Re: Would you buy TSM again.
Rating: 8 I have found TSM to be an excellent product. We are running >700 Nodes, and upgrading to a SAN architecture so we can keep growing/take advantage of the LAN free approach. The only reasons it doesn't get a 10 are; - It is quite complicated when you first look in. I think it's roots in the IBM large systems world has made it's mark. This negative has a positive, as it needs to have flexibility and many features/flags to maintain a large, potential complex environment. The GUI tools are quite good now though (even though I have learnt the command line :) - Getting reporting summaries out of the database can be a pain. There are lots of ways of getting stuff but you end up hacking a lot of SQL. Other information, that you would think is important, doesn't seem to be accessable or can take a lot of effort on the server to get. We are getting the Decision Support package to, hopefully, get us ready-made information for the suits. You might want to look at the availability of the Data Protection for Applications you are running that takes advantage of the SAN environment. Cheers, Suad -- > We are a pretty large unix shop (5 Terrabytes to backup nightly) and are using some >HP Omniback and a lot of Veritas Netbackup. Mostly HP-UX. > > We have a large Lotus Notes Rel 5 implementation on AIX (600 gig on its way to 1.2 >Terrabytes). > > We are studying robot technology and SAN's. > > Tivoli is selling and Netbackup is trying to stay in the shop. > > How good do you rate TSM on a scale of 1 to 10. (10 being best). > > Would you definately buy it again, or would you shop around. > > My gut feeling is that everybody has some complaints with their backup solution. > > > Lynn Sattler > Dana Corp > Toledo Oh > [EMAIL PROTECTED]
IMPORT error
Hi there, 1 node exported from ADSM server 3.1.2.50 (MVS) - filedata=all During import to TSM server 3.7.3(MVS) i get this error.. ANRD IMBKINS(795): Multiple active versions of the same file found during import. ANRD SMINV(1945): Duplicate object encountered during import or rename. ANR0690E IMPORT NODE: Transaction failure - server aborted the transaction (32). ANR0687E IMPORT NODE: Transaction failure - could not commit database transaction. ANR0728E IMPORT NODE: Processing terminated abnormally - internal error. No data for the node existed on the target server prior to the import. Any clues ? Regards, Carsten Moldrup
Problems backing up Novell servers with TSM 3.7.1 client
Help! TSM Server: TSM 3.7.2 for NT Clients effected:Novell 4.X and 5.00 Servers using TSM 3.7.1 client Issue: I'm encountering major problems backup up these Novell servers with these clients It's just 2 out of 20+ Novell servers, but they are highly visible. What's happening is that it will sometimes take up to 52+ hours to complete an incremental backup of around only 2 gigs. This is completely unacceptable. We have other Novell servers that will do same amount of data in less than 2 hours. It's somewhat sporatic, and does not happen all the time, but when it does, the following appears on Novell console: ANS1802E Incremental backup of 'SYS': finished with XX failure [- ] It will sit in this state for hours. At this point it is apparently attempting to access the "VOL1" volume (or "SDATA") volume etc. Both of these servers have more than just the "SYS" volume.. These volumes are not that large, only about 60 gigs. I have tried a variety of switches in DSM.OPT file including "memoryef y", as per Tivoli's suggestion. Nothing seems to work. I don't recall seeing this type of problem with the ADSM 3.1.XX client. I've sent logs and more logs to Tivoli in attempt to resolve this problem w/o success. Any insight appreciated. Thanks Jeff
SAP Backups
I was wondering if someone with experience with the SAP way of communicating with ADSM could contact me. I've got some questions and concerns I'd like to discuss. I don't know I've seen many posts about it so I'm just hoping someone has some knowledge. Thanks, > Geoff Gill > NT Systems Support Engineer > Computer Systems Group > E-Mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Phone: (858) 826-4062 > Pager: (888) 997-9614 >
Re: DLT TAPE CLEANING PROBLEMS WITH ADSM
In article <000d01c02215$bfc0e000$86a97099@tn91665ws>, Johan Moreels <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> says: > >Johan Moreels Hello Johan You might want to check if any others have been manually using the cleaning tape on the drives. len
Re: Slow restore for large NT client outcome
I think we need the answers to Kelly Lipp's question - how fast is Arcserve really? But IF it is better, then I dont think we can get away with saying - its too many files, its NTFS that slows down TSM, etc. Those are the realities of our servers, and we need a RESTORE (notice I did not say backup) solution that isn't career ending. Now there was one response that said thay are MOVING towards mirroring - better late than never - and another response that said management doesn't like incremental forever - they need to get over that. All in all, TSM is great - but if any restore takes 48 hours - WB will be looking for a new tech support manager. Dan Kronstadt Warner Bros. "Who the hell wants to hear actors talk?" - H. M. Warner (1881-1958), founder of Warner Bros., in 1927 -Original Message- From: Richard Sims [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Wednesday, September 20, 2000 12:56 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: Slow restore for large NT client outcome Jeff - I more than sympathize with your predicament as a storage administrator dealing with NT systems and their administrators. But be careful about going after a vendor to fix a problem you perceive to be with their product without first establishing baseline values for your configuration and otherwise analyzing it determine just where and what the problem is. Nick's posting today about NTFS performance and recommendations last week regarding FTP baseline tests regarding your problem will help to define it. Such measures will help you obtain baseline values, as close as possible to optimal values, against which you can compare performance with more involved applications like TSM, on top of that amalgam. Being a long-time ADSM guy I'm sure you remember back to postings where people would wail on IBM about poor performance backing up and restoring, asking "What's wrong with ADSM???" - when their implementation choices resulted in 20,000 or more files in one directory, which is deadly for anything entering such a directory. That is to say, the way in which systems are configured and implemented, plus networking problems and operating system defects and design shortcomings can thwart performance in any package implemented on them. Some customers unknowingly implement tape technologies with poor start-stop performance, see slow restoral performance, and then blame the restoral software. We have to be aware of what these things can do to and for us. Know thy technologies, lest they bite thee. It's a classic situation in data processing that users blame performance problems on the first thing between them and the computer system, but of course that's just convenient blame assignment. After all - they have to blame someone or something, and that's the one thing they know. This is not to say that TSM is perfect or necessarily blameless in this situation. But as customer technicians it's our responsibility to determine where the problem lies. And for that to succeed the various experts in the environment (networking, opsys, application) have to work together to analyze it. Your NT people say that TSM seems like a UNIX product trying to make it in the NT space. The irony is that it's a mainframe product that did even better in a Unix environment because of that environment's minimized overhead. You have the unenviable situation of an MVS server and NT clients, with a lineage and history of TCP/IP performance shortcomings, high overhead, and file system inefficiencies. Your shop is looking at an AIX-based TSM server system, which is a good move. Whether "TSM can make it in the NT space" is more up to NT than TSM: if Microsoft wants to be a serious contender, they have to make Windows a serious operating system. Many shops won't implement NTs as enterprise servers because their performance is ridiculously inferior. Tivoli gets blamed for numerous things not its fault, like its TDP being unable to restore individual mail boxes in a certain vendor mail system, when that other vendor fails to provide an API to make it possible. Certainly Tivoli would agree that they should take responsibility for their own failings, but we should be careful to attribute to them what is actually theirs. The situation you're in is the familiar one so many of us find ourselves in, having to address complaints about why things are so bad, when we don't have measurements to know how much that deviates from how good they can be. I strongly encourage everyone to get such numbers during off-peak times so that you have something to compare against, in each area (disk activity, tape throughput, tape search time, network capacity, CPU load capability, etc.). From what you describe, your shop is undergoing an unusual number of full file system recoveries. With the size of today's disks and the need for data to be current, I would very much avoid dependence on any backup package for such recoveries. I would recommend some form of dis
Re: Would you buy TSM again.
It would be interesting to see the answers from customers of other products. Lynn: if you get answers elsewhere about other products, post them here. Dan Kronstadt Warner Bros. "Who the hell wants to hear actors talk?" - H. M. Warner (1881-1958), founder of Warner Bros., in 1927 -Original Message- From: Othonas Xixis [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, September 19, 2000 2:17 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: Would you buy TSM again. Been in the industry for more than 18 years, and especially in the storage and backup/recovery business for more than 7 years... I have seen, tested and worked on a lot different storage products here in the States and abroad, so here are the answers to yr questions: How good do you rate TSM on a scale of 1 to 10. (10 being best) ? I will give TSM a 9.4 because I believe it is the best available storage solution in its category... as you can see I use the word "solution" and not program or package, because TSM is a solution... you just have to do your homework and put it to work as most appropriate for yr environment. 9.4 because I believe there is still room for improvement... always... We just finished a 6.8 TB TSM 3.7.3.6/8 / SAN (Fibre/1Gb Ether) solution and it worked like a "swiss clock", and most important... it worked the first time (no reinstallations, no reconfigurations, no voodoo) , the only special thing that I did was... to read the manual and instructions line by line. Would you definitely buy it again, or would you shop around ? Yes, I would buy it again... most definitely... and for various reasons, but especially for the functionality, scalability, and support. Good luck on yr decision. Cheers. Othonas "Sattler, Lynn" wrote: > We are reconsidering our backup software. > > We are a pretty large unix shop (5 Terrabytes to backup nightly) and are using some HP Omniback and a lot of Veritas Netbackup. Mostly HP-UX. > > We have a large Lotus Notes Rel 5 implementation on AIX (600 gig on its way to 1.2 Terrabytes). > > We are studying robot technology and SAN's. > > Tivoli is selling and Netbackup is trying to stay in the shop. > > How good do you rate TSM on a scale of 1 to 10. (10 being best). > > Would you definately buy it again, or would you shop around. > > My gut feeling is that everybody has some complaints with their backup solution. > > Lynn Sattler > Dana Corp > Toledo Oh > [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Another ADSM capacity question
Hi, Daniel, Brian. The second select statement is selecting from filespaces. If you have a 2GB client drive with 1GB of data on it, and if that counts as a filespace on your OS, then your filespaces table will show that filespace as having a 2GB capacity and 50% utilization. That's data on the client at last backup, not in the ADSM server. However, when you go into the realm of storage space used on the ADSM server, the number from filespaces doesn't take into account the fact that there are inactive versions and deleted files stored on the *SM server associated with that node. The first select statement includes those inactive and deleted files. I hope that helps. Alex Paschal Storage Administrator Freightliner, LLC (503) 745-6850 phone/vmail (503) 745-5091 fax PS: output from HELP Q FI Capacity (MB) Specifies the amount of space, in megabytes, assigned to this file space on the client node. Pct Util Specifies the percentage of the file space that is occupied. -Original Message- From: Johnson, Brian [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Wednesday, September 20, 2000 11:55 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: Another ADSM capacity question Daniel, Absolutely no offence taken... Looking at the second command it seems to be trying to do something slightly different, something clever which my command doesnt !!! Can someone please explain !! Many thanks, Brian Johnson > -Original Message- > From: Daniel Swan/TM [SMTP:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: Wednesday, September 20, 2000 2:45 PM > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: Re: Another ADSM capacity question > > Brian, in no way did I mean to imply your statement was faulty... I guess > what I was hoping for is a better understanding of the output it > generates. > From my limited understanding, the two commands below should generate > identical #'s. Ie, Total occupancy of a client should equal the sum of > all > filespaces of a client. > > Obviously I've made a faulty assumption, and am hoping someone can point > out > to me where, and how. > > Best regards, > Dan. > > > Daniel Swan > HP Unix Team > ISM-BC > 3030 2nd Ave SE > Calgary, AB, T2A 5N7 > ph. 403-530-1726 > fax: 403-530-1066 > > > > > > -Original Message- > > From: Johnson, Brian [SMTP:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > > Sent: Wednesday, September 20, 2000 12:30 PM > > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > Subject: Re: Another ADSM capacity question > > > > Daniel, > > My command only sums up the number of files backed up and the total MB > per > > client. It doesnt do any percentages and so on - so just for a set of > > totals > > my command works ok and the figures are ok > > > > Regards, > > > > Brian Johnson > > 212 647 3557 > > > > > -Original Message- > > > From: Daniel Swan/TM [SMTP:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > > > Sent: Wednesday, September 20, 2000 2:13 PM > > > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > Subject: Re: Another ADSM capacity question > > > > > > Brian, your SQL statement worked like a charm, however, I am having > > > trouble > > > reconciling the difference between the following outputs, which I > think > > > should be the same: > > > > > > adsm> select total_MB from auditocc where node_name='U1_APPS' > > > > > > TOTAL_MB > > > --- > > > 7396917 > > > > > > ---AND--- > > > > > > adsm> select node_name, cast(sum(capacity * (PCT_UTIL/100))as decimal > > > (9,0)) > > > as percent_utilized from filespaces group by node_name order by > > > percent_utilized > > > > > > > > > U1_APPS 473461 > > > > > > How do I reconcile these differences, and which is a more accurate > > picture > > > of how much space is being taken up on my ADSM server?
