Re: Restore of System Object
I've done it without problem with a tricky sequence: 1. install w2k (no domain!). it would complain for same name so set it to different (temp) 2. open network connection properties and remove bindings to netbios client/sharing. open tcp/ip properties and disable netbios/ip. now you have bare tcp/ip! 3. (optional) stop all unnecessary netbios-related serverces 4. rename the server to original name. it is now netbios blind and will not complain :-) 5. perform restore as usual - files, system object and reboot 6. upon restart the system will complain about name conflict and/or ip-address conflict but will do no harm to live server 7. change ip, computer name, etc. enjoy. Zlatko Krastev IT Consultant "Rushforth, Tim" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent by: "ADSM: Dist Stor Manager" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 28.03.2003 23:13 Please respond to "ADSM: Dist Stor Manager" To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] cc: Subject:Re: Restore of System Object Any plans for removing this restriction? We have a few users that want to "clone" a production machine to do testing. And they want to use TSM to do it. Becuasue of this limitation we use MS Backup to backup system state to disk. Then the restore process is similar to documented Bare Metal Restore procedure from redbook except using a different computer name. So install W2K (different computer name, IP). Restore data from TSM (to different node name - either using virtualnode or logging in with source name). Restore MS system state from disk. Reboot and bring up online on separate stand-alone test network or change computer specific information. Thanks, Tim Rushforth City of Winnipeg ...
Re: NEED HELP - Restore performance
True, assuming you have collocated your data by file space. If you haven't, (perhaps it is collocated by server, or not at all) it is possible to run into a situation where each instance of those DSM windows is attempting to access files which exist on the same tape. I did this once, and found the same tape moving back and forth between two tape drives. I've since corrected my ways :) Wilson Northrup -Original Message- From: Prather, Wanda [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, April 02, 2003 8:58 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: NEED HELP - Restore performance Regardless of the client level, you can open as many dsm windows and start as many restores at once as you want. That's the best way to go if you have multiple filesystems to restore, up until you bottleneck your networks. -Original Message- From: Zoltan Forray/AC/VCU [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, April 01, 2003 10:10 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: NEED HELP - Restore performance FYI, FWIW, the option of multiple-restore streams was introduced with the 5.x client. While this machine is still using 4.2.3.0, we are going to investigate upgrading to 5.1.5.x Not sure why this client wasn't upgraded. Any specifics on how to do the "no query" restore ? We checked the book and from what it says, we are doing this (using wild-card/*, no -inact, etc). Are we missing something or is this one of those features that didn't really make it until the V5 client. Examples would be extremely helpful ! Lloyd Dieter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent by: "ADSM: Dist Stor Manager" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 04/01/2003 06:11 PM Please respond to "ADSM: Dist Stor Manager" To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] cc: Subject:Re: NEED HELP - Restore performance Zoltan, You've probably tried this already, but just in case...have you cranked up resourceutilization and maxnummp? Maybe no-query restores? Just a thought... -Lloyd On Tue, 1 Apr 2003 17:45:46 -0500 Zoltan Forray/AC/VCU <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > This is a zOS TSM 4.2.3.2 server. The client server is AIX 4.3 with > TSM client 4.2.3.0 > > We had a recent hardware failure/disaster which resulted in a complete > wipe of 250GB+ of storage on an AIX 4.3 system. To complicate matters, > this is one of our email system, with 22-MILLION files comprising the > 250GB. > > So, we start the *BIG* restore. To put it quaintly, restore performance > sucks.We are averaging .5GB per hour. At this rate, it will take > 15-20 DAYS ! > > I have gone through the "TSM Performance Tuning" guide, to no avail. I > had pretty much done everything the book suggests, long ago, with the > exception of pagefixing storage for the VSAM/BSAM reads. > > Even checked its recommendations for the AIX system for things like > TCPIP settings, etc. > > The AIX system is hardly breathing hard, when it comes to CPU > utilization. > > What can I look at to do anything I can to speed things up ? > > Can I run multiple restores of different filesystems ? > -- - Lloyd Dieter- Senior Technology Consultant Registered Linux User 285528 Synergy, Inc. http://www.synergyinc.cc [EMAIL PROTECTED] Main:585-389-1260fax:585-389-1267 - -- Notice: This e-mail message, together with any attachments, contains information of Merck & Co., Inc. (Whitehouse Station, New Jersey, USA) that may be confidential, proprietary copyrighted and/or legally privileged, and is intended solely for the use of the individual or entity named on this message. If you are not the intended recipient, and have received this message in error, please immediately return this by e-mail and then delete it. ==
Re: How many copies in copypool?
