Re: Availability of 7.1.1.200 server code
After this switching between copy pool and primary pool, I changed the mount retention on the device classes affected. This speeded up the restore and ended the constant mount and dismount of the same tape volumes over and over and over again. -Original Message- From: ADSM: Dist Stor Manager [mailto:ADSM-L@VM.MARIST.EDU] On Behalf Of Rick Saylor Sent: Wednesday, February 04, 2015 7:28 AM To: ADSM-L@VM.MARIST.EDU Subject: Re: Availability of 7.1.1.200 server code In our case the restore time increased substantially(2-3hours to >8 hours) but eventually finished. TSM seemed to prefer the copypool data that was stored on virtual volumes on a remote TSM server. So, this also increased network usage by quite a bit. Oddly, TSM would mount the correct primary volume but not use it and immediately look for a copypool volume. Also, our primary pool volume are colocated but copypool volumes aren't. This had the effect of mounting many more volumes than necessary on both the local and remote TSM servers. If the copypool volumes aren't available then the restore did use the primary pool volumes. But like you said how often do you get advanced warning of restores? So, if you can wait, then install 7.1.1.200 when it is released. However, if you have to upgrade for some reason, then call IBM for the efix. Rick Saylor Austin Community College At 08:27 AM 2/4/2015, you wrote: >When the mounting of both primary and copypool volumes occurs, does >the restore run successfully anyway, even if the copypool is nor >marked Unavailable? Is the mounting of both primary pool and >copypool volumes just a waste of tape drives, or does it crash the >restore or export? Our client admins run their own restores. We are >rarely notified before one is submitted. > >If additional bad effects happen, please describe them. I may be >misisng the obvious. > >One of our TSM admins is going to retire later this year. We are >being urged to upgrade the TSM servers to a stable version of 7.x >before that happens. If I present the APAR in 7.1.1.100 to >management as a reson to delay the upgrade, I will be asked what >harm is caused by it. Again, client admins run their own restores, >so we cannot take preemptive action to prevent undesirable side-effects. > >With many thanks, >Keith Arbogast >Indiana University > >
Re: Availability of 7.1.1.200 server code
In our case the restore time increased substantially(2-3hours to >8 hours) but eventually finished. TSM seemed to prefer the copypool data that was stored on virtual volumes on a remote TSM server. So, this also increased network usage by quite a bit. Oddly, TSM would mount the correct primary volume but not use it and immediately look for a copypool volume. Also, our primary pool volume are colocated but copypool volumes aren't. This had the effect of mounting many more volumes than necessary on both the local and remote TSM servers. If the copypool volumes aren't available then the restore did use the primary pool volumes. But like you said how often do you get advanced warning of restores? So, if you can wait, then install 7.1.1.200 when it is released. However, if you have to upgrade for some reason, then call IBM for the efix. Rick Saylor Austin Community College At 08:27 AM 2/4/2015, you wrote: When the mounting of both primary and copypool volumes occurs, does the restore run successfully anyway, even if the copypool is nor marked Unavailable? Is the mounting of both primary pool and copypool volumes just a waste of tape drives, or does it crash the restore or export? Our client admins run their own restores. We are rarely notified before one is submitted. If additional bad effects happen, please describe them. I may be misisng the obvious. One of our TSM admins is going to retire later this year. We are being urged to upgrade the TSM servers to a stable version of 7.x before that happens. If I present the APAR in 7.1.1.100 to management as a reson to delay the upgrade, I will be asked what harm is caused by it. Again, client admins run their own restores, so we cannot take preemptive action to prevent undesirable side-effects. With many thanks, Keith Arbogast Indiana University
Re: Availability of 7.1.1.200 server code