Multiple companies using the same TSM server
Our TSM server running on a OS/390 serves multiple customers. For each customer I have a separate policy domain & separate archive & backup disk storage pools and when they migrate they migrate to a common 9840 cartridge storage pool. For those who are backing up more than one customer from a TSM server, do you also have a separate 9840 cartridge or separate 3590 cartridge pool for each customer? John R. O'Connell Phone:408-492-2042 Pager:408-949-1432 John.R.O'[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Slow restore for large NT client outcome.. appeal to Tivoli
I can't comment on ARCserve or BackupExec's performance numbers, but I can comment on their robustness. In the past 3 months I have assisted several customers off of ARCserve onto a TSM based solution. Before that I have migrated other customers off BackupExec as well. Once an ARCserve customers sees TSM installed - they will never go back! -- Joshua S. Bassi Senior Technical Consultant Symatrix Technology, Inc. [EMAIL PROTECTED] -Original Message- From: ADSM: Dist Stor Manager [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Kelly J. Lipp Sent: Wednesday, September 20, 2000 2:38 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: Slow restore for large NT client outcome.. appeal to Tivoli Could someone with experience doing large restores with ArcServe or BackupExec provide some performance numbers? I've been in shops where the backups were taking a very long time. Longer than my TSM backup took. I never witnessed a restore but how can it be better. I want the facts. I'm tired of hearing about how much faster ArcServe and BackupExec are (in theory) compared to TSM in reality. I'm sick and tired of it and I won't take it anymore! This is what happens when you TSM 24 hours per day. Your brain. Your brain on TSM. Not a pretty picture. Kelly J. Lipp Storage Solutions Specialists, Inc. PO Box 51313 Colorado Springs CO 80949-1313 (719) 531-5926 Fax: (719) 260-5991 Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] www.storsol.com www.storserver.com -Original Message- From: ADSM: Dist Stor Manager [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Keith E. Pruitt Sent: Wednesday, September 20, 2000 12:03 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: Slow restore for large NT client outcome.. appeal to Tivo Jeff, we too have a problem with small files. At first I thought it was a Netware thing because the servers we have the greatest amount of files on reside on the Netware servers. But reading emails from several users I see that I may have a future problem on the NT side. We store Word and WordPerfect docs on two Netware 5 machines and each server holds about 1.8 Million files apiece. Needless to say these files are not that big. It took over 11 hours to back each of the servers up and they total around 30GB per server. We were forced to perform a Full backup because our director and other new admins don't understand and feel comfortable with the "incremental forever" logic. I would hate to see what a restore would look like. In contrast, we just backed up a directory on an NT server we are using for our Backoffice conversion and that dir totals 35GB. That took 2h20m. We also performed a large restore from one AIX machine to another one of about 25GB. Less than 2 hours to restore. We have tweaked our Netware and AIX ADSM server according to performance guides and other suggestions and still have issues with small files. We will be moving our documents from Netware to NT soon and our NT guys like to refer to ADSM as crap. They are used to Arcserve but our now raving about BackupExec. It is going to be extremely difficult to explain if our huge machine can't keep up with their backup server. I know that overall ADSM is a better and more stable product but what do you do when you have a mixture of servers with large databases(ADSM's favorite) and (the more common) servers with small files that Arcserve and others like? I'm hoping another ADSM/TSM user has some tricks or tweaks that can help in this area. Anyone from any universities out there? Reply Separator Subject:Slow restore for large NT client outcome.. appeal to Tivoli Author: Jeff Connor <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Date: 09/20/2000 12:21 PM Our NT group was a hard sell for replacing Arcserve with TSM. Since the switch, I have taken quite a beating about TSM restore performance. Our NT admins take the position, "we'll try TSM but if the performance doesn't improve we are going with a tried and true solution like Compaq Enterprise Backup. TSM seems to us like a UNIX product trying to make it in the NT space. It is not typically selected by companies for NT backup and recovery". Not a word for word quote but generally sums up their position. The Compaq solution would use Arcserve from what I've been told. I know Tivoli/IBM have tried to address the small files issue with things like small file aggregation but I haven't noticed much improvement from version to version for big restores of servers with small files. I've heard different reasons for slow performance with small files over the years like the amount of TSM database lookups, NT file system processing/inefficiencies, etc.I have suggested to our NT admins that we break that big D: partition into multiple smaller partitions so I can collocate by filespace and restore multiple drives concurrently. Frankly, they are not interested in changing the way they configure their servers to accommodate the backup software. They feel they would not have to do this with Arcserve or other mor
Re: Slow restore for large NT client outcome.. appeal to Tivoli D evelopment/Support
> My NT admin's are moving toward hardware mirroring. That should be the first feature added for any highly available configuration. -- Joshua S. Bassi Senior Technical Consultant Symatrix Technology, Inc. [EMAIL PROTECTED] -Original Message- From: ADSM: Dist Stor Manager [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Arturo Lopez Sent: Wednesday, September 20, 2000 3:07 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: Slow restore for large NT client outcome.. appeal to Tivoli D evelopment/Support Jeff, I have the same concerns. My company is in the process of server consolidation. I have concerns that when the time comes to consolidate these servers into cluster servers I (TSM) will not be able to restore 1.2 TB of data to a cluster server in a timely manner. I am quickly loosing the battle in defending TSM. My NT admin's are moving toward hardware mirroring. If improvements to small file restores does not come soon I may loose the battle. I typically I achieve a 1-3gb per hour restore rate on file servers, Arturo Lopez -Original Message- From: Jeff Connor [SMTP:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Wednesday, September 20, 2000 11:22 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject:Slow restore for large NT client outcome.. appeal to Tivoli Development/Support I posted the memo below to this listserv last week when we were having trouble with the performance restoring a large NT drive. This memo is for the people who wanted to know how we made out in the end. I am also writing to bring to the attention of TSM development what I feel is a pretty big problem in the area of performance for clients with lots of small files. I am pursuing this issue with Tivoli through other channels but thought others on this listserv might have the same concern. For a summary of our TSM config see my first memo below. First lets get a couple things out of the way. I have been working with TSM/ADSM for approximately five years since version 1. I am a HUGE fan of the product and have fought very hard to get our company to standardize on TSM and leave Arcserve, Backup exec, Legato, and the like. I am pleased with improvements in TSM functionality over the years. The second thing is we run TSM on OS/390. Over time I've seen many posts on the listserv about users that have achieved better performance with UNIX based TSM servers. We are currently piloting TSM on AIX to test the performance. Now that we've established my loyalties, back to my concern about backup, and more importantly restore, performance for TSM clients with lots of small files. Most of our UNIX servers are database servers so my concerns about small files really pertain mostly to Windows NT server clients. Others may have issues with other platforms. The NT clients I have restore issues with are big file and print servers. The data partition is typically the D: drive and can be anywhere from 20GB to 160GB in size. The best restore time we can achieve for the file and print servers is somewhere between 1.5GB and 3.5GB per hour generally on the lower side. Now we could go through a lot of the common, is your network performing, is your database cache hit high enough, tcp window sizes, txn sizes, and the usual things but assume for a moment that we are optimally configured and done all "the right stuff". To make a performance comparison, we have a couple NT clients that contain a small number of file and they are large files. We restored 20GB of data on one of those servers recently in 1hr 45mins. The restore of the one directory on the D: partition for the client mentioned in my first memo below with an average file size of 64K ran for 6hrs 5mins and transferring 4.8GB. The whole drive took 45hrs. Our NT group was a hard sell for replacing Arcserve with TSM. Since the switch, I have taken quite a beating about TSM restore performance. Our NT admins take the position, "we'll try TSM but if the performance doesn't improve we are going with a tried and true solution like Compaq Enterprise Backup. TSM seems to us like a UNIX product trying to make it in the NT space. It is not typically selected by companies for NT backup and recovery". Not a word for word quote but generally sums up their position. The Compaq solution would use Arcserve from what I've been told. I know Tivoli/IBM have tried to address the small files issue with things like small file aggregation but I haven't noticed much improvement from version to version for big restores of servers with small files. I've heard d
Re: 3570 Volumes status=empty. Why?
If there was a write error when TSM attempted to use that volume, then TSM would update the volume to being private so that it could track the error it had on the volume (scratch volumes do not allow that). -- Joshua S. Bassi Senior Technical Consultant Symatrix Technology, Inc. [EMAIL PROTECTED] -Original Message- From: ADSM: Dist Stor Manager [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Ken Sedlacek Sent: Wednesday, September 20, 2000 2:08 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: 3570 Volumes status=empty. Why? This has not happened in the last 1 1/2 years of our ADSM system. Some of our 3570 volumes are being reclaimed OK, except instead of being deleted out of the library, some of them go to an "empty" status. Do any of you know why this is happening?? Yet other volumes reclaim to their end and then get deleted from the library, as they should. I believe this has happened to us 2-4 weeks ago, and the "empty" volumes eventually get deleted, but it takes somekind of doing. Any ideas? Volume Name Storage Device EstimatedPct Volume Pool NameClass Name Capacity Util Status (MB) --- -- - - --- - /usr/lpp/adsmserv/bin/a- ARCHIVEPOOL DISK 8.00.0 On-Line rchive.dsm /usr/lpp/adsmserv/bin/b- BACKUPPOOL DISK 8.00.0 On-Line ackup.dsm /usr/lpp/adsmserv/bin/s- SPACEMGPOOL DISK 8.00.0 On-Line pcmgmt.dsm 01D1933570POOL 3570DEV 27,421.4 55.6Full 021BB73570POOL 3570DEV 10,947.0 100.0Full 022B883570POOL 3570DEV 11,979.1 100.0Full 022B9D3570POOL 3570DEV 14,769.8 100.0Full 0234EA3570POOL 3570DEV 0.00.0 Empty< 023AC63570POOL 3570DEV 13,616.3 100.0 Filling 023FB83570POOL 3570DEV 29,109.8 100.0Full 02437D3570POOL 3570DEV 5,536.7 100.0Full 0247E93570POOL 3570DEV 7,612.8 57.6Full 0252623570POOL 3570DEV 21,112.4 65.2Full 0252C23570POOL 3570DEV 19,168.4 100.0Full 0258643570POOL 3570DEV 6,497.5 100.0 Filling 025A223570POOL 3570DEV 6,136.6 74.8Full 025A403570POOL 3570DEV 12,785.1 71.2Full 025AE73570POOL 3570DEV 14,088.2 93.0Full 025F263570POOL 3570DEV 16,180.7 93.0Full 025F2F3570POOL 3570DEV 5,195.6 72.9Full 025F343570POOL 3570DEV 16,292.3 97.5Full 0264023570POOL 3570DEV 43,057.1 58.4Full 02670F3570POOL 3570DEV 19,892.0 63.1 Filling 0267D93570POOL 3570DEV 17,500.7 99.7Full 0268943570POOL 3570DEV 16,823.3 96.8Full 026D9C3570POOL 3570DEV 18,833.3 97.7Full 0273853570POOL 3570DEV 10,376.3 97.5Full 0274E33570POOL 3570DEV 10,548.4 82.2Full 0ABB963570POOL 3570DEV 14,772.4 75.0Full 0AD4133570POOL 3570DEV 9,576.9 60.2Full 0AE1843570POOL 3570DEV 27,676.6 89.9Full 0AE18A3570POOL 3570DEV 33,958.8 52.1Full 0AE5083570POOL 3570DEV 5,303.1 100.0Full 0AE7CE3570POOL 3570DEV 0.00.0 Empty 0AE7F93570POOL 3570DEV 33,382.2 88.2Full 0AE9B83570POOL 3570DEV 23,402.0 55.6Full 0AEA373570POOL 3570DEV 0.00.0 Empty 0AEA573570POOL 3570DEV 6,039.5 98.1Full 0AF5883570POOL 3570DEV 17,502.9 100.0Full 0AF5A73570POOL 3570DEV 5,373.1 100.0Full 0FC77E3570POOL 3570DEV 5,919.4 84.3Full 0FCDDB3570POOL 3570DEV 5,228.9 98.6Full 0FE2403570POOL 3570DEV 5,000.00.2 Filling 0FE3063570POOL 3570DEV 8,629.6 98.8Full 0FE4563570POOL 3570DEV 17,037.0 77.7Full 0FE45B3570POOL 3570DEV 20,621.1 70.8Full 0FF4A73570POOL 3570DEV 16,316.5 66.4Full 0FF5763570POOL 3570DEV 5,000.0 64.9
Re: Slow restore for large NT client outcome.. appeal to Tivoli Development/Support
Not today. But I have heard it is coming. Also MS is adding a native NTFS image backup to NT 6.0 (aka Whistler). That will definitely be nice... -- Joshua S. Bassi Senior Technical Consultant Symatrix Technology, Inc. [EMAIL PROTECTED] -Original Message- From: ADSM: Dist Stor Manager [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Greazel, Alex Sent: Wednesday, September 20, 2000 9:44 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: Slow restore for large NT client outcome.. appeal to Tivoli Development/Support Can TSM do an image backup on NT? (If it can)That will dramatically decrease the amount of time it takes to do backups/restores for file systems that have tons of small files.
Re: Slow restore for large NT client outcome.. appeal to Tivoli D evelopment/Support
That may be because from what I have seen in TSM 3.7, directories are actually kept in the TSM database and not on tape. (That is just what I have seen in the field, but haven't seen documented anywhere). -- Joshua S. Bassi Senior Technical Consultant Symatrix Technology, Inc. [EMAIL PROTECTED] -Original Message- From: ADSM: Dist Stor Manager [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Farris, Raeana Sent: Wednesday, September 20, 2000 11:19 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: Slow restore for large NT client outcome.. appeal to Tivoli D evelopment/Support Just a thought - Take a look at the new TSM Implementation Redbook. They set up separate storage pools for NT, one for directory info and one for files. According to the Redbook restoring the directory structure first allows for faster restore times. I happened to be in a TSM session last week, the presenter said there was no need to separate storage pools(confused me). Please let us know if you get it resolved Good Luck. > -Original Message- > From: Jeff Connor [SMTP:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: Wednesday, September 20, 2000 11:22 AM > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: Slow restore for large NT client outcome.. appeal to Tivoli > Development/Support > > I posted the memo below to this listserv last week when we were > having trouble with the performance restoring a large NT drive. > This memo is for the people who wanted to know how we made out in > the end. I am also writing to bring to the attention of TSM > development what I feel is a pretty big problem in the area of > performance for clients with lots of small files. I am pursuing > this issue with Tivoli through other channels but thought others > on this listserv might have the same concern. For a summary of > our TSM config see my first memo below. > > First lets get a couple things out of the way. I have been > working with TSM/ADSM for approximately five years since > version 1. I am a HUGE fan of the product and have fought very > hard to get our company to standardize on TSM and leave Arcserve, > Backup exec, Legato, and the like. I am pleased with > improvements in TSM functionality over the years. The second > thing is we run TSM on OS/390. Over time I've seen many posts on > the listserv about users that have achieved better performance > with UNIX based TSM servers. We are currently piloting TSM on > AIX to test the performance. > > Now that we've established my loyalties, back to my concern about > backup, and more importantly restore, performance for TSM clients > with lots of small files. Most of our UNIX servers are database > servers so my concerns about small files really pertain mostly to > Windows NT server clients. Others may have issues with other > platforms. The NT clients I have restore issues with are big > file and print servers. The data partition is typically the D: > drive and can be anywhere from 20GB to 160GB in size. The best > restore time we can achieve for the file and print servers is > somewhere between 1.5GB and 3.5GB per hour generally on the lower > side. Now we could go through a lot of the common, is your > network performing, is your database cache hit high enough, tcp > window sizes, txn sizes, and the usual things but assume for a > moment that we are optimally configured and done all "the right > stuff". To make a performance comparison, we have a couple NT > clients that contain a small number of file and they are large > files. We restored 20GB of data on one of those servers recently > in 1hr 45mins. The restore of the one directory on the D: > partition for the client mentioned in my first memo below with an > average file size of 64K ran for 6hrs 5mins and transferring > 4.8GB. The whole drive took 45hrs. > > Our NT group was a hard sell for replacing Arcserve with TSM. > Since the switch, I have taken quite a beating about TSM restore > performance. Our NT admins take the position, "we'll try TSM but > if the performance doesn't improve we are going with a tried and > true solution like Compaq Enterprise Backup. TSM seems to us > like a UNIX product trying to make it in the NT space. It is not > typically selected by companies for NT backup and recovery". > Not a word for word quote but generally sums up their position. > The Compaq solution would use Arcserve from what I've been told. > > I know Tivoli/IBM have tried to address the small files issue > with things like small file aggregation but I haven't noticed > much improvement from version to version for big restores of > servers with small files. I've heard different reasons for slow > performance with small files over the years like the amount of > TSM database lookups, NT file system processing/inefficiencies, > etc. When looking at future directions for SAN backups I can > understand the argument that the SAN pipes will be faster and > TCPIP overhead will be eliminated leading to faster > restores/backups. But if the poor performance fo
Re: 3570 Volumes status=empty. Why?
