_exch.html
**
ADSM: Dist Stor Manager ADSM-L@VM.MARIST.EDU wrote on 09/11/2007
01:18:09 PM:
In case anyone is interested - a small refinement to the select statement
to omit clutter:
select * from backupsets, volhistory where date(backupsets.date_time) =
date(volhistory.date_time) and volhistory.type in ('BACKUPSET','BACKUPSET
FULL')
Comments from development on how to really find the volume for a
backupset
would be appreciated.
Regards,
Joerg
- Forwarded by Joerg Pohlmann/CanWest/IBM on 2007-09-11 09:14 -
Joerg Pohlmann/CanWest/IBM
2007-09-09 13:55
To
ADSM-L@VM.MARIST.EDU
cc
Subject
TSM 5410 - how can I find the volume(s) on which stacked backsets are
stored?
Hi Does anyone know how to determine the volume on which a backupset is
stored when a nodegroup containing several nodegroupmembers (i.e. a
stacked set of backupsets) is used.
For a single node , i.e. generate backupset nodename backupsetprefix ...
the old
select * from backupsets, volhistory where backupsets.date_time =
volhistory.date_time
worked very nicely before 5.4.1.0 (we even used to teach this select
statement in TSM classes). It still works when you do the generate
backupset nodename ... on 5.4.1.0. However, when you do a generate
backupset nodegroupname backupsetprefix ... the date_time stamp in the
backupsets table reflects the start of the backupset creation, whereas
the
date_time in the volhistory table reflects the time of the completion of
the generate backupset nodegroupname ... process. If your practice is to
only have one generate backup nodegroupname ... per day, then a
select * from backupsets, volhistory where date(backupsets.date_time) =
date(volhistory.date_time)
will give you correct output. It still does not give you with absolute
certainty the volumes for an individual backupset when you do multiple
generate backupset nodegroupname ... on a given day.
Any help would be appreciated.
Regards,
Joerg Pohlmann
250-245-9863
Re: Maximum throughput with Windows 2003
Hi Ian, Great information... I had no idea Windows 2003 could get read speeds of 400MB/s. My proposed VTL does not do de-dupe in line, it is a post process so I am not concerned with VTL performance. I need to backup about 10 TB's from the array. This is a mix of file system, email and database... I will be using BCV's and mounting those volumes on Win 2003 hosts. I am not sure how much impact TSM has on moving data? I have a choice. I can use VTL or add more physical LTO-3 drives... I understand the benefits of a VTL in a TSM environment, but more specifically... LTO-3 can do 80MB/sec. If I have 4 drives allocated to Windows host, I don't think I can keep them streaming? Will I be better off with 8 virtual drives? Will more streams give me more performance with TSM? I am new to TSM, I know it does not do multiplexing but not sure about multistreaming? Am I better off creating multiple BCV's and mounting different file systems in order to have more streams or should I keep it simple and have larger luns with only a single stream? Thanks again for the help. Pat +-- |This was sent by [EMAIL PROTECTED] via Backup Central. |Forward SPAM to [EMAIL PROTECTED] +--
Re: Request advice on moving from IBM 3494 Library
If we currently have 6 3590-h drives in the 3494 library, do you think can we get by with 4 LTO-4 drives in the new libraries given that speed and storage capacity is so much better with LTO-4 drives? Most of the tape activity is backups only. Occasionally we have a file restore or two. It depends. Probably, if your host can PUSH the data to the LTO-4 drives faster than they currently push it to the 3590's. We are hoping to keep the new tape library for 5+ years so reliability is a big factor. Any LTO-4 libraries more reliable than others? Absolutely. There are Enterprise-class libraries, mid-range tape libraries, and entry-level libraries. Since you are talking 4 drives, you are talking mid-range or Enterprise class libraries. The 3584 (now mysteriously renamed to the TS3500) is the replacement for the 3584, and will give you the same or BETTER reliability. You can also buy it with