Quote from Admin's Ref. for BAckup STGpool : "If a file already exists in the copy storage pool, the file is not backed up unless ..." TSM implements incremental-forever to storage pool backup same as for client backups. A list of "objects" to be backed up is created comparing contents of the primary pool and existence of copy in the copy pool. If the copy does exist the object is not included in the run. Each file version is treated as separate object within the TSM server DB and is tracked by internal ObjectID not by name. You can find the proof yourself: 1. create small diskpool and backup some data there 2. backup diskpool contents to a copy pool 3. create a tape pool and migrate test diskpool data there 4. invoke backup of tape pool to the same copy pool The tape pool backup will finish in less than a second with result 0 files backed up - all data already has copies and incremental algorithm has nothing to do. Zlatko Krastev IT Consultant Kai Hintze <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent by: "ADSM: Dist Stor Manager" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 04.04.2003 21:12 Please respond to "ADSM: Dist Stor Manager" To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] cc: Subject:How many copies in copypool? Greetings oh wise and varied *SM'ers! I have an internals question. I have a primary disk pool BACKUP_DISK, with a collocated primary tape pool BACKUP_TAPE that BACKUP_DISK spools to when it gets full (or at 16:30, whichever comes first :). I have enough disk that I seldom need to migrate data out of BACKUP_DISK during the night, but occasionally we have a really heavy day, and BACKUP_DISK goes over its threshold and migrates before its schedule. For disaster recovery I have a non-collocated tape copypool BACKUP_OFF. During the day our DRM script does a "backup stg BACKUP_DISK BACKUP_OFF" then "backup stg BACKUP_TAPE BACKUP_OFF", in case we had a migration in the night. So far that is fairly straightforward, but now comes the tricky part If a long-running backup pushes BACKUP_DISK over its threshold after some of the files are sent from BACKUP_DISK to BACKUP_OFF, but before the backup from BACKUP_TAPE to BACKUP_OFF starts, then the files are there to be backed up to BACKUP_OFF *again* from BACKUP_TAPE. So the question is: Does TSM recognize that the files are already in BACKUP_OFF, or does it make another copy? The reason I am asking is that we are using LOTS of tapes, and management wants me to see if I can cut back on the burn rate. I know that tape to tape copy would be slower because I would have multiple input mounts per output tape, but I don't do the disk to offsite backup, but instead migrate, then tape to offsite backup then I know that the offsite pool only has one copy of all the files. Thanks for any insights. - Kai.
Re: Ia-64-client
On a customer site the sysadmin managed to install HP-UX PA-RISC 5.1.5 client on IA-64 box and it runs fine since. I will second that probably in ITSM 5.2 coming in few days we can have a supported version. Zlatko Krastev IT Consultant Christoph Pilgram <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent by: "ADSM: Dist Stor Manager" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 25.03.2003 15:11 Please respond to "ADSM: Dist Stor Manager" To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] cc: Subject:Ia-64-client Hi all, Does anybody know, if there is a TSM-client for Linux and/or HP-UX on a Hardware with Intel-Itanium Processor available or is the normal HP-UX-client ok ? I saw an IA64-api for Linux on the download-side. Thanks for help Christoph
Re: TSM on Mainframe
Joe, if you look at the line above (which ought to mean July 9th 1998) then you should interpret the IPL date as March 18th 2001, isn't it. So it would be not once a month but once every two years :-) Zlatko Krastev IT Consultant "Wholey, Joseph (IDS DM&DS)" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent by: "ADSM: Dist Stor Manager" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 05.04.2003 17:11 Please respond to "ADSM: Dist Stor Manager" To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] cc: Subject:Re: TSM on Mainframe Once a month... too often. -Original Message- From: Wayne T. Smith [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, April 04, 2003 4:34 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: TSM on Mainframe Though I'm not advocating someone install TSM or TSM on a mainframe, I'll offer that we don't IPL our mainframe very often. Here's the output of a command I just entered ... q cplevel VM/ESA Version 2 Release 3.0, service level 9803 Generated at 07/09/98 12:19:20 EST IPL at 03/18/01 07:17:35 EST But then the mainframe isn't as big as some of our Linux/AIX/Solaris servers. ;-) cheers, wayne
Re: Server-Free Backup is it for real or is it just a Hype