Ken, "Some of our 3570 volumes are being reclaimed OK, except instead of being deleted out of the library, some of them go to an "empty" status. Do any of you know why this is happening?? Yet other volumes reclaim to their end and then get deleted from the library, as they should." We've seen that, too. Typically I'll reclaim about ten to twelve 3570 tapes from our temporary archive pool using a 3570B library. They all toggle to "pending" when their data are removed. Reuse delay is set to five days. After five days, most of the tapes disappear from the storage pool automatically, but I always have two or three that don't. For those I have to do a Move Media to delete them. At first I thought it was an issue of how they came to be removed from the library. For a while I was using "audit library" as a shortcut for "checkout" (ugly - I know). But I haven't done that in almost a year, and the archives expire after five weeks, so any tapes affected by that faux pas should have been recycled long ago. Now all tape removals from any storage pool are via the Move Media (to "local storage") command. That is how we've operated the system for about nine months now. Tapes affected by that early bad practice couldn't be "moved" because ADSM didn't know where they were; "volume location" was blank. Now all the tapes have valid locations from being "moved" out of the storage pool, this should no longer be an issue. And yet... I always end up with two or three tapes that don't go away automatically. I, too, would like an explanation. Tab Trepagnier Laitram Corporation
Re: Slow restore for large NT client outcome.. appeal to Tivoli D evelopment/Support
Jeff, I have the same concerns. My company is in the process of server consolidation. I have concerns that when the time comes to consolidate these servers into cluster servers I (TSM) will not be able to restore 1.2 TB of data to a cluster server in a timely manner. I am quickly loosing the battle in defending TSM. My NT admin's are moving toward hardware mirroring. If improvements to small file restores does not come soon I may loose the battle. I typically I achieve a 1-3gb per hour restore rate on file servers, Arturo Lopez -Original Message- From: Jeff Connor [SMTP:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Wednesday, September 20, 2000 11:22 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject:Slow restore for large NT client outcome.. appeal to Tivoli Development/Support I posted the memo below to this listserv last week when we were having trouble with the performance restoring a large NT drive. This memo is for the people who wanted to know how we made out in the end. I am also writing to bring to the attention of TSM development what I feel is a pretty big problem in the area of performance for clients with lots of small files. I am pursuing this issue with Tivoli through other channels but thought others on this listserv might have the same concern. For a summary of our TSM config see my first memo below. First lets get a couple things out of the way. I have been working with TSM/ADSM for approximately five years since version 1. I am a HUGE fan of the product and have fought very hard to get our company to standardize on TSM and leave Arcserve, Backup exec, Legato, and the like. I am pleased with improvements in TSM functionality over the years. The second thing is we run TSM on OS/390. Over time I've seen many posts on the listserv about users that have achieved better performance with UNIX based TSM servers. We are currently piloting TSM on AIX to test the performance. Now that we've established my loyalties, back to my concern about backup, and more importantly restore, performance for TSM clients with lots of small files. Most of our UNIX servers are database servers so my concerns about small files really pertain mostly to Windows NT server clients. Others may have issues with other platforms. The NT clients I have restore issues with are big file and print servers. The data partition is typically the D: drive and can be anywhere from 20GB to 160GB in size. The best restore time we can achieve for the file and print servers is somewhere between 1.5GB and 3.5GB per hour generally on the lower side. Now we could go through a lot of the common, is your network performing, is your database cache hit high enough, tcp window sizes, txn sizes, and the usual things but assume for a moment that we are optimally configured and done all "the right stuff". To make a performance comparison, we have a couple NT clients that contain a small number of file and they are large files. We restored 20GB of data on one of those servers recently in 1hr 45mins. The restore of the one directory on the D: partition for the client mentioned in my first memo below with an average file size of 64K ran for 6hrs 5mins and transferring 4.8GB. The whole drive took 45hrs. Our NT group was a hard sell for replacing Arcserve with TSM. Since the switch, I have taken quite a beating about TSM restore performance. Our NT admins take the position, "we'll try TSM but if the performance doesn't improve we are going with a tried and true solution like Compaq Enterprise Backup. TSM seems to us like a UNIX product trying to make it in the NT space. It is not typically selected by companies for NT backup and recovery". Not a word for word quote but generally sums up their position. The Compaq solution would use Arcserve from what I've been told. I know Tivoli/IBM have tried to address the small files issue with things like small file aggregation but I haven't noticed much improvement from version to version for big restores of servers with small files. I've heard different reasons for slow performance with small files over the years like the amount of TSM database lookups, NT file system processing/inefficiencies, etc. When looking at future directions for SAN backups I can understand the argument that the SAN pipes will be faster and TCPIP overhead will be eliminated leading to faster restores/backups. But if the poor performance for small files has a lot to do with TSM database lookups/overhead
Re: ADSM 3.1.2.50 for SUN Solaris 2.5.1
You mean and not have the license police jump down their throats? Kelly J. Lipp Storage Solutions Specialists, Inc. PO Box 51313 Colorado Springs CO 80949-1313 (719) 531-5926 Fax: (719) 260-5991 Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] www.storsol.com www.storserver.com -Original Message- From: ADSM: Dist Stor Manager [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of DIEGO GARCIA _ DIRECCION DE SISTEMAS-. Sent: Wednesday, September 20, 2000 3:20 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: ADSM 3.1.2.50 for SUN Solaris 2.5.1 Good afternoon, May be you note that Solaris 8 is freeware for less than 8 processors. You can confirm this in Sun's Website Cordially Diego Garcma System Manager Pontificia Universidad Javeriana Bogota , Colombia Gerrit van Zyl wrote: > Hi **SM'ers > > Is there anybody out there still using ADSM Server Version 3, Release 1, > Level 2.50 for SUN Solaris 2.5.1. We've bought ADSM 3.7 for SUN, but > unfortunately this is not supported on SUN Solaris 2.5.1. I've got the > ADSM evaluation software (ADSM 3.1.2.50), but our evaluation license has > expired now. We are struggling to get a licensed copy of ADSM 3.1.2.50 > from IBM, because these are not made anymore. Is there somebody that is > still on this level that can help me with the .LIC files in the > meantime. > > Thanks and regards > Gerrit van Zyl
Re: Slow restore for large NT client outcome.. appeal to Tivoli
Could someone with experience doing large restores with ArcServe or BackupExec provide some performance numbers? I've been in shops where the backups were taking a very long time. Longer than my TSM backup took. I never witnessed a restore but how can it be better. I want the facts. I'm tired of hearing about how much faster ArcServe and BackupExec are (in theory) compared to TSM in reality. I'm sick and tired of it and I won't take it anymore! This is what happens when you TSM 24 hours per day. Your brain. Your brain on TSM. Not a pretty picture. Kelly J. Lipp Storage Solutions Specialists, Inc. PO Box 51313 Colorado Springs CO 80949-1313 (719) 531-5926 Fax: (719) 260-5991 Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] www.storsol.com www.storserver.com -Original Message- From: ADSM: Dist Stor Manager [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Keith E. Pruitt Sent: Wednesday, September 20, 2000 12:03 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: Slow restore for large NT client outcome.. appeal to Tivo Jeff, we too have a problem with small files. At first I thought it was a Netware thing because the servers we have the greatest amount of files on reside on the Netware servers. But reading emails from several users I see that I may have a future problem on the NT side. We store Word and WordPerfect docs on two Netware 5 machines and each server holds about 1.8 Million files apiece. Needless to say these files are not that big. It took over 11 hours to back each of the servers up and they total around 30GB per server. We were forced to perform a Full backup because our director and other new admins don't understand and feel comfortable with the "incremental forever" logic. I would hate to see what a restore would look like. In contrast, we just backed up a directory on an NT server we are using for our Backoffice conversion and that dir totals 35GB. That took 2h20m. We also performed a large restore from one AIX machine to another one of about 25GB. Less than 2 hours to restore. We have tweaked our Netware and AIX ADSM server according to performance guides and other suggestions and still have issues with small files. We will be moving our documents from Netware to NT soon and our NT guys like to refer to ADSM as crap. They are used to Arcserve but our now raving about BackupExec. It is going to be extremely difficult to explain if our huge machine can't keep up with their backup server. I know that overall ADSM is a better and more stable product but what do you do when you have a mixture of servers with large databases(ADSM's favorite) and (the more common) servers with small files that Arcserve and others like? I'm hoping another ADSM/TSM user has some tricks or tweaks that can help in this area. Anyone from any universities out there? Reply Separator Subject:Slow restore for large NT client outcome.. appeal to Tivoli Author: Jeff Connor <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Date: 09/20/2000 12:21 PM Our NT group was a hard sell for replacing Arcserve with TSM. Since the switch, I have taken quite a beating about TSM restore performance. Our NT admins take the position, "we'll try TSM but if the performance doesn't improve we are going with a tried and true solution like Compaq Enterprise Backup. TSM seems to us like a UNIX product trying to make it in the NT space. It is not typically selected by companies for NT backup and recovery". Not a word for word quote but generally sums up their position. The Compaq solution would use Arcserve from what I've been told. I know Tivoli/IBM have tried to address the small files issue with things like small file aggregation but I haven't noticed much improvement from version to version for big restores of servers with small files. I've heard different reasons for slow performance with small files over the years like the amount of TSM database lookups, NT file system processing/inefficiencies, etc.I have suggested to our NT admins that we break that big D: partition into multiple smaller partitions so I can collocate by filespace and restore multiple drives concurrently. Frankly, they are not interested in changing the way they configure their servers to accommodate the backup software. They feel they would not have to do this with Arcserve or other more common NT backup products. I've tried tests using share names for folders and performing backups/restores using the UNC name, collocating the data by filespace and running concurrent restores. My tests showed improved elapsed time but this scheme would be tough to maintain. In a full server restore scenario I'd need to create the folders and shares for the target restore which means we'd need to keep track of that info some place. I'd constantly have to monitor growth in all the folders to make sure I've carved up the drive in fairly equal parts to optimize for restore, etc. Not a good solution either. Does anyone else see the poor performance for restoring clients with lots
Re: 3570 Volumes status=empty. Why?
What is the reusedelay parameter set to on that pool? That's the number of days a volume will stay empty before being deleted from a pool. For primary pools, typically 0 is good number of days. For DR pools, perhaps longer to allow for volume movement from on-site to off-site. Kelly J. Lipp Storage Solutions Specialists, Inc. PO Box 51313 Colorado Springs CO 80949-1313 (719) 531-5926 Fax: (719) 260-5991 Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] www.storsol.com www.storserver.com -Original Message- From: ADSM: Dist Stor Manager [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Sean Duffy Sent: Wednesday, September 20, 2000 3:19 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: 3570 Volumes status=empty. Why? Does the activity log indicate that there was some type of problem during the reclaim process. I have seen a similar problem where an error occured with our gardware and the tape was not made scratch (in our case). I realize I am running an exabyte library, and there may be several things that are different in our systems. Hope this helps Sean Duffy Network Analyst Alcatel canada, TA Ken Sedlacek cc: Sent by: Subject: 3570 Volumes status=empty. Why? "ADSM: Dist Stor Manager" <[EMAIL PROTECTED] IST.EDU> 09/20/00 02:06 PM Please respond to "ADSM: Dist Stor Manager" This has not happened in the last 1 1/2 years of our ADSM system. Some of our 3570 volumes are being reclaimed OK, except instead of being deleted out of the library, some of them go to an "empty" status. Do any of you know why this is happening?? Yet other volumes reclaim to their end and then get deleted from the library, as they should. I believe this has happened to us 2-4 weeks ago, and the "empty" volumes eventually get deleted, but it takes somekind of doing. Any ideas? Volume Name Storage Device EstimatedPct Volume Pool NameClass Name Capacity Util Status (MB) --- -- - - /usr/lpp/adsmserv/bin/a- ARCHIVEPOOL DISK 8.00.0 On-Line rchive.dsm /usr/lpp/adsmserv/bin/b- BACKUPPOOL DISK 8.00.0 On-Line ackup.dsm /usr/lpp/adsmserv/bin/s- SPACEMGPOOL DISK 8.00.0 On-Line pcmgmt.dsm 01D1933570POOL 3570DEV 27,421.4 55.6Full 021BB73570POOL 3570DEV 10,947.0 100.0Full 022B883570POOL 3570DEV 11,979.1 100.0Full 022B9D3570POOL 3570DEV 14,769.8 100.0Full 0234EA3570POOL 3570DEV 0.00.0 Empty < 023AC63570POOL 3570DEV 13,616.3 100.0 Filling 023FB83570POOL 3570DEV 29,109.8 100.0Full 02437D3570POOL 3570DEV 5,536.7 100.0Full 0247E93570POOL 3570DEV 7,612.8 57.6Full 0252623570POOL 3570DEV 21,112.4 65.2Full 0252C23570POOL 3570DEV 19,168.4 100.0Full 0258643570POOL 3570DEV 6,497.5 100.0 Filling 025A223570POOL 3570DEV 6,136.6 74.8Full 025A403570POOL 3570DEV 12,785.1 71.2Full 025AE73570POOL 3570DEV 14,088.2 93.0Full 025F263570POOL 3570DEV 16,180.7 93.0Full 025F2F3570POOL 3570DEV 5,195.6 72.9Full 025F343570POOL 3570DEV 16,292.3 97.5Full 0264023570POOL 3570DEV 43,057.1 58.4Full 02670F3570POOL 3570DEV 19,892.0 63.1 Filling 0267D93570POOL 3570DEV 17,500.7 99.7Full 0268943570POOL 3570DEV 16,823.3 96.8Full 026D9C3570POOL 3570DEV 18,833.3 97.7Full 0273853570POOL 3570DEV 10,376.3 97.5Full 0274E33570POOL 3570DEV 10,548.4 82.2Full 0ABB963570POOL 3570DEV 14,772.4 75.0Full 0AD4133570POOL 3570DEV 9,576.9 60.2Full 0AE1843570POOL 3570DEV 27,676.6 89.9Full 0AE18A3570POOL 3570DEV 33,958.8 52.1Full 0AE5083570POOL 3570DEV 5,303.1 100.0Full 0AE7CE3570POOL 3570DEV 0.00.0 Empty 0AE7F93570POOL
Unsubscribe
Please remove my e-mail address from ADSM-Serv Tivoli Storage Manager Server Development [EMAIL PROTECTED] Tel: (520) 799-5485 -*- T/L: 321-5485
Re: 3570 Volumes status=empty. Why?