a limited capacity option (which is either 80 or 100 slots, don't remmeber), and it is muich more economical that way. The Quantum/Adic i2000 will give you the same reliability, although I don't like it because it won't autoclean. The large STK libraries are also enterprise-class. I don't know if Overland has an Enterprise-class library. Speaking from personal experience, any models below those, aren't going to give you the kind of reliability you are used to with the 3494. Just my opionion, and nobody else's. W Do tapes last 5 years? Any advice or ideas are very welcome as everything is undecided right now. John
Re: Request advice on moving from IBM 3494 Library
John, If you are experienced with the 3494 library, they are working well and tape mount speed is acceptable, you may consider just replacing the 3590 drives with TS1120 (3592) drives. The cartridges fit in the same slots as 3590 cartridges and you can significantly increase the capacity of the library allowing you to remove a few frames if necessary. You could migrate from 3590 to 3592 in the same library by installing the new drives while keeping the old drives in place for a few weeks. You may also consider keeping the 3590 drives and cartridges for copypool/offsite storage. This would reduce your initial new media cost. Eventually, you could migrate to all 3592 media. Cheers, Neil -Original Message- From: ADSM: Dist Stor Manager [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of John C Dury Sent: Friday, September 07, 2007 9:42 AM To: ADSM-L@VM.MARIST.EDU Subject: [ADSM-L] Request advice on moving from IBM 3494 Library We currently have two 3494 libraries with 6 3590-H drives in each that have each been paid for and depreciated and are still working well for the most part. One of the libraries is offsite but accessible via dark fiber we own and is setup as a copy storage pool for DR. We are looking into upgrading the tape components of our TSM system to two libraries with 4 LTO-4 drives in each because the speed and capacity difference with LTO-4 drives is so much larger than the 3494 library. We will also save lots of floor space as newer libraries are a fraction of the size of the 3494s we have that currently have 7 frames each. The 3494 is partitioned so that part is for TSM and part for the mainframe but when this is all said and done, the mainframe will be going away so a newer tape library will only be used for open systems. So far we have talked to several vendors about their products including: IBM,STK and EMC and have even looked at some third party vendors like Overland. Right now everything is open to suggestion but we are severely budget challenged. Some of the questions I'm looking for advice about are: If we currently have 6 3590-h drives in the 3494 library, do you think can we get by with 4 LTO-4 drives in the new libraries given that speed and storage capacity is so much better with LTO-4 drives? Most of the tape activity is backups only. Occasionally we have a file restore or two. We are hoping to keep the new tape library for 5+ years so reliability is a big factor. Any LTO-4 libraries more reliable than others? Do tapes last 5 years? Any advice or ideas are very welcome as everything is undecided right now. John IMPORTANT: E-mail sent through the Internet is not secure. Legg Mason therefore recommends that you do not send any confidential or sensitive information to us via electronic mail, including social security numbers, account numbers, or personal identification numbers. Delivery, and or timely delivery of Internet mail is not guaranteed. Legg Mason therefore recommends that you do not send time sensitive or action-oriented messages to us via electronic mail. This message is intended for the addressee only and may contain privileged or confidential information. Unless you are the intended recipient, you may not use, copy or disclose to anyone any information contained in this message. If you have received this message in error, please notify the author by replying to this message and then kindly delete the message. Thank you.