When the mounting of both primary and copypool volumes occurs, does the restore run successfully anyway, even if the copypool is nor marked Unavailable? Is the mounting of both primary pool and copypool volumes just a waste of tape drives, or does it crash the restore or export? Our client admins run their own restores. We are rarely notified before one is submitted. If additional bad effects happen, please describe them. I may be misisng the obvious. One of our TSM admins is going to retire later this year. We are being urged to upgrade the TSM servers to a stable version of 7.x before that happens. If I present the APAR in 7.1.1.100 to management as a reson to delay the upgrade, I will be asked what harm is caused by it. Again, client admins run their own restores, so we cannot take preemptive action to prevent undesirable side-effects. With many thanks, Keith Arbogast Indiana University
Re: Query syntax
Nice one! -Original Message- From: ADSM: Dist Stor Manager [mailto:ADSM-L@VM.MARIST.EDU] On Behalf Of Reese, Michael A (Mike) CIV USARMY 93 SIG BDE (US) Sent: Wednesday, February 04, 2015 8:53 AM To: ADSM-L@VM.MARIST.EDU Subject: Re: [ADSM-L] Query syntax select char(node_name,50) as "Node Name", cast(client_version as char) || '.' || cast(client_release as char) || '.' || cast(client_level as char) || '.' || cast(client_sublevel as char) as "Version" from nodes From: ADSM: Dist Stor Manager [ADSM-L@VM.MARIST.EDU] on behalf of David Ehresman [david.ehres...@louisville.edu] Sent: Wednesday, February 04, 2015 8:36 AM To: ADSM-L@VM.MARIST.EDU Subject: [ADSM-L] Query syntax What is the select statement syntax for concatenating client_version,client_release,client_level,client_sublevel from the nodes table into a single string, e.g. 7.1.1.3? David
Re: Query syntax
select char(node_name,50) as "Node Name", cast(client_version as char) || '.' || cast(client_release as char) || '.' || cast(client_level as char) || '.' || cast(client_sublevel as char) as "Version" from nodes From: ADSM: Dist Stor Manager [ADSM-L@VM.MARIST.EDU] on behalf of David Ehresman [david.ehres...@louisville.edu] Sent: Wednesday, February 04, 2015 8:36 AM To: ADSM-L@VM.MARIST.EDU Subject: [ADSM-L] Query syntax What is the select statement syntax for concatenating client_version,client_release,client_level,client_sublevel from the nodes table into a single string, e.g. 7.1.1.3? David
Query syntax
What is the select statement syntax for concatenating client_version,client_release,client_level,client_sublevel from the nodes table into a single string, e.g. 7.1.1.3? David
Re: size of objects in the backups table
An alternative to the export node option (and works well if you want the active data sum for everything, is to set up an empty active data pool and do a preview of a stgpool copy. It'll be faster than multiple exports. Steven On 4 February 2015 at 12:08, Rhodes, Richard L. wrote: > Yes, that worked great. An occupancy gives you the totals, and this gives > just the active. > > Just for curiosity I created a sql cmd to join contents and backups for a > single node with very little data. It never returned, as expected. > > Rick > > > > -Original Message- > From: ADSM: Dist Stor Manager [mailto:ADSM-L@VM.MARIST.EDU] On Behalf Of > Jeanne Bruno > Sent: Tuesday, February 03, 2015 5:00 PM > To: ADSM-L@VM.MARIST.EDU > Subject: Re: size of objects in the backups table > > Hello. I tested this and got the output: > > ANR0986I Process 206 for EXPORT NODE running in the BACKGROUND processed > 37,158 items for a total of 10,206,832,635 bytes with a completion state of > SUCCESS at 16:58:30. > > So I have 37,158 active items for this particular node, correct? > > -Original Message- > From: ADSM: Dist Stor Manager [mailto:ADSM-L@VM.MARIST.EDU] On Behalf Of > TH > Sent: Tuesday, February 03, 2015 12:21 PM > To: ADSM-L@VM.MARIST.EDU > Subject: Re: [ADSM-L] size of objects in the backups table > > Maybe a different way would be suitable for you - try to do EXPORT NODE > xxx FILEDATA=BACKUPACTIVE PREVIEW=YES > > The end of process will give you a total size of active data for a node. > > Regards, > > Tomasz Hubicki > > > -- Wiadomość oryginalna -- > Temat: [ADSM-L] size of objects in the backups table > Nadawca: Rhodes, Richard L. > Adresat: ADSM-L@VM.MARIST.EDU > Data: Tue Feb 03 2015 15:25:52 GMT+0100 > > > We are on TSM v6.2.5. > > > > We keep running into the normal question that seems to come up when we > start analyzing our backups. We can tell the number of active/inactive > files from the backups table, but not the size, which is in the contents > table. Does anyone have a way to get the active/inactive objects and their > size without killing your system