Does the activity log indicate that there was some type of problem during the reclaim process. I have seen a similar problem where an error occured with our gardware and the tape was not made scratch (in our case). I realize I am running an exabyte library, and there may be several things that are different in our systems. Hope this helps Sean Duffy Network Analyst Alcatel canada, TA Ken Sedlacek cc: Sent by: Subject: 3570 Volumes status=empty. Why? "ADSM: Dist Stor Manager" <[EMAIL PROTECTED] IST.EDU> 09/20/00 02:06 PM Please respond to "ADSM: Dist Stor Manager" This has not happened in the last 1 1/2 years of our ADSM system. Some of our 3570 volumes are being reclaimed OK, except instead of being deleted out of the library, some of them go to an "empty" status. Do any of you know why this is happening?? Yet other volumes reclaim to their end and then get deleted from the library, as they should. I believe this has happened to us 2-4 weeks ago, and the "empty" volumes eventually get deleted, but it takes somekind of doing. Any ideas? Volume Name Storage Device EstimatedPct Volume Pool NameClass Name Capacity Util Status (MB) --- -- - - /usr/lpp/adsmserv/bin/a- ARCHIVEPOOL DISK 8.00.0 On-Line rchive.dsm /usr/lpp/adsmserv/bin/b- BACKUPPOOL DISK 8.00.0 On-Line ackup.dsm /usr/lpp/adsmserv/bin/s- SPACEMGPOOL DISK 8.00.0 On-Line pcmgmt.dsm 01D1933570POOL 3570DEV 27,421.4 55.6Full 021BB73570POOL 3570DEV 10,947.0 100.0Full 022B883570POOL 3570DEV 11,979.1 100.0Full 022B9D3570POOL 3570DEV 14,769.8 100.0Full 0234EA3570POOL 3570DEV 0.00.0 Empty < 023AC63570POOL 3570DEV 13,616.3 100.0 Filling 023FB83570POOL 3570DEV 29,109.8 100.0Full 02437D3570POOL 3570DEV 5,536.7 100.0Full 0247E93570POOL 3570DEV 7,612.8 57.6Full 0252623570POOL 3570DEV 21,112.4 65.2Full 0252C23570POOL 3570DEV 19,168.4 100.0Full 0258643570POOL 3570DEV 6,497.5 100.0 Filling 025A223570POOL 3570DEV 6,136.6 74.8Full 025A403570POOL 3570DEV 12,785.1 71.2Full 025AE73570POOL 3570DEV 14,088.2 93.0Full 025F263570POOL 3570DEV 16,180.7 93.0Full 025F2F3570POOL 3570DEV 5,195.6 72.9Full 025F343570POOL 3570DEV 16,292.3 97.5Full 0264023570POOL 3570DEV 43,057.1 58.4Full 02670F3570POOL 3570DEV 19,892.0 63.1 Filling 0267D93570POOL 3570DEV 17,500.7 99.7Full 0268943570POOL 3570DEV 16,823.3 96.8Full 026D9C3570POOL 3570DEV 18,833.3 97.7Full 0273853570POOL 3570DEV 10,376.3 97.5Full 0274E33570POOL 3570DEV 10,548.4 82.2Full 0ABB963570POOL 3570DEV 14,772.4 75.0Full 0AD4133570POOL 3570DEV 9,576.9 60.2Full 0AE1843570POOL 3570DEV 27,676.6 89.9Full 0AE18A3570POOL 3570DEV 33,958.8 52.1Full 0AE5083570POOL 3570DEV 5,303.1 100.0Full 0AE7CE3570POOL 3570DEV 0.00.0 Empty 0AE7F93570POOL 3570DEV 33,382.2 88.2Full 0AE9B83570POOL 3570DEV 23,402.0 55.6Full 0AEA373570POOL 3570DEV 0.00.0 Empty 0AEA573570POOL 3570DEV 6,039.5 98.1Full 0AF5883570POOL 3570DEV 17,502.9 100.0Full 0AF5A73570POOL 3570DEV 5,373.1 100.0Full 0FC77E3570POOL 3570DEV 5,919.4 84.3Full 0FCDDB3570POOL 3570DEV 5,228.9 98.6Full 0FE2403570POOL 3570DEV 5,000.00.2 Filling 0FE3063570POOL 357
Re: 3570 Volumes status=empty. Why?
Ken, Issue a q vo on the volume that is empty with format=detail and see if the Scratch Volume field is no. If it is no then you will have to delete the volume from the storage pool. Bill Sherrill Analyst International
Re: ADSM 3.1.2.50 for SUN Solaris 2.5.1
Good afternoon, May be you note that Solaris 8 is freeware for less than 8 processors. You can confirm this in Sun's Website Cordially Diego Garcma System Manager Pontificia Universidad Javeriana Bogota , Colombia Gerrit van Zyl wrote: > Hi **SM'ers > > Is there anybody out there still using ADSM Server Version 3, Release 1, > Level 2.50 for SUN Solaris 2.5.1. We've bought ADSM 3.7 for SUN, but > unfortunately this is not supported on SUN Solaris 2.5.1. I've got the > ADSM evaluation software (ADSM 3.1.2.50), but our evaluation license has > expired now. We are struggling to get a licensed copy of ADSM 3.1.2.50 > from IBM, because these are not made anymore. Is there somebody that is > still on this level that can help me with the .LIC files in the > meantime. > > Thanks and regards > Gerrit van Zyl
unsubscribe
From: Vanderlei Pelizer Pereira@NOTESDSV on 09/20/2000 05:38 PM Please remove my e-mail address from ADSM-Serv
3570 Volumes status=empty. Why?
This has not happened in the last 1 1/2 years of our ADSM system. Some of our 3570 volumes are being reclaimed OK, except instead of being deleted out of the library, some of them go to an "empty" status. Do any of you know why this is happening?? Yet other volumes reclaim to their end and then get deleted from the library, as they should. I believe this has happened to us 2-4 weeks ago, and the "empty" volumes eventually get deleted, but it takes somekind of doing. Any ideas? Volume Name Storage Device EstimatedPct Volume Pool NameClass Name Capacity Util Status (MB) --- -- - - /usr/lpp/adsmserv/bin/a- ARCHIVEPOOL DISK 8.00.0 On-Line rchive.dsm /usr/lpp/adsmserv/bin/b- BACKUPPOOL DISK 8.00.0 On-Line ackup.dsm /usr/lpp/adsmserv/bin/s- SPACEMGPOOL DISK 8.00.0 On-Line pcmgmt.dsm 01D1933570POOL 3570DEV 27,421.4 55.6Full 021BB73570POOL 3570DEV 10,947.0 100.0Full 022B883570POOL 3570DEV 11,979.1 100.0Full 022B9D3570POOL 3570DEV 14,769.8 100.0Full 0234EA3570POOL 3570DEV 0.00.0 Empty< 023AC63570POOL 3570DEV 13,616.3 100.0 Filling 023FB83570POOL 3570DEV 29,109.8 100.0Full 02437D3570POOL 3570DEV 5,536.7 100.0Full 0247E93570POOL 3570DEV 7,612.8 57.6Full 0252623570POOL 3570DEV 21,112.4 65.2Full 0252C23570POOL 3570DEV 19,168.4 100.0Full 0258643570POOL 3570DEV 6,497.5 100.0 Filling 025A223570POOL 3570DEV 6,136.6 74.8Full 025A403570POOL 3570DEV 12,785.1 71.2Full 025AE73570POOL 3570DEV 14,088.2 93.0Full 025F263570POOL 3570DEV 16,180.7 93.0Full 025F2F3570POOL 3570DEV 5,195.6 72.9Full 025F343570POOL 3570DEV 16,292.3 97.5Full 0264023570POOL 3570DEV 43,057.1 58.4Full 02670F3570POOL 3570DEV 19,892.0 63.1 Filling 0267D93570POOL 3570DEV 17,500.7 99.7Full 0268943570POOL 3570DEV 16,823.3 96.8Full 026D9C3570POOL 3570DEV 18,833.3 97.7Full 0273853570POOL 3570DEV 10,376.3 97.5Full 0274E33570POOL 3570DEV 10,548.4 82.2Full 0ABB963570POOL 3570DEV 14,772.4 75.0Full 0AD4133570POOL 3570DEV 9,576.9 60.2Full 0AE1843570POOL 3570DEV 27,676.6 89.9Full 0AE18A3570POOL 3570DEV 33,958.8 52.1Full 0AE5083570POOL 3570DEV 5,303.1 100.0Full 0AE7CE3570POOL 3570DEV 0.00.0 Empty 0AE7F93570POOL 3570DEV 33,382.2 88.2Full 0AE9B83570POOL 3570DEV 23,402.0 55.6Full 0AEA373570POOL 3570DEV 0.00.0 Empty 0AEA573570POOL 3570DEV 6,039.5 98.1Full 0AF5883570POOL 3570DEV 17,502.9 100.0Full 0AF5A73570POOL 3570DEV 5,373.1 100.0Full 0FC77E3570POOL 3570DEV 5,919.4 84.3Full 0FCDDB3570POOL 3570DEV 5,228.9 98.6Full 0FE2403570POOL 3570DEV 5,000.00.2 Filling 0FE3063570POOL 3570DEV 8,629.6 98.8Full 0FE4563570POOL 3570DEV 17,037.0 77.7Full 0FE45B3570POOL 3570DEV 20,621.1 70.8Full 0FF4A73570POOL 3570DEV 16,316.5 66.4Full 0FF5763570POOL 3570DEV 5,000.0 64.9 Filling 10017E3570POOL 3570DEV 15,283.1 99.3Full 1001E33570POOL 3570DEV 7,664.1 72.8Full 1002023570POOL 3570DEV 14,284.3 99.6Full Ken Sedlacek Information Technology Infrastructure-Kyrus Corporation W: 864-244-7051 x2260 Cell: 864-444-8375 Text Page: 864-444-7243, follow prompts [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Slow restore for large NT client outcome.. appeal to Tivo
Jeff, we too have a problem with small files. At first I thought it was a Netware thing because the servers we have the greatest amount of files on reside on the Netware servers. But reading emails from several users I see that I may have a future problem on the NT side. We store Word and WordPerfect docs on two Netware 5 machines and each server holds about 1.8 Million files apiece. Needless to say these files are not that big. It took over 11 hours to back each of the servers up and they total around 30GB per server. We were forced to perform a Full backup because our director and other new admins don't understand and feel comfortable with the "incremental forever" logic. I would hate to see what a restore would look like. In contrast, we just backed up a directory on an NT server we are using for our Backoffice conversion and that dir totals 35GB. That took 2h20m. We also performed a large restore from one AIX machine to another one of about 25GB. Less than 2 hours to restore. We have tweaked our Netware and AIX ADSM server according to performance guides and other suggestions and still have issues with small files. We will be moving our documents from Netware to NT soon and our NT guys like to refer to ADSM as crap. They are used to Arcserve but our now raving about BackupExec. It is going to be extremely difficult to explain if our huge machine can't keep up with their backup server. I know that overall ADSM is a better and more stable product but what do you do when you have a mixture of servers with large databases(ADSM's favorite) and (the more common) servers with small files that Arcserve and others like? I'm hoping another ADSM/TSM user has some tricks or tweaks that can help in this area. Anyone from any universities out there? Reply Separator Subject:Slow restore for large NT client outcome.. appeal to Tivoli Author: Jeff Connor <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Date: 09/20/2000 12:21 PM Our NT group was a hard sell for replacing Arcserve with TSM. Since the switch, I have taken quite a beating about TSM restore performance. Our NT admins take the position, "we'll try TSM but if the performance doesn't improve we are going with a tried and true solution like Compaq Enterprise Backup. TSM seems to us like a UNIX product trying to make it in the NT space. It is not typically selected by companies for NT backup and recovery". Not a word for word quote but generally sums up their position. The Compaq solution would use Arcserve from what I've been told. I know Tivoli/IBM have tried to address the small files issue with things like small file aggregation but I haven't noticed much improvement from version to version for big restores of servers with small files. I've heard different reasons for slow performance with small files over the years like the amount of TSM database lookups, NT file system processing/inefficiencies, etc.I have suggested to our NT admins that we break that big D: partition into multiple smaller partitions so I can collocate by filespace and restore multiple drives concurrently. Frankly, they are not interested in changing the way they configure their servers to accommodate the backup software. They feel they would not have to do this with Arcserve or other more common NT backup products. I've tried tests using share names for folders and performing backups/restores using the UNC name, collocating the data by filespace and running concurrent restores. My tests showed improved elapsed time but this scheme would be tough to maintain. In a full server restore scenario I'd need to create the folders and shares for the target restore which means we'd need to keep track of that info some place. I'd constantly have to monitor growth in all the folders to make sure I've carved up the drive in fairly equal parts to optimize for restore, etc. Not a good solution either. Does anyone else see the poor performance for restoring clients with lots of small files and feel that this is a problem Tivoli needs to address? I do. If this issue is not resolved then I won't be able to keep using TSM to backup our NT servers. Thanks, Jeff Connor Niagara Mohawk Power Corp. -- Forwarded by Jeffrey P Connor/IT/NMPC on 09/20/2000 10:32 AM --- Jeffrey P Connor 09/13/2000 01:20 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] cc: Subject: Slow restore for large NT client.. help! We are in the process of restoring a subdirectory of a very large NT client file space (D:) and it is running really slow. I thought I'd see if any of you have some ideas as to where we can look for bottlenecks. The client config is: Compaq proliant 5500 400MB RAM two 400MHz Xeon processors. ~160GB of disk in a Compaq disc array made up of 18.2GB drives Windows NT 4.0 SP6a TSM client for NT 3.7.2.01 Applicable TSM client options: tcpwindowsize 63 tcpbuffsize 31 tcp
Unknown Exchange API error
Hi TSMers, I'm running the TDP for Exchange Version 1 Release 1 Level 1.0 (IP21909) and suddenly get the following messages. 09/14/2000 23:01:38,COMMAND LINE : C:\ADMIN\ADSM\agentexc\excdsmc /backup:dir,full /adsmoptfile:C:\ADMIN\ADSM\agentexc\dsm.opt /logfile:C:\ADMIN\ADSM\agentexc\excdsm.log 09/14/2000 23:03:03,ACN3025E -- Backup error encountered. ACN4226E -- Exchange Error: ACN3516E -- An unknown Exchange API error has occured. 09/14/2000 23:03:03,BACKUP(CLC) - Database: DIR, Type: FULL, Actual bytes: N/A, Secs: 0.00, Kb/Sec: 0.00, Exchange server: POST, TSM server: C:\ADMIN\ADSM\agentexc\dsm.opt, Status: ACN4226E -- Exchange Error: ACN3516E -- An unknown Exchange API error has occured. I searched the archives but couldn't find anything specific. Is there a TDP or Exchange log file that further explains this error? Kind regards Thomas Rupp Vorarlberger Illwerke AG MAIL: [EMAIL PROTECTED] TEL:++43/5574/4991-251 FAX:++43/5574/4991-820-8251
Re: Server unable to contact client
This will also happen if there is a firewall between the server and the client. Perhaps the port is not being passed backward or forward. Kelly J. Lipp Storage Solutions Specialists, Inc. PO Box 51313 Colorado Springs CO 80949-1313 (719) 531-5926 Fax: (719) 260-5991 Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] www.storsol.com www.storserver.com -Original Message- From: ADSM: Dist Stor Manager [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Thomas Denier Sent: Wednesday, September 20, 2000 1:40 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: Server unable to contact client > Has anyone seen this error trying to backup NT client? > > The schedlog looks fine, it shows the next date and time for backup to > start. > > ANR2716E Schedule prompter was not able to contact client NodeName using > type 1 (165.4.121.2 1501) I have seen it more often with Unix clients, but I think the possible causes are pretty much the same. Another respondant has already noted the possibility that the scheduler service is not running. The other reasonably common problem that leads to this message is loss of network connectivity. This can be checked using the ping command.