Re: Request advice on moving from IBM 3494 Library
To echo that, used 3494 tape libraries are going for cheap these days. We recently bought a used one that had 7 frames and 5 new TS1120 tape drives for under 100K. That's somewhere between 660TB and 1.8PB for $100K. For this case where we have about 8TB a day of seldom accessed archives that we have to keep for 2 years, it's a cost/GB that couldn't be beat. -Original Message- From: ADSM: Dist Stor Manager [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Strand, Neil B. Sent: Tuesday, September 11, 2007 2:56 PM To: ADSM-L@VM.MARIST.EDU Subject: Re: Request advice on moving from IBM 3494 Library John, If you are experienced with the 3494 library, they are working well and tape mount speed is acceptable, you may consider just replacing the 3590 drives with TS1120 (3592) drives. The cartridges fit in the same slots as 3590 cartridges and you can significantly increase the capacity of the library allowing you to remove a few frames if necessary. You could migrate from 3590 to 3592 in the same library by installing the new drives while keeping the old drives in place for a few weeks. You may also consider keeping the 3590 drives and cartridges for copypool/offsite storage. This would reduce your initial new media cost. Eventually, you could migrate to all 3592 media. Cheers, Neil -Original Message- From: ADSM: Dist Stor Manager [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of John C Dury Sent: Friday, September 07, 2007 9:42 AM To: ADSM-L@VM.MARIST.EDU Subject: [ADSM-L] Request advice on moving from IBM 3494 Library We currently have two 3494 libraries with 6 3590-H drives in each that have each been paid for and depreciated and are still working well for the most part. One of the libraries is offsite but accessible via dark fiber we own and is setup as a copy storage pool for DR. We are looking into upgrading the tape components of our TSM system to two libraries with 4 LTO-4 drives in each because the speed and capacity difference with LTO-4 drives is so much larger than the 3494 library. We will also save lots of floor space as newer libraries are a fraction of the size of the 3494s we have that currently have 7 frames each. The 3494 is partitioned so that part is for TSM and part for the mainframe but when this is all said and done, the mainframe will be going away so a newer tape library will only be used for open systems. So far we have talked to several vendors about their products including: IBM,STK and EMC and have even looked at some third party vendors like Overland. Right now everything is open to suggestion but we are severely budget challenged. Some of the questions I'm looking for advice about are: If we currently have 6 3590-h drives in the 3494 library, do you think can we get by with 4 LTO-4 drives in the new libraries given that speed and storage capacity is so much better with LTO-4 drives? Most of the tape activity is backups only. Occasionally we have a file restore or two. We are hoping to keep the new tape library for 5+ years so reliability is a big factor. Any LTO-4 libraries more reliable than others? Do tapes last 5 years? Any advice or ideas are very welcome as everything is undecided right now. John IMPORTANT: E-mail sent through the Internet is not secure. Legg Mason therefore recommends that you do not send any confidential or sensitive information to us via electronic mail, including social security numbers, account numbers, or personal identification numbers. Delivery, and or timely delivery of Internet mail is not guaranteed. Legg Mason therefore recommends that you do not send time sensitive or action-oriented messages to us via electronic mail. This message is intended for the addressee only and may contain privileged or confidential information. Unless you are the intended recipient, you may not use, copy or disclose to anyone any information contained in this message. If you have received this message in error, please notify the author by replying to this message and then kindly delete the message. Thank you.
Re: Maximum throughput with Windows 2003
In general TSM will send 1 stream for each source, but I would suggest that you go to a disk pool first unless the objects are very large. We run our large BCV backup to disk then migrate to virtual tape later. What you have to be careful of is creating too many virtual drives as this may slow down the VTL and is also harder to manage. Andy Huebner -Original Message- From: ADSM: Dist Stor Manager [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Kenny Sent: Tuesday, September 11, 2007 3:37 PM To: ADSM-L@VM.MARIST.EDU Subject: Re: [ADSM-L] Maximum throughput with Windows 2003 Hi Ian, Great information... I had no idea Windows 2003 could get read speeds of 400MB/s. My proposed VTL does not do de-dupe in line, it is a post process so I am not concerned with VTL performance. I need to backup about 10 TB's from the array. This is a mix of file system, email and database... I will be using BCV's and mounting those volumes on Win 2003 hosts. I am not sure how much impact TSM has on moving data? I have a choice. I can use VTL or add more physical LTO-3 drives... I understand the benefits of a VTL in a TSM environment, but more specifically... LTO-3 can do 80MB/sec. If I have 4 drives allocated to Windows host, I don't think I can keep them streaming? Will I be better off with 8 virtual drives? Will more streams give me more performance with TSM? I am new to TSM, I know it does not do multiplexing but not sure about multistreaming? Am I better off creating multiple BCV's and mounting different file systems in order to have more streams or should I keep it simple and have larger luns with only a single stream? Thanks again for the help. Pat +-- |This was sent by [EMAIL PROTECTED] via Backup Central. |Forward SPAM to [EMAIL PROTECTED] +-- This e-mail (including any attachments) is confidential and may be legally privileged. If you are not an intended recipient or an authorized representative of an intended recipient, you are prohibited from using, copying or distributing the information in this e-mail or its attachments. If you have received this e-mail in error, please notify the sender immediately by return e-mail and delete all copies of this message and any attachments. Thank you.