I vote for hype. If we look at TSM definition of "server-free" backup (SAN Xcopy moving disk to tape implemented by SAN switch/router) even if is not a hype but for me is very close. The technology behind 3rd party copy is very simplified, dumb and hard to coordinate with any other application/system in the enterprise. If we broaden the definition to include other smarter devices which are neither the application nor backup server, server-free is quite real and used in production long since. Examples: - backup from another server of mirrors made using EMC's BCV, HDS's ShadowImage or IBM's FlashCopy; - remote disk storage copies made using EMC's Symmetrix Remote Data Facility, HDS's Hitachi Extended Remote Copy or IBM's Peer-to-Peer Remote Copy/eXtended Remote Copy; The difference here is how smart is the device used to move the data. The SAN switches/routers are devices made for specific purpose, dumb enough, and tuned for performance of main functionality. Implementation of 3rd party copy is very generic and thus difficult to use and ineffective. Next level of smartness are disk storage servers. They have sophisticated controllers inside, with lot of memory and enough processing power to perform more types of copy operations. OTOH those servers do not mess with filesystem structure inside LUNs. Even if they try it would be nearly impossible to synchronize the efforts with application server's operating system and filesystem's cache. So we need even smarter device, capable to understand the specific filesystem's internal structure, read the files, send the data to a disk or tape. Usually such device is called a server :-) This is a task for well-known LAN-free TSM Storage Agent. So what is Server-Free and where is it positioned? My opinion is server-free is oversimplified edition of LAN-free. If it has to become functionally equivalent to storage agent then it would become equally complex. I remember reading somewhere an argument against simplification of taxation laws - that complexity was introduced to satisfy many requirements and plain simple rules will have to be ammended several times to meet those requirements thus the result on the end will be of same complexity. Zlatko Krastev IT Consultant Pétur Eyþórsson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent by: "ADSM: Dist Stor Manager" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 04.04.2003 16:25 Please respond to "ADSM: Dist Stor Manager" To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] cc: Subject:Server-Free Backup is it for real or is it just a Hype Hi Guys. I want to start a discussion on Server-Free Backup. Server-Free backup is to bee the holy grail in SAN backup. Server free backup is just when you tell something on the san backup these files, and it will copy disk to disk or disk to tape or what ever you want. This will make use of the SCSI 3´rd party command (XCOPY), and it´s real easy to write code that can recive that command and do the read and write because all the work is done, because it all comes down to "i want this track and block copyed to this device". Whats hard to do is to build that command in the fist place. File space has to bee written such that they will accept a request for a 3´rd party copy command and they haft to have a API so that the applications know that it´s possible or the application has to go around the file system and write directly to the SCSI adapter and then it got to figure out where all those files are. So the kind of Server Free Backup going on today is realy full volume backup where it´s jst block 0, block 1, blcok 2 and its more of a Server Free dump than a Server Free Backup. So my point is that when you use software to do a block level backup on the SAN. I belive that hardware, where you have firmware microcode will always be better than software. kinda like hardware raid vs software raid. I dont see any true benefits from using Server Free backup because today you´ll alwayes bee bound to full volume backup, and there are usualy mutch beter deviceses out on the san that can do that. The only scenario i see where Server Free backup would be acceptable is when you can start doing a file level backup. but that just isn´t possible today. I belive Server Free backup is just a sales hype, Server Free isn´t ready and wont be for many years to come. Please share your thoughts on my statement. Kvedja/Regards Petur Eythorsson Taeknimadur/Technician IBM Certified Specialist - AIX Tivoli Storage Manager Certified Professional Microsoft Certified System Engineer [EMAIL PROTECTED] Nyherji Hf Simi TEL: +354-569-7700 Borgartun 37105 Iceland URL:http://www.nyherji.is
Re: Defining TSM Disk pools on ESS wisdom wanted
On Fri, Apr 04, 2003 at 08:37:31PM -0500, Seay, Paul wrote: >> > So, using 24GB volumes is probably the best way to go. Also, JFS >> > formatted volumes is the way to go. >> Why would you prefer JFS volumes? I use raw and find it a bit better since >> the VM want cache anything. > Ever tried maxpgahead? That is why you want JFS. Causes things to fly. Yes, but I find that TSMs bufferpool is alot better at managing the cache than AIXs VM. If we are talking about storagepools, I don't see the big benefit of maxpgahead since most data will only be read once and most reads will be big and sequitial AND will come as fast as the drive(s) can deliver them. -- Best Regards Emil S. Hansen - [EMAIL PROTECTED] - ESH14-DK UNIX Administrator, Berlingske IT - www.bit.dk PGP: 109375FA/ABEB 1EFA A764 529E 82B5 0943 AD3B 1FC2 1093 75FA "Gravity can not be held responsible for people falling in love." - Albert Einstein
Re: Sum of inactive versions