Re: Server unable to contact client
> Has anyone seen this error trying to backup NT client? > > The schedlog looks fine, it shows the next date and time for backup to > start. > > ANR2716E Schedule prompter was not able to contact client NodeName using > type 1 (165.4.121.2 1501) I have seen it more often with Unix clients, but I think the possible causes are pretty much the same. Another respondant has already noted the possibility that the scheduler service is not running. The other reasonably common problem that leads to this message is loss of network connectivity. This can be checked using the ping command.
Re: Slow restore for large NT client outcome
Jeff - I more than sympathize with your predicament as a storage administrator dealing with NT systems and their administrators. But be careful about going after a vendor to fix a problem you perceive to be with their product without first establishing baseline values for your configuration and otherwise analyzing it determine just where and what the problem is. Nick's posting today about NTFS performance and recommendations last week regarding FTP baseline tests regarding your problem will help to define it. Such measures will help you obtain baseline values, as close as possible to optimal values, against which you can compare performance with more involved applications like TSM, on top of that amalgam. Being a long-time ADSM guy I'm sure you remember back to postings where people would wail on IBM about poor performance backing up and restoring, asking "What's wrong with ADSM???" - when their implementation choices resulted in 20,000 or more files in one directory, which is deadly for anything entering such a directory. That is to say, the way in which systems are configured and implemented, plus networking problems and operating system defects and design shortcomings can thwart performance in any package implemented on them. Some customers unknowingly implement tape technologies with poor start-stop performance, see slow restoral performance, and then blame the restoral software. We have to be aware of what these things can do to and for us. Know thy technologies, lest they bite thee. It's a classic situation in data processing that users blame performance problems on the first thing between them and the computer system, but of course that's just convenient blame assignment. After all - they have to blame someone or something, and that's the one thing they know. This is not to say that TSM is perfect or necessarily blameless in this situation. But as customer technicians it's our responsibility to determine where the problem lies. And for that to succeed the various experts in the environment (networking, opsys, application) have to work together to analyze it. Your NT people say that TSM seems like a UNIX product trying to make it in the NT space. The irony is that it's a mainframe product that did even better in a Unix environment because of that environment's minimized overhead. You have the unenviable situation of an MVS server and NT clients, with a lineage and history of TCP/IP performance shortcomings, high overhead, and file system inefficiencies. Your shop is looking at an AIX-based TSM server system, which is a good move. Whether "TSM can make it in the NT space" is more up to NT than TSM: if Microsoft wants to be a serious contender, they have to make Windows a serious operating system. Many shops won't implement NTs as enterprise servers because their performance is ridiculously inferior. Tivoli gets blamed for numerous things not its fault, like its TDP being unable to restore individual mail boxes in a certain vendor mail system, when that other vendor fails to provide an API to make it possible. Certainly Tivoli would agree that they should take responsibility for their own failings, but we should be careful to attribute to them what is actually theirs. The situation you're in is the familiar one so many of us find ourselves in, having to address complaints about why things are so bad, when we don't have measurements to know how much that deviates from how good they can be. I strongly encourage everyone to get such numbers during off-peak times so that you have something to compare against, in each area (disk activity, tape throughput, tape search time, network capacity, CPU load capability, etc.). From what you describe, your shop is undergoing an unusual number of full file system recoveries. With the size of today's disks and the need for data to be current, I would very much avoid dependence on any backup package for such recoveries. I would recommend some form of disk mirroring for first-level recovery, to render recovery immediate and current. Rely upon a package such as TSM for second-tier recovery when the mirror can't do it, and for the spot restoral of individual files. In summary, get those baseline numbers and use them to help isolate the problem areas. Identifying problems is 90% of their solution. And stay a huge fan of the product. :-) Richard Sims, BU
Re: Slow restore for large NT client outcome.. appeal to Tivoli Development/Support
How so?? George
Re: Slow restore for large NT client outcome.. appeal to Tivoli Development/Support
We have same problems. It took 6 hrs to restore 220MB with 300,000 small files without DIRMC, with disk DIRMC it reduce to 3 hrs. However it is still too slow. I did test for multi-session--multi drive, it dose not improve much. As long as we use tape, multi session will be limited. Only thing may help a little is holding the data in disk pool, and start multi sessions. Another thing is using LAN -free backup site, meaning restore from local SCSI drive directly. I am going to do a test on that. We are dealing with same pressure to change the backup software too. It is nice to know that if any other product can do that thing better. I doubt. George
Re: Another ADSM capacity question
Daniel, Absolutely no offence taken... Looking at the second command it seems to be trying to do something slightly different, something clever which my command doesnt !!! Can someone please explain !! Many thanks, Brian Johnson > -Original Message- > From: Daniel Swan/TM [SMTP:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: Wednesday, September 20, 2000 2:45 PM > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: Re: Another ADSM capacity question > > Brian, in no way did I mean to imply your statement was faulty... I guess > what I was hoping for is a better understanding of the output it > generates. > From my limited understanding, the two commands below should generate > identical #'s. Ie, Total occupancy of a client should equal the sum of > all > filespaces of a client. > > Obviously I've made a faulty assumption, and am hoping someone can point > out > to me where, and how. > > Best regards, > Dan. > > > Daniel Swan > HP Unix Team > ISM-BC > 3030 2nd Ave SE > Calgary, AB, T2A 5N7 > ph. 403-530-1726 > fax: 403-530-1066 > > > > > > -Original Message- > > From: Johnson, Brian [SMTP:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > > Sent: Wednesday, September 20, 2000 12:30 PM > > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > Subject: Re: Another ADSM capacity question > > > > Daniel, > > My command only sums up the number of files backed up and the total MB > per > > client. It doesnt do any percentages and so on - so just for a set of > > totals > > my command works ok and the figures are ok > > > > Regards, > > > > Brian Johnson > > 212 647 3557 > > > > > -Original Message- > > > From: Daniel Swan/TM [SMTP:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > > > Sent: Wednesday, September 20, 2000 2:13 PM > > > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > Subject: Re: Another ADSM capacity question > > > > > > Brian, your SQL statement worked like a charm, however, I am having > > > trouble > > > reconciling the difference between the following outputs, which I > think > > > should be the same: > > > > > > adsm> select total_MB from auditocc where node_name='U1_APPS' > > > > > > TOTAL_MB > > > --- > > > 7396917 > > > > > > ---AND--- > > > > > > adsm> select node_name, cast(sum(capacity * (PCT_UTIL/100))as decimal > > > (9,0)) > > > as percent_utilized from filespaces group by node_name order by > > > percent_utilized > > > > > > > > > U1_APPS 473461 > > > > > > How do I reconcile these differences, and which is a more accurate > > picture > > > of how much space is being taken up on my ADSM server?
Re: Another ADSM capacity question
Brian, in no way did I mean to imply your statement was faulty... I guess what I was hoping for is a better understanding of the output it generates. >From my limited understanding, the two commands below should generate identical #'s. Ie, Total occupancy of a client should equal the sum of all filespaces of a client. Obviously I've made a faulty assumption, and am hoping someone can point out to me where, and how. Best regards, Dan. Daniel Swan HP Unix Team ISM-BC 3030 2nd Ave SE Calgary, AB, T2A 5N7 ph. 403-530-1726 fax: 403-530-1066 > -Original Message- > From: Johnson, Brian [SMTP:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: Wednesday, September 20, 2000 12:30 PM > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: Re: Another ADSM capacity question > > Daniel, > My command only sums up the number of files backed up and the total MB per > client. It doesnt do any percentages and so on - so just for a set of > totals > my command works ok and the figures are ok > > Regards, > > Brian Johnson > 212 647 3557 > > > -Original Message- > > From: Daniel Swan/TM [SMTP:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > > Sent: Wednesday, September 20, 2000 2:13 PM > > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > Subject: Re: Another ADSM capacity question > > > > Brian, your SQL statement worked like a charm, however, I am having > > trouble > > reconciling the difference between the following outputs, which I think > > should be the same: > > > > adsm> select total_MB from auditocc where node_name='U1_APPS' > > > > TOTAL_MB > > --- > > 7396917 > > > > ---AND--- > > > > adsm> select node_name, cast(sum(capacity * (PCT_UTIL/100))as decimal > > (9,0)) > > as percent_utilized from filespaces group by node_name order by > > percent_utilized > > > > > > U1_APPS 473461 > > > > How do I reconcile these differences, and which is a more accurate > picture > > of how much space is being taken up on my ADSM server?
Re: Slow restore for large NT client outcome.. appeal to Tivoli Development/Support
Would other backup tools suffer the same problem then? If this is a filesystem problem I would expect so. To the original poster: how long does it take Barfserve to restore a 60 GB filesystem with 10M files? As you can tell, I'm no fan of Arcserve. Kelly J. Lipp Storage Solutions Specialists, Inc. PO Box 51313 Colorado Springs CO 80949-1313 (719) 531-5926 Fax: (719) 260-5991 Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] www.storsol.com www.storserver.com -Original Message- From: ADSM: Dist Stor Manager [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Nicholas Cassimatis/Raleigh/IBM Sent: Wednesday, September 20, 2000 10:53 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: Slow restore for large NT client outcome.. appeal to Tivoli Development/Support Jeff, One thing to show your NT Admins is just how much overhead NTFS has. The way I've done this before is to copy a drive, either locally or over the network. If you take one of the drives with a lot of small files, can copy it, the performance will drop as the copy goes on. The more files you stick on an NTFS partition, the higher the overhead becomes. The way the NTFS allocation tables work, the more files you put in, the more complex the tables become. Here's the test I did, in basic form: On a system with a large drive, net use (NT speak - "Map Network Drive") to an empty drive on an adjacent machine. Copy a 20GB directory (from the command line - no NT speak) to this drive. Measure performance. Delete data on target system. Copy entire drive to target. Measure performance. Laugh as NT Admins realize how bad the performance gets with the larger drive. (If you can't tell from the above, I'm not much of an NT fan) Nick Cassimatis [EMAIL PROTECTED] "I'm one cookie away from happy." - Snoopy (Charles Schulz)
Re: Another ADSM capacity question
Daniel, My command only sums up the number of files backed up and the total MB per client. It doesnt do any percentages and so on - so just for a set of totals my command works ok and the figures are ok Regards, Brian Johnson 212 647 3557 > -Original Message- > From: Daniel Swan/TM [SMTP:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: Wednesday, September 20, 2000 2:13 PM > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: Re: Another ADSM capacity question > > Brian, your SQL statement worked like a charm, however, I am having > trouble > reconciling the difference between the following outputs, which I think > should be the same: > > adsm> select total_MB from auditocc where node_name='U1_APPS' > > TOTAL_MB > --- > 7396917 > > ---AND--- > > adsm> select node_name, cast(sum(capacity * (PCT_UTIL/100))as decimal > (9,0)) > as percent_utilized from filespaces group by node_name order by > percent_utilized > > > U1_APPS 473461 > > How do I reconcile these differences, and which is a more accurate picture > of how much space is being taken up on my ADSM server?