Re: Request advice on moving from IBM 3494 Library
The only drawbacks being the need to upgrade the library managers to a level that will support TS1120, and the maintenance costs compared to a TS3500 et al. [RC] On Sep 11, 2007, at 1:56 PM, Strand, Neil B. wrote: John, If you are experienced with the 3494 library, they are working well and tape mount speed is acceptable, you may consider just replacing the 3590 drives with TS1120 (3592) drives. The cartridges fit in the same slots as 3590 cartridges and you can significantly increase the capacity of the library allowing you to remove a few frames if necessary. You could migrate from 3590 to 3592 in the same library by installing the new drives while keeping the old drives in place for a few weeks. You may also consider keeping the 3590 drives and cartridges for copypool/offsite storage. This would reduce your initial new media cost. Eventually, you could migrate to all 3592 media. Cheers, Neil -Original Message- From: ADSM: Dist Stor Manager [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of John C Dury Sent: Friday, September 07, 2007 9:42 AM To: ADSM-L@VM.MARIST.EDU Subject: [ADSM-L] Request advice on moving from IBM 3494 Library We currently have two 3494 libraries with 6 3590-H drives in each that have each been paid for and depreciated and are still working well for the most part. One of the libraries is offsite but accessible via dark fiber we own and is setup as a copy storage pool for DR. We are looking into upgrading the tape components of our TSM system to two libraries with 4 LTO-4 drives in each because the speed and capacity difference with LTO-4 drives is so much larger than the 3494 library. We will also save lots of floor space as newer libraries are a fraction of the size of the 3494s we have that currently have 7 frames each. The 3494 is partitioned so that part is for TSM and part for the mainframe but when this is all said and done, the mainframe will be going away so a newer tape library will only be used for open systems. So far we have talked to several vendors about their products including: IBM,STK and EMC and have even looked at some third party vendors like Overland. Right now everything is open to suggestion but we are severely budget challenged. Some of the questions I'm looking for advice about are: If we currently have 6 3590-h drives in the 3494 library, do you think can we get by with 4 LTO-4 drives in the new libraries given that speed and storage capacity is so much better with LTO-4 drives? Most of the tape activity is backups only. Occasionally we have a file restore or two. We are hoping to keep the new tape library for 5+ years so reliability is a big factor. Any LTO-4 libraries more reliable than others? Do tapes last 5 years? Any advice or ideas are very welcome as everything is undecided right now. John IMPORTANT: E-mail sent through the Internet is not secure. Legg Mason therefore recommends that you do not send any confidential or sensitive information to us via electronic mail, including social security numbers, account numbers, or personal identification numbers. Delivery, and or timely delivery of Internet mail is not guaranteed. Legg Mason therefore recommends that you do not send time sensitive or action-oriented messages to us via electronic mail. This message is intended for the addressee only and may contain privileged or confidential information. Unless you are the intended recipient, you may not use, copy or disclose to anyone any information contained in this message. If you have received this message in error, please notify the author by replying to this message and then kindly delete the message. Thank you.