with a massive SQL join? Maybe some kind > of SQL join for a specific node. > > > > I just can't believe TSM doesn't provide this info easily from the > server! > > (I suppose this belongs under the "Rant" thread!) > > > > > > Rick > > > > > > - > > > > The information contained in this message is intended only for the > personal and confidential use of the recipient(s) named above. If the > reader of this message is not the intended recipient or an agent > responsible for delivering it to the intended recipient, you are hereby > notified that you have received this document in error and that any review, > dissemination, distribution, or copying of this message is strictly > prohibited. If you have received this communication in error, please notify > us immediately, and delete the original message. > > > > > - > The information contained in this message is intended only for the > personal and confidential use of the recipient(s) named above. If the > reader of this message is not the intended recipient or an agent > responsible for delivering it to the intended recipient, you are hereby > notified that you have received this document in error and that any review, > dissemination, distribution, or copying of this message is strictly > prohibited. If you have received this communication in error, please notify > us immediately, and delete the original message. >
Re: size of objects in the backups table
Yes, that worked great. An occupancy gives you the totals, and this gives just the active. Just for curiosity I created a sql cmd to join contents and backups for a single node with very little data. It never returned, as expected. Rick -Original Message- From: ADSM: Dist Stor Manager [mailto:ADSM-L@VM.MARIST.EDU] On Behalf Of Jeanne Bruno Sent: Tuesday, February 03, 2015 5:00 PM To: ADSM-L@VM.MARIST.EDU Subject: Re: size of objects in the backups table Hello. I tested this and got the output: ANR0986I Process 206 for EXPORT NODE running in the BACKGROUND processed 37,158 items for a total of 10,206,832,635 bytes with a completion state of SUCCESS at 16:58:30. So I have 37,158 active items for this particular node, correct? -Original Message- From: ADSM: Dist Stor Manager [mailto:ADSM-L@VM.MARIST.EDU] On Behalf Of TH Sent: Tuesday, February 03, 2015 12:21 PM To: ADSM-L@VM.MARIST.EDU Subject: Re: [ADSM-L] size of objects in the backups table Maybe a different way would be suitable for you - try to do EXPORT NODE xxx FILEDATA=BACKUPACTIVE PREVIEW=YES The end of process will give you a total size of active data for a node. Regards, Tomasz Hubicki -- Wiadomość oryginalna -- Temat: [ADSM-L] size of objects in the backups table Nadawca: Rhodes, Richard L. Adresat: ADSM-L@VM.MARIST.EDU Data: Tue Feb 03 2015 15:25:52 GMT+0100 > We are on TSM v6.2.5. > > We keep running into the normal question that seems to come up when we start > analyzing our backups. We can tell the number of active/inactive files from > the backups table, but not the size, which is in the contents table. Does > anyone have a way to get the active/inactive objects and their size without > killing your system with a massive SQL join? Maybe some kind of SQL join for > a specific node. > > I just can't believe TSM doesn't provide this info easily from the server! > (I suppose this belongs under the "Rant" thread!) > > > Rick > > > - > > The information contained in this message is intended only for the personal > and confidential use of the recipient(s) named above. If the reader of this > message is not the intended recipient or an agent responsible for delivering > it to the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that you have received > this document in error and that any review, dissemination, distribution, or > copying of this message is strictly prohibited. If you have received this > communication in error, please notify us immediately, and delete the original > message. > - The information contained in this message is intended only for the personal and confidential use of the recipient(s) named above. If the reader of this message is not the intended recipient or an agent responsible for delivering it to the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that you have received this document in error and that any review, dissemination, distribution, or copying of this message is strictly prohibited. If you have received this communication in error, please notify us immediately, and delete the original message.