Re: Server unable to contact client
Check that the client scheduler is running. > -Original Message- > From: Georgia Blair [SMTP:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: Wednesday, September 20, 2000 12:30 PM > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: Server unable to contact client > > Has anyone seen this error trying to backup NT client? > > The schedlog looks fine, it shows the next date and time for backup to > start. > > ANR2716E Schedule prompter was not able to contact client NodeName using > type 1 (165.4.121.2 1501) > > > Thanks, > [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Slow restore for large NT client outcome.. appeal to Tivoli D evelopment/Support
Just a thought - Take a look at the new TSM Implementation Redbook. They set up separate storage pools for NT, one for directory info and one for files. According to the Redbook restoring the directory structure first allows for faster restore times. I happened to be in a TSM session last week, the presenter said there was no need to separate storage pools(confused me). Please let us know if you get it resolved Good Luck. > -Original Message- > From: Jeff Connor [SMTP:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: Wednesday, September 20, 2000 11:22 AM > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: Slow restore for large NT client outcome.. appeal to Tivoli > Development/Support > > I posted the memo below to this listserv last week when we were > having trouble with the performance restoring a large NT drive. > This memo is for the people who wanted to know how we made out in > the end. I am also writing to bring to the attention of TSM > development what I feel is a pretty big problem in the area of > performance for clients with lots of small files. I am pursuing > this issue with Tivoli through other channels but thought others > on this listserv might have the same concern. For a summary of > our TSM config see my first memo below. > > First lets get a couple things out of the way. I have been > working with TSM/ADSM for approximately five years since > version 1. I am a HUGE fan of the product and have fought very > hard to get our company to standardize on TSM and leave Arcserve, > Backup exec, Legato, and the like. I am pleased with > improvements in TSM functionality over the years. The second > thing is we run TSM on OS/390. Over time I've seen many posts on > the listserv about users that have achieved better performance > with UNIX based TSM servers. We are currently piloting TSM on > AIX to test the performance. > > Now that we've established my loyalties, back to my concern about > backup, and more importantly restore, performance for TSM clients > with lots of small files. Most of our UNIX servers are database > servers so my concerns about small files really pertain mostly to > Windows NT server clients. Others may have issues with other > platforms. The NT clients I have restore issues with are big > file and print servers. The data partition is typically the D: > drive and can be anywhere from 20GB to 160GB in size. The best > restore time we can achieve for the file and print servers is > somewhere between 1.5GB and 3.5GB per hour generally on the lower > side. Now we could go through a lot of the common, is your > network performing, is your database cache hit high enough, tcp > window sizes, txn sizes, and the usual things but assume for a > moment that we are optimally configured and done all "the right > stuff". To make a performance comparison, we have a couple NT > clients that contain a small number of file and they are large > files. We restored 20GB of data on one of those servers recently > in 1hr 45mins. The restore of the one directory on the D: > partition for the client mentioned in my first memo below with an > average file size of 64K ran for 6hrs 5mins and transferring > 4.8GB. The whole drive took 45hrs. > > Our NT group was a hard sell for replacing Arcserve with TSM. > Since the switch, I have taken quite a beating about TSM restore > performance. Our NT admins take the position, "we'll try TSM but > if the performance doesn't improve we are going with a tried and > true solution like Compaq Enterprise Backup. TSM seems to us > like a UNIX product trying to make it in the NT space. It is not > typically selected by companies for NT backup and recovery". > Not a word for word quote but generally sums up their position. > The Compaq solution would use Arcserve from what I've been told. > > I know Tivoli/IBM have tried to address the small files issue > with things like small file aggregation but I haven't noticed > much improvement from version to version for big restores of > servers with small files. I've heard different reasons for slow > performance with small files over the years like the amount of > TSM database lookups, NT file system processing/inefficiencies, > etc. When looking at future directions for SAN backups I can > understand the argument that the SAN pipes will be faster and > TCPIP overhead will be eliminated leading to faster > restores/backups. But if the poor performance for small files > has a lot to do with TSM database lookups/overhead then how will > performance be different when the data travels over the SAN > versus the LAN/WAN? The database processing about file > information will be pretty much the same won't it? I have > suggested to our NT admins that we break that big D: partition > into multiple smaller partitions so I can collocate by filespace > and restore multiple drives concurrently. Frankly, they are not > interested in changing the way they configure their servers to > accommodate the backup software. They feel t
Re: Another ADSM capacity question
Brian, your SQL statement worked like a charm, however, I am having trouble reconciling the difference between the following outputs, which I think should be the same: adsm> select total_MB from auditocc where node_name='U1_APPS' TOTAL_MB --- 7396917 ---AND--- adsm> select node_name, cast(sum(capacity * (PCT_UTIL/100))as decimal (9,0)) as percent_utilized from filespaces group by node_name order by percent_utilized U1_APPS 473461 How do I reconcile these differences, and which is a more accurate picture of how much space is being taken up on my ADSM server?
Re: Another ADSM capacity question
On Wed, 20 Sep 2000, Daniel Swan/TM wrote: // Brian, my ADSM server choked on your SQL statement... it didn't like the // "as". However, I did work this out on my own: // // select node_name, sum(capacity * (PCT_UTIL/100)) from filespaces group by // node_name // // It works the way I want it to, but I'd like to round the result... I tried a // few obvious syntaxes, but no dice. Any suggestions? // Daniel, try this: select node_name, cast(sum(capacity * (PCT_UTIL/100))as decimal (yy,z)) as percent_utilized from filespaces group by node_name where yy is the max number of places to the left of the decimal point, z is the number of places to the left. Note that places to the right are padded with zeros, places to the left are not. // Daniel Swan // HP Unix Team // ISM-BC // 3030 2nd Ave SE // Calgary, AB, T2A 5N7 // ph. 403-530-1726 // fax: 403-530-1066 // // // // // > -Original Message- // > From: Johnson, Brian [SMTP:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] // > Sent: Wednesday, September 20, 2000 10:23 AM // > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] // > Subject: Re: Another ADSM capacity question // > // > You could try, // > // > select node_name, sum(physical_mb), as DATA_IN_MB, sum(num_files) from // > occupancy group by node_name order by node_name // > // > // > Brian Johnson // > Merrill Lynch // > // > 212-647 3557 // > // > // - Best regards, Brian +---+ | Brian T. Huntley Systems and Network Engineer | | Campus Information Services, Clarkson University | | Ph/FAX: 315.268-6723/6570 | | [EMAIL PROTECTED] www.clarkson.edu/cis | +---+ UNIX *is* user friendly. It's just selective about who its friends are. PGP Public Key available. finger [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Exclude.FS(?) on NT cluster
Just fooled with this, but on the latest 3.7.2 client. The syntax there is exclude.dir c:\* Kelly J. Lipp Storage Solutions Specialists, Inc. PO Box 51313 Colorado Springs CO 80949-1313 (719) 531-5926 Fax: (719) 260-5991 Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] www.storsol.com www.storserver.com -Original Message- From: ADSM: Dist Stor Manager [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Tab Trepagnier Sent: Wednesday, September 20, 2000 10:41 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Exclude.FS(?) on NT cluster I haven't found the answer in the archives. Server: ADSM 3.1.2.58 on AIX 4.3.2 Client: 3.1.0.8 on NT 4.0 Cluster Server Two physical cluster nodes with 3 local drives each Six shared drives hosting six virtual servers In the next few days, we are transfering all data from our NT cluster's G: drive to newly-created K: drive. Of course, the virtual-server backup service will have to be reconfigured to follow suit. No problem. The problem is with the services that back up the nodes' local drives. Their OPT domain statements say to use C:, D:, and E: drives only, but because the OPT file uses "include" and "exclude" rather than their more sophisticated relatives, we get a full set of directory names from under each shared drive associated with the local node backups. There are no files in those directories, so the domain statement is working correctly there, but this is a big server and having duplicates of the directory names adds "noise" to the ADSM database. Now that we are about to activate K: drive, I would like to prevent the services that backup the nodes' local drives from grabbing the directories of K: drive. Those directories will be backed up relative to the virtual server node. How do I do this? I'm really just looking for the correct syntax for "exclude.fs" or "exclude.dir" to force the schedule service of the individual cluster nodes to completely omit all references to K: drive, without affecting what the service for K: drive's virtual server backs up. Thanks. Tab Trepagnier Laitram Corporation
Server unable to contact client
Has anyone seen this error trying to backup NT client? The schedlog looks fine, it shows the next date and time for backup to start. ANR2716E Schedule prompter was not able to contact client NodeName using type 1 (165.4.121.2 1501) Thanks, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Available Space In Library
There isn't really any way to do this since it is impossible to know, generally, how much data can fit on each tape. You can make some calculations based on tape utilization of full tapes in the library to determine average capacity of a tape and apply this to all other tapes. TSM sort of does this with it's estimated capacity number on the pool. However, if maxscratch is set larger than the number of tapes the library holds, it won't help with your original question. Monitoring is the key. As everyone knows, a too small library is the bane of TSM administrators. If you sense you are in this minority, you're stuck with removing full tapes from your library and replacing them with scratch tapes. Mr. Murphy will then rear his ugly head and want the tape you just removed, but there isn't a way around that problem. I've toyed with the idea of limiting my tape pool to something less than the library capacity and using an overflow pool to catch data in the event I fill 'er up. I can then monitor volumes in the overflow pool. If there is a volume in the overflow pool, I know the tapepool is full. I can add scratch volumes to the pool, and then move the data from the overflow pool back to the tapepool. I've never set this up, but it would work. We're working on some additions to our STORServer Manager product to help gauge the capacity of storage pools and volumes. Nothing to look at yet, however. The easy answer is to buy a bigger library and not worry about it. Kelly J. Lipp Storage Solutions Specialists, Inc. PO Box 51313 Colorado Springs CO 80949-1313 (719) 531-5926 Fax: (719) 260-5991 Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] www.storsol.com www.storserver.com -Original Message- From: ADSM: Dist Stor Manager [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Gene Greenberg Sent: Wednesday, September 20, 2000 10:32 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Available Space In Library Hello fellow *SM. I'm hoping someone can help me determine the amount of available space on the tapes currently in the library. I'm running aix4.3.3 and 3.7.0 TSM. Also I ran out of space on one of my storage pools the other day and had to increase the amount of tapes from 80 to 100. Is there a way to monitor this? Thanks, GG
Re: Another ADSM capacity question
Brian, my ADSM server choked on your SQL statement... it didn't like the "as". However, I did work this out on my own: select node_name, sum(capacity * (PCT_UTIL/100)) from filespaces group by node_name It works the way I want it to, but I'd like to round the result... I tried a few obvious syntaxes, but no dice. Any suggestions? Daniel Swan HP Unix Team ISM-BC 3030 2nd Ave SE Calgary, AB, T2A 5N7 ph. 403-530-1726 fax: 403-530-1066 > -Original Message- > From: Johnson, Brian [SMTP:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: Wednesday, September 20, 2000 10:23 AM > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: Re: Another ADSM capacity question > > You could try, > > select node_name, sum(physical_mb), as DATA_IN_MB, sum(num_files) from > occupancy group by node_name order by node_name > > > Brian Johnson > Merrill Lynch > > 212-647 3557 > >
Re: Inactive Versions
Adam, add having count(*) > 10 after the group by clause. Hope this helps, -- -- Bill Colwell C. S. Draper Lab Cambridge, Ma. [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- In <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, on 09/20/00 at 01:25 PM, "Crump, Adam (CC-MIS Open Sys)" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said: >I am trying to list the number of inactive versions of a file if more than >ten exist. >Here is what I have so far: >select FILESPACE_NAME,HL_NAME,LL_NAME,count(*) as Inactive_Files from >backups where node_name='NODEX' and state='INACTIVE_VERSION' group by >HL_NAME,LL_NAME,FILESPACE_NAME >Here is the output: >FILESPACE_NAME HL_NAME LL_NAME >INACTIVE_FILES >-- -- -- >-- >// >3 >/home/ >12 >/images / >2 >/sa / >1 >/sa/ca / >1 >/tng/cac / >1 >/tmp /.oslevel.mlinfo.c- >1 > ache >//.rhosts >3 >//.rhosts_bak >3 >/tmp /.sf27036 >1 >//.spgen_rhosts >3 >/tmp /.strload.mutex >1 >My question is what do I code now to only get the entry if more than ten >exist (I don't want to see all the entries that only have one inactive >version). I have tried using count(*) > 10, but that doesn't work.
Re: sql agent causing user32.dll error
Dave, Hmmm... We haven't seen this before. Did you happen to install anything from the base client at or about the same time (like maybe ODBC)? I am not sure how this is related.. What happens when you uninstall TDP for SQL. Does it still fail? TDP for SQL does install the following things into the SYSTEM32 directory but ONLY if "older" versions of the files are there: mfc42.dll msvcrt.dll ctl3d32.dll inetwh32.dll roboex32.dll It doesn't install or change user32.dll. I have to ask the standard is there a possibility that anything else could have changed on the system besides the installation of TDP for SQL? If you are still having problems, please open a problem with IBM support. It may be worth while to find out why the SQL server "LINK" command is having a problem...that is ask Microsoft. Thanks, Del Del Hoobler IBM Corporation [EMAIL PROTECTED] "Frost, Dave" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>@VM.MARIST.EDU> on 09/20/2000 09:19:59 AM Please respond to "ADSM: Dist Stor Manager" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent by: "ADSM: Dist Stor Manager" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] cc: Subject: sql agent causing user32.dll error hi all has anybody seen this problem: NT Server 4 running MSSQL7. Before TDP was installed, user used use an MSSQL7 function called LINK SERVER. This allowed them to connect to an AS400 database. Since TDP was installed the function now gives user32.dll error 3 initialization failure unable to initialize odbc driver acces to OLE database tia dave
TSM Image problems
I am doing testing on AIX 4.3 for TSM 3.7 and 4.1 clients. Every thing works fine with the exception of Images(logical volumes). The error I get when I try any command with "image" in it(query image, backup image) I get Unknown system error Please Check the TSM Error Log for any additional information But there is no additional info in the error log. Has anyone else had problems like this, or have any idea of why it doesn't work?
Re: Slow restore for large NT client outcome.. appeal to Tivoli Development/Support
Can TSM do an image backup on NT? (If it can)That will dramatically decrease the amount of time it takes to do backups/restores for file systems that have tons of small files.