--> TDP nodes won't be effected ... Not exactly. While TDPO for example relies on RMAN to expire backups, there are other TDPs (like new versions of TDP for MS SQL and Exchange) which are relying on TSM policy settings. Again that fuzzy answer - it depends. Zlatko Krastev IT Consultant Nicholas Cassimatis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent by: "ADSM: Dist Stor Manager" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 02.04.2003 22:43 Please respond to "ADSM: Dist Stor Manager" To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] cc: Subject:Re: Sum of inactive versions This request is a statistical nightmare - don't promise results to be identical to what you come up with... You're missing single quotes around 'INACTIVE_VERSION', so the statement looks like: select * from backups where node_name='TSMHOST6' and filespace_name='/export/home' and state='INACTIVE_VERSION' (Not sure why you were using "like" references instead of "=") But the number of objects won't help you for how many tapes you'll save - you need the average size of an object, too. I can think of two ways to guesstimate that value: 1. For the average size of an object on a tape: select avg(filesize) from contents where volume_name='XXX' And do a random selection of volumes. 2. Average size of an object for a particular node: select sum(physical_mb)/sum(num_files) from occupancy where node_name='NODENAME' and type='Bkup' That, times the number of objects you think you can get rid of, is the approximate amount of data space you'll get back. And some more things to think about: Not all objects will have the same number of inactive versions - some will have 0, some will have your retain_extra +1 (depending on if expiration has run or not). TDP nodes won't be effected - the application on the client controls the versions, not TSM. Do you have archives? They don't play by versions, either. Have fun - I tend to cringe when I get projects like this one. Nick Cassimatis [EMAIL PROTECTED] Think twice, type once.
Re: End Of Support V4.2
George, ITSM v5.1 was released a year ago. It was specifically announced that *both* v5.1.x client is supported with v4.2.y server and v4.2 client with v5.1 server. Yes, there were many people on this list having some problems with v5.1 servers and were postponing their server upgrade. But at the same time many of them (including me) stayed at v4.2.x.y server and still deploying v5.1 clients. If I was you those 350 clients would be upgraded to v5.1.. And another one - if you now have to upgrade, do it directly to v5.2 (coming next week). Zlatko Krastev IT Consultant "Cardoza, George" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent by: "ADSM: Dist Stor Manager" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 04.04.2003 00:26 Please respond to "ADSM: Dist Stor Manager" To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] cc: Subject:Re: End Of Support V4.2 *SMers: So, if I understand you correctly. My 350 clients, which I just upgraded to 4.2, will only be supported until April 15th. So the work I have just completed the past 3 months is for not. As I recall, the IBM/Tivoli site published a compatibility matrix for planning purposes. It specifically stated the V4.2 clients would work just fine with 5.X servers. To my delight even the TDPs would work. This may just work, true, on the other hand, if it doesn't we can not call IBM for support or open a PMR. Pretty hard to run a 24/7 shop when IBM gives its customers little time to plan or react to this announcement. Is anyone else in this predicament? Has this been common knowledge? George ...
Re: Small TSM deployment
Hot Diggety! Levinson, Donald A. was rumored to have written: > has anyone deployed TSM from a B50 or a 43p 140 ? > I need to back up about 4 GB a night on a local network from 2 clients and > maintain a total tape pool of about 2.5 TB on about 100,000 objects or less. A B50 is just a repackaged 43P-150 in a rack mount case. It's (either one - the B50 or 150) is a very capable machine. Only limitation to the B50 is that it is not "slots-happy" ;) Has only two expansion slots so you have to choose *VERY* carefully with what and how you expand it... and it also can not support gigabit ethernet adapters -- presumably due to the fact it's a 32 bit machine. Doing some quick calculations shows 8 GB/night to be about 8.3 MB/sec for about 8 hours which means about 70 Mbps on the network -- which would just barely saturate a fast ethernet network. You would be *highly* advised to add a second FE network adapter to the B50 and split the clients -- point half of the clients towards one B50 interface and the other half towards the second FE interface. Ie: backup1.foobarbazz.com points to 10.1.1.1 backup2.foobarbazz.com points to 10.1.2.1 (and both IPs would be individual IPs on each ethernet interface... would put both on separate IP subnets such as a class C or /24 because this would prevent return traffic from hogging one primary outgoing interface.) On half of your clients, point them to backup1 in dsm.sys, on other half, point to backup2 in dsm.sys, etc. How do you decide which clients to split up? Do it based on data volume for backed up data. If one client does 50% of the data traffic and 99 clients does 50% of the data traffic, then that's how you'd split it up. I would not recommend the use of a 140 because IIRC, it's a PReP based machine and I think AIX 5.2 dropped support for these? The current generation RS6Ks and pSeries servers are CHRP based, including the 150 and B50. Also, if you can daisy chain your tape drive(s) off the onboard SCSI adapter for the B50, that might work... but you would most likely want to have a diskpool