Re: Available Space In Library
yes. do a q stg from the command line and look under the pct util column. larry clark nys thruway authority >>> [EMAIL PROTECTED] 09/20/00 12:32PM >>> Hello fellow *SM. I'm hoping someone can help me determine the amount of available space on the tapes currently in the library. I'm running aix4.3.3 and 3.7.0 TSM. Also I ran out of space on one of my storage pools the other day and had to increase the amount of tapes from 80 to 100. Is there a way to monitor this? Thanks, GG
Re: Slow restore for large NT client outcome.. appeal to Tivoli Development/Support
Jeff, One thing to show your NT Admins is just how much overhead NTFS has. The way I've done this before is to copy a drive, either locally or over the network. If you take one of the drives with a lot of small files, can copy it, the performance will drop as the copy goes on. The more files you stick on an NTFS partition, the higher the overhead becomes. The way the NTFS allocation tables work, the more files you put in, the more complex the tables become. Here's the test I did, in basic form: On a system with a large drive, net use (NT speak - "Map Network Drive") to an empty drive on an adjacent machine. Copy a 20GB directory (from the command line - no NT speak) to this drive. Measure performance. Delete data on target system. Copy entire drive to target. Measure performance. Laugh as NT Admins realize how bad the performance gets with the larger drive. (If you can't tell from the above, I'm not much of an NT fan) Nick Cassimatis [EMAIL PROTECTED] "I'm one cookie away from happy." - Snoopy (Charles Schulz)
Re: Upgrade TSM 3730 to 4110
No, you must first upgrade to 4.1.0.0 (or whatever is sent to you on CD) so that you will install your license fileset. Then install 4.1.1.0 on top of that. -- Joshua S. Bassi Senior Technical Consultant Symatrix Technology, Inc. [EMAIL PROTECTED] -Original Message- From: ADSM: Dist Stor Manager [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Patrick Tjon-a-sam Sent: Wednesday, September 20, 2000 2:35 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Upgrade TSM 3730 to 4110 *SM, Is it possible to upgrade from TSM 3.7.3.0 directly to TSM 4.1.1.0. Thanks in advance Patrick. - ATTENTION: The information in this electronic mail message is private and confidential, and only intended for the addressee. Should you receive this message by mistake, you are hereby notified that any disclosure, reproduction, distribution or use of this message is strictly prohibited. Please inform the sender by reply transmission and delete the message without copying or opening it. Messages and attachments are scanned for all viruses known. If this message contains password-protected attachments, the files have NOT been scanned for viruses by the ING mail domain. Always scan attachments before opening them. -
Inactive Versions
I am trying to list the number of inactive versions of a file if more than ten exist. Here is what I have so far: select FILESPACE_NAME,HL_NAME,LL_NAME,count(*) as Inactive_Files from backups where node_name='NODEX' and state='INACTIVE_VERSION' group by HL_NAME,LL_NAME,FILESPACE_NAME Here is the output: FILESPACE_NAME HL_NAME LL_NAME INACTIVE_FILES -- -- -- -- // 3 /home/ 12 /images / 2 /sa / 1 /sa/ca / 1 /tng/cac / 1 /tmp /.oslevel.mlinfo.c- 1 ache //.rhosts 3 //.rhosts_bak 3 /tmp /.sf27036 1 //.spgen_rhosts 3 /tmp /.strload.mutex 1 My question is what do I code now to only get the entry if more than ten exist (I don't want to see all the entries that only have one inactive version). I have tried using count(*) > 10, but that doesn't work.
Re: Oracle mailing list
metalink.oracle.com Chris Welsh - Finance <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>@VM.MARIST.EDU> on 09/20/2000 11:09:37 AM Please respond to "ADSM: Dist Stor Manager" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent by: "ADSM: Dist Stor Manager" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] cc: Subject: Oracle mailing list Where can I find a good Oracle DBA mailing list Thanks Chris
Exclude.FS(?) on NT cluster
I haven't found the answer in the archives. Server: ADSM 3.1.2.58 on AIX 4.3.2 Client: 3.1.0.8 on NT 4.0 Cluster Server Two physical cluster nodes with 3 local drives each Six shared drives hosting six virtual servers In the next few days, we are transfering all data from our NT cluster's G: drive to newly-created K: drive. Of course, the virtual-server backup service will have to be reconfigured to follow suit. No problem. The problem is with the services that back up the nodes' local drives. Their OPT domain statements say to use C:, D:, and E: drives only, but because the OPT file uses "include" and "exclude" rather than their more sophisticated relatives, we get a full set of directory names from under each shared drive associated with the local node backups. There are no files in those directories, so the domain statement is working correctly there, but this is a big server and having duplicates of the directory names adds "noise" to the ADSM database. Now that we are about to activate K: drive, I would like to prevent the services that backup the nodes' local drives from grabbing the directories of K: drive. Those directories will be backed up relative to the virtual server node. How do I do this? I'm really just looking for the correct syntax for "exclude.fs" or "exclude.dir" to force the schedule service of the individual cluster nodes to completely omit all references to K: drive, without affecting what the service for K: drive's virtual server backs up. Thanks. Tab Trepagnier Laitram Corporation
Available Space In Library
Hello fellow *SM. I'm hoping someone can help me determine the amount of available space on the tapes currently in the library. I'm running aix4.3.3 and 3.7.0 TSM. Also I ran out of space on one of my storage pools the other day and had to increase the amount of tapes from 80 to 100. Is there a way to monitor this? Thanks, GG
Oracle mailing list
Where can I find a good Oracle DBA mailing list Thanks Chris
Slow restore for large NT client outcome.. appeal to Tivoli Development/Support
I posted the memo below to this listserv last week when we were having trouble with the performance restoring a large NT drive. This memo is for the people who wanted to know how we made out in the end. I am also writing to bring to the attention of TSM development what I feel is a pretty big problem in the area of performance for clients with lots of small files. I am pursuing this issue with Tivoli through other channels but thought others on this listserv might have the same concern. For a summary of our TSM config see my first memo below. First lets get a couple things out of the way. I have been working with TSM/ADSM for approximately five years since version 1. I am a HUGE fan of the product and have fought very hard to get our company to standardize on TSM and leave Arcserve, Backup exec, Legato, and the like. I am pleased with improvements in TSM functionality over the years. The second thing is we run TSM on OS/390. Over time I've seen many posts on the listserv about users that have achieved better performance with UNIX based TSM servers. We are currently piloting TSM on AIX to test the performance. Now that we've established my loyalties, back to my concern about backup, and more importantly restore, performance for TSM clients with lots of small files. Most of our UNIX servers are database servers so my concerns about small files really pertain mostly to Windows NT server clients. Others may have issues with other platforms. The NT clients I have restore issues with are big file and print servers. The data partition is typically the D: drive and can be anywhere from 20GB to 160GB in size. The best restore time we can achieve for the file and print servers is somewhere between 1.5GB and 3.5GB per hour generally on the lower side. Now we could go through a lot of the common, is your network performing, is your database cache hit high enough, tcp window sizes, txn sizes, and the usual things but assume for a moment that we are optimally configured and done all "the right stuff". To make a performance comparison, we have a couple NT clients that contain a small number of file and they are large files. We restored 20GB of data on one of those servers recently in 1hr 45mins. The restore of the one directory on the D: partition for the client mentioned in my first memo below with an average file size of 64K ran for 6hrs 5mins and transferring 4.8GB. The whole drive took 45hrs. Our NT group was a hard sell for replacing Arcserve with TSM. Since the switch, I have taken quite a beating about TSM restore performance. Our NT admins take the position, "we'll try TSM but if the performance doesn't improve we are going with a tried and true solution like Compaq Enterprise Backup. TSM seems to us like a UNIX product trying to make it in the NT space. It is not typically selected by companies for NT backup and recovery". Not a word for word quote but generally sums up their position. The Compaq solution would use Arcserve from what I've been told. I know Tivoli/IBM have tried to address the small files issue with things like small file aggregation but I haven't noticed much improvement from version to version for big restores of servers with small files. I've heard different reasons for slow performance with small files over the years like the amount of TSM database lookups, NT file system processing/inefficiencies, etc. When looking at future directions for SAN backups I can understand the argument that the SAN pipes will be faster and TCPIP overhead will be eliminated leading to faster restores/backups. But if the poor performance for small files has a lot to do with TSM database lookups/overhead then how will performance be different when the data travels over the SAN versus the LAN/WAN? The database processing about file information will be pretty much the same won't it? I have suggested to our NT admins that we break that big D: partition into multiple smaller partitions so I can collocate by filespace and restore multiple drives concurrently. Frankly, they are not interested in changing the way they configure their servers to accommodate the backup software. They feel they would not have to do this with Arcserve or other more common NT backup products. I've tried tests using share names for folders and performing backups/restores using the UNC name, collocating the data by filespace and running concurrent restores. My tests showed improved elapsed time but this scheme would be tough to maintain. In a full server restore scenario I'd need to create the folders and shares for the target restore which means we'd need to keep track of that info some place. I'd constantly have to monitor growth in all the folders to make sure I've carved up the drive in fairly equal parts to optimize for restore, etc. Not a good solution either. Does anyone else see the poor performance for restoring clients with lots of small files and feel that this is a problem Tivoli needs to address?
Re: Another ADSM capacity question
You could try, select node_name, sum(physical_mb), as DATA_IN_MB, sum(num_files) from occupancy group by node_name order by node_name Brian Johnson Merrill Lynch 212-647 3557 > -Original Message- > From: Richard Sims [SMTP:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: Wednesday, September 20, 2000 12:16 PM > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: Re: Another ADSM capacity question > > >How do I find out the total storage used by a node > > Do 'Audit License', then 'Query Auditoccupancy'. > Break down with 'Query Occupancy'. > Richard Sims, BU
Re: Another ADSM capacity question
Issue command q license. This updates the information. Then issue q auditoccupancy to display it. -Original Message- From: Daniel Swan/TM [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Wednesday, September 20, 2000 11:08 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Another ADSM capacity question How do I find out the total storage used by a node, and what are the best ways to break that down into useful information as to what is making up that total? I've got a node that appears to be taking up more space than it should, and need to find out why.
Re: Another ADSM capacity question
>How do I find out the total storage used by a node Do 'Audit License', then 'Query Auditoccupancy'. Break down with 'Query Occupancy'. Richard Sims, BU
Another ADSM capacity question
How do I find out the total storage used by a node, and what are the best ways to break that down into useful information as to what is making up that total? I've got a node that appears to be taking up more space than it should, and need to find out why.
Re: Determining Capacity on ADSM?
Shekhar, "select count(*) from volumes ..." counts the volumes already attached to storagepools not the tapes in the tape library if you have 400 tapes in the STK - Library named 'STK-LIB' try a "select count(*) from libvolumes where LIBRARY_NAME='STK-LIB'" and yu will get Unnamed[1] --- 400 regards Peter Sternecker ZI-SB-ST-BS R+V Versicherungs AG John-F.-Kennedy-Str.1 D-65189 Wiesbaden EMail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > -Original Message- > From: Shekhar Dhotre [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: Wednesday, September 20, 2000 3:19 PM > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: Re: Determining Capacity on ADSM? > > > Yes you won the bet , but i am having 400tapes in STK,and > the query shows 47? > >^^^ > > tsm: TSM>select count(*) from volumes where devclass_name='STK9710' > > Unnamed[1] > --- > 47 >
Inactive Versions
I received an error the first time I sent this so I'm sending it again. I am trying to list the number of inactive versions of a file if more than ten exist. Here is what I have so far: select FILESPACE_NAME,HL_NAME,LL_NAME,count(*) as Inactive_Files from backups where node_name='NODEX' and state='INACTIVE_VERSION' group by HL_NAME,LL_NAME,FILESPACE_NAME Here is the output: FILESPACE_NAME HL_NAME LL_NAME INACTIVE_FILES -- -- -- -- // 3 /home/ 12 /images / 2 /sa / 1 /sa/ca / 1 /tng/cac / 1 /tmp /.oslevel.mlinfo.c- 1 ache //.rhosts 3 //.rhosts_bak 3 /tmp /.sf27036 1 //.spgen_rhosts 3 /tmp /.strload.mutex 1 My question is what do I code now to only get the entry if more than ten exist (I don't want to see all the entries that only have one inactive version). I have tried using count(*) > 10, but that doesn't work.
Re: NT Permissions and Restore
Take a look at the Web client. It's designed for this case - to let someone at a help desk (or operations) run restores remotely. You can give your operators an ADSM admin id with the ADSM authority of "CLIENT OWNER", just for specific machines. That gives them NO ADSM server management priveleges, but it gives them the ability to ability to run ADSM remote restores just for those clients you specify. They use a web browser from anwhere on the network to run the restore. The restore runs under the authority of the NT "client acceptor" service, which is the "system" id. (The client acceptor service is installed automatically when you install the ADSM client. You just have to go to Control Panel/Services and activate it.) So your operators would have the ability to restore anything to those machines. There is the (relatively small) exposure that they could restore something they shouldn't. But they can do it without having any NT permissions even to log on to the NT server at all. HOpe that helps,, Wanda Prather The Johns Hopkins Applied Physics Lab 443-778-8769 [EMAIL PROTECTED] "Intelligence has much less practical application than you'd think" - Scott Adams/Dilbert > -Original Message- > From: Mayo, Bill [SMTP:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: Wednesday, September 20, 2000 8:22 AM > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: NT Permissions and Restore > > I am trying to figure out if there is any way to allow a non-administrator > account to restore files from ADSM to an NT server. I am the network > administrator and have previously handled this. Our Operations group is > going to take this over, and I have added them to the Backup Operators > group > in NT. However, from the literature and from a test, it appears that this > is insufficient to restore from ADSM, although it works with a local NT > backup. For security and confidentiality reasons, I am not looking to > make > them Administrators of all these machines. Is there a workaround, or is > it > absolutely required to either be an admin or have specific priveleges to > restore a file in NT? > > Thanks, > Bill Mayo > Pitt County MIS
unsubscribe
Please remove my e-mail address from ADSM-Serv
Re: Tape Mounts and Disk Pools
Gill, Is it possible that reclamation has kicked off and you specified the archive tape pool as reclamation storage pool. Just a thought. Arturo -Original Message- From: Gill, Geoffrey L. [SMTP:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, September 19, 2000 10:02 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject:Tape Mounts and Disk Pools Last night I'm watching backups because we're doing a test on a computer running SAP, that will be backing up 150GB+ data. At the same time I have about 25 other nodes starting when I notice tape mounts. I see that mounts of Archive tapes are going and I'm wondering why. Question: Can I tell if a mount request happens what node is requesting it? I've checked my disk storage pools and none point directly to the archive tape pool except the archive disk pool. I have no archives going at this time so I'm still wondering why I've got 2 mounts for archive tapes in use. I'm wondering if the SAP test is somehow doing this. unfortunately the guy running it is doing it from his end so I can't see what's happening. I don't know why I couldn't run this from the scheduler. I'm not familiar with the SAP agent so someone might be able to help me out. Or better yet if you have a script you use that kicks off from the node side maybe you can send it to me so I can show it to our SAP folks. Maybe they are doing something odd. These are the 2 sessions running; 31,663 Tcp/Ip MediaW 2.8 M7.2 K 13.7 G Node OSF/1CPAB 31,664 Tcp/Ip RecvW0 S7.1 K 13.2 G Node OSF/1CPAB Not sure why it specifies OSF/1 when it's a DECUNIX box??? One does have a media wait and I don't know why since I have a file size limit of 3g on the disk pools. I was told by the SAP folks the files they would be sending were all 2gb or less. The SAP disk pools are not filling. I wonder if I have to have a specific name for them instead of what I decided to use??? > Geoff Gill > NT Systems Support Engineer > Computer Systems Group > E-Mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Phone: (858) 826-4062 > Pager: (888) 997-9614 >
Re: Tape Mounts and Disk Pools
Geoff, If you do a "query session format=detail" it will show you which tapes are mounted for which client session. Nick Cassimatis [EMAIL PROTECTED] "I'm one cookie away from happy." - Snoopy (Charles Schulz)
DB2 Error
Hi! Does anyone have an idea what the meaning of this error is? When doing a db2 backup for node 1 (f1s9c) on f1s11c I get the following error: SQL2025N An I/O error "2302" occurred on media "". Here is the command I'm using from f1s11c: db2wbq> db2_all "<<-0< db2 backup database wbq use adsm open 4 sessions with 8 buffers buffer 1024 without prompting" 2302 I DSM_RC_CHECK_REASON_CODE Explanation: After a dsmEndTxn call, the transaction is aborted by either the server or client with a DSM_VOTE_ABORT and the reason is returned. System Action: The system returns to the calling procedure. User Response: Check the reason field for the code which explains why the transaction has been aborted. Thanks!
sql agent causing user32.dll error
hi all has anybody seen this problem: NT Server 4 running MSSQL7. Before TDP was installed, user used use an MSSQL7 function called LINK SERVER. This allowed them to connect to an AS400 database. Since TDP was installed the function now gives user32.dll error 3 initialization failure unable to initialize odbc driver acces to OLE database tia dave -- "on a clear disk, you can seek for ever." www.guardianit.com The information contained in this email is confidential and intended only for the use of the individual or entity named above. If the reader of this message is not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution, or copying of this communication is strictly prohibited. Guardian iT Group will accept no responsibility or liability in respect to this email other than to the addressee. If you have received this communication in error, please notify us immediately via email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Determining Capacity on ADSM?
Yes you won the bet , but i am having 400tapes in STK,and the query shows 47? ^^^ tsm: TSM>select count(*) from volumes where devclass_name='STK9710' Unnamed[1] --- 47 "[EMAIL PROTECTED]/P=Internet/A= /C=us" on 09/20/2000 03:33:17 AM Please respond to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]/P=Internet/A= /C=us" @ X400 To: "[EMAIL PROTECTED]/P=Internet/A= /C=us"@X400 cc: Subject: Re: Determining Capacity on ADSM? Shekhar, are the cases o.k.? I bet, it should look like select count (*) from volumes where devclass_name='STK9710' ^^^ Regards, Reinhard Shekhar Dhotre writes: > tsm: TSM>select count (*) from volumes where devclass_name='stk9710' > > Unnamed[1] > --- > 0 > > tsm: TSM>select count (*) from drmedia > > Unnamed[1] > --- > 49 > > tsm: TSM>select avg(EST_CAPACITY_MB) from volumes where devclass_name='stk9710' > >Unnamed[1] > > whats wrong with first and third query? or not applicable to stk? > - > > > > > > "[EMAIL PROTECTED]/P=Internet/A= /C=us" on 09/19/2000 01:23:01 PM > Please respond to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]/P=Internet/A= /C=us" @ X400 > To: "[EMAIL PROTECTED]/P=Internet/A= /C=us"@X400 > cc: > > Subject: Re: Determining Capacity on ADSM? > > >How do I determine how many physical slots my 3494 library has? > > mtlib -l /dev/lmcp0 -qL | grep cells > > >How do I determine how many tapes are offsite? > > a) select count(*) from volumes where stgpool_name='BACKUP3590_OFFSITE' > (where a storagepool is used for offsite.) > b) select count(*) from drmedia > (where DRM is in use.) > c) select count(*) from volumes where access='OFFSITE' > (where you set the access or use DRM.) > > Note: tapes may be in transit to-and-from offsite. > Also, db backups are not in the volume table. > > >How do I determine how many tapes total I have? > > select count(*) from volumes where devclass_name='MAGSTAR3590' > (where your device class name is MAGSTAR3590.) > > >How do I determine the average capacity per tape? > > > > select avg(EST_CAPACITY_MB) from volumes where devclass_name='MAGSTAR3590' > > -- > Richard -- Reinhard MerschWestfaelische Wilhelms-Universitaet Zentrum fuer Informationsverarbeitung - ehemals Universitaetsrechenzentrum Roentgenstrasse 9-13, D-48149 Muenster, Germany Tel: +49(251)83-31583 E-Mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Fax: +49(251)83-31653
Re: NT Permissions and Restore
Try this: grant auth (someadmin) cl=node auth=acc node=(somenode) -Original Message- From: Mayo, Bill [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Wednesday, September 20, 2000 8:22 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: NT Permissions and Restore I am trying to figure out if there is any way to allow a non-administrator account to restore files from ADSM to an NT server. I am the network administrator and have previously handled this. Our Operations group is going to take this over, and I have added them to the Backup Operators group in NT. However, from the literature and from a test, it appears that this is insufficient to restore from ADSM, although it works with a local NT backup. For security and confidentiality reasons, I am not looking to make them Administrators of all these machines. Is there a workaround, or is it absolutely required to either be an admin or have specific priveleges to restore a file in NT? Thanks, Bill Mayo Pitt County MIS
Re: Checkout/Checkin Priority
Richard - from what I read about that, it seems that it would have no effect on this. This has nothing to do with the "same" volume usages by two processes, but just choosing to have one process run before another. Hopefully someone from Tivoly/IBM will see and respond. -Tom >>> [EMAIL PROTECTED] 09/20/00 07:33AM >>> >Is there any way to modify the priority of CHECKIN to be higher than >CHECKOUT in the background process queue? Tom - I'm not aware of a means yet available in the product to allow for selective prioritization. One thing you might try is to use the NOPREEMPT server option and see if that has the desired effect. If you do, could you let us know whether it does? thanks, Richard Sims, BU
NT Permissions and Restore
I am trying to figure out if there is any way to allow a non-administrator account to restore files from ADSM to an NT server. I am the network administrator and have previously handled this. Our Operations group is going to take this over, and I have added them to the Backup Operators group in NT. However, from the literature and from a test, it appears that this is insufficient to restore from ADSM, although it works with a local NT backup. For security and confidentiality reasons, I am not looking to make them Administrators of all these machines. Is there a workaround, or is it absolutely required to either be an admin or have specific priveleges to restore a file in NT? Thanks, Bill Mayo Pitt County MIS
Re: Checkout/Checkin Priority
>Is there any way to modify the priority of CHECKIN to be higher than >CHECKOUT in the background process queue? Tom - I'm not aware of a means yet available in the product to allow for selective prioritization. One thing you might try is to use the NOPREEMPT server option and see if that has the desired effect. If you do, could you let us know whether it does? thanks, Richard Sims, BU
Checkout/Checkin Priority
I am using a 3494 ATL and ADSM 3.1.2.55. When we remove tapes from ADSM to the bulk door of the 3494 we issue 90 CHECKOUT commands to ADSM. These background commands take a little while to complete. We have the 3494 set to give priority to the convienience door vs the bulk door so that individual tapes can be fed into the 3494. My issue, the CHECKIN command that is required for these entered tapes falls in line behind the CHECKOUT commands. This causes the usage of the newly inserted tapes to be delayed for some time. Is there any way to modify the priority of CHECKIN to be higher than CHECKOUT in the background process queue? Tom Melton Emory HealthCare Emory University
Re: Tape Mounts and Disk Pools
Hello, I usually start a Q CONTENT on the volume name of the mounted tapes. Listing the first 20 files will give you an idea of the client which have been backed up or migrated (pool full) to the tape. Regards, René Lambelet Nestec S.A. / Informatique du Centre 55, av. Nestlé CH-1800 Vevey (Switzerland) *+41(021) 924 3543 7 +41 (021) 924 4589 * B 133 Visit our site: http://www.nestle.com This message is intended only for the use of the addressee and may contain information that is privileged and confidential. > -Original Message- > From: Gill, Geoffrey L. [SMTP:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: Wednesday, September 20, 2000 5:02 AM > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: Tape Mounts and Disk Pools > > Last night I'm watching backups because we're doing a test on a computer > running SAP, that will be backing up 150GB+ data. At the same time I have > about 25 other nodes starting when I notice tape mounts. I see that mounts > of Archive tapes are going and I'm wondering why. > > Question: Can I tell if a mount request happens what node is requesting > it? > > I've checked my disk storage pools and none point directly to the archive > tape pool except the archive disk pool. I have no archives going at this > time so I'm still wondering why I've got 2 mounts for archive tapes in > use. > I'm wondering if the SAP test is somehow doing this. unfortunately the guy > running it is doing it from his end so I can't see what's happening. I > don't > know why I couldn't run this from the scheduler. I'm not familiar with the > SAP agent so someone might be able to help me out. Or better yet if you > have > a script you use that kicks off from the node side maybe you can send it > to > me so I can show it to our SAP folks. Maybe they are doing something odd. > > These are the 2 sessions running; > 31,663 Tcp/Ip MediaW 2.8 M7.2 K 13.7 G Node OSF/1CPAB > > 31,664 Tcp/Ip RecvW0 S7.1 K 13.2 G Node OSF/1CPAB > > Not sure why it specifies OSF/1 when it's a DECUNIX box??? > > One does have a media wait and I don't know why since I have a file size > limit of 3g on the disk pools. I was told by the SAP folks the files they > would be sending were all 2gb or less. The SAP disk pools are not filling. > I > wonder if I have to have a specific name for them instead of what I > decided > to use??? > > > Geoff Gill > > NT Systems Support Engineer > > Computer Systems Group > > E-Mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > Phone: (858) 826-4062 > > Pager: (888) 997-9614 > >
Urgent info required for TSM,Solaris7 and Informix 64bit
Hi all We need to backup our Informix databse running on Solaris 7. However the TSM 3.7 client does not have 64bit API. So i upgraded client to TSM 4.1.1 which is 64 bit enabled, hoowever the readme.api file says that this API does not support Informix onbar backups native anymore and that TDP for Informix is required. Can anyone shed some light on this?? Is anyone running Informix ver 9.2 IDS in 64bit mode backing up to TSM. Any help will be urgently and greatly appreciated. Our box goes into production in a couple of days and obviously needs to be backed up I have checked the tivoli site and could not find any evidence of what needs to be done.. Thanks Marc _ Marc Layne Product Manager - Storage and Software Solutions Faritec Mobile: +27 82 4169086email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Office: + 27 21 7629702 http://www.faritec.co.za _
Re: Any way to see which files are associated to a certain Mgt class? ?
The ARCHIVES and BACKUPS tables have a column CLASS_NAME. So you could do
"SELECT * FROM ARCHIVES WHERE CLASS_NAME=''"
"SELECT * FROM BACKUPS WHERE CLASS_NAME=''"
these queries may run for some time so it might be better to include a WHERE
clause for NODE_NAME such as WHERE NODE_NAME IN ('xxx', 'yyy', 'zzz') for
all the nodes in that domain.
>From: Susan Wright <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>Reply-To: "ADSM: Dist Stor Manager" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>Subject: Any way to see which files are associated to a certain Mgt class?
> ?
>Date: Tue, 19 Sep 2000 12:55:48 -0500
>
>I have a management class that was created a while ago and we are cleaning
>up things and before we remove this class we want to make sure that there
>are no files associated to this class. Is there a way in which to see what
>files, if any, there are backed up to this mgt class??
>
>AIX 4.3.3
>ADSM 3.1.2.50
>
>TIA
>
>Susan Wright
>Operations Specialist
>Lab Safety Supply, Wisconsin
>[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>12:00 pm - 8:30 pm CST.
_
Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com.
Share information about yourself, create your own public profile at
http://profiles.msn.com.
Upgrade TSM 3730 to 4110
*SM, Is it possible to upgrade from TSM 3.7.3.0 directly to TSM 4.1.1.0. Thanks in advance Patrick. - ATTENTION: The information in this electronic mail message is private and confidential, and only intended for the addressee. Should you receive this message by mistake, you are hereby notified that any disclosure, reproduction, distribution or use of this message is strictly prohibited. Please inform the sender by reply transmission and delete the message without copying or opening it. Messages and attachments are scanned for all viruses known. If this message contains password-protected attachments, the files have NOT been scanned for viruses by the ING mail domain. Always scan attachments before opening them. -
Re: Determining Capacity on ADSM?
Shekhar, are the cases o.k.? I bet, it should look like select count (*) from volumes where devclass_name='STK9710' ^^^ Regards, Reinhard Shekhar Dhotre writes: > tsm: TSM>select count (*) from volumes where devclass_name='stk9710' > > Unnamed[1] > --- > 0 > > tsm: TSM>select count (*) from drmedia > > Unnamed[1] > --- > 49 > > tsm: TSM>select avg(EST_CAPACITY_MB) from volumes where devclass_name='stk9710' > >Unnamed[1] > > whats wrong with first and third query? or not applicable to stk? > - > > > > > > "[EMAIL PROTECTED]/P=Internet/A= /C=us" on 09/19/2000 01:23:01 PM > Please respond to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]/P=Internet/A= /C=us" @ X400 > To: "[EMAIL PROTECTED]/P=Internet/A= /C=us"@X400 > cc: > > Subject: Re: Determining Capacity on ADSM? > > >How do I determine how many physical slots my 3494 library has? > > mtlib -l /dev/lmcp0 -qL | grep cells > > >How do I determine how many tapes are offsite? > > a) select count(*) from volumes where stgpool_name='BACKUP3590_OFFSITE' > (where a storagepool is used for offsite.) > b) select count(*) from drmedia > (where DRM is in use.) > c) select count(*) from volumes where access='OFFSITE' > (where you set the access or use DRM.) > > Note: tapes may be in transit to-and-from offsite. > Also, db backups are not in the volume table. > > >How do I determine how many tapes total I have? > > select count(*) from volumes where devclass_name='MAGSTAR3590' > (where your device class name is MAGSTAR3590.) > > >How do I determine the average capacity per tape? > > > > select avg(EST_CAPACITY_MB) from volumes where devclass_name='MAGSTAR3590' > > -- > Richard -- Reinhard MerschWestfaelische Wilhelms-Universitaet Zentrum fuer Informationsverarbeitung - ehemals Universitaetsrechenzentrum Roentgenstrasse 9-13, D-48149 Muenster, Germany Tel: +49(251)83-31583 E-Mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Fax: +49(251)83-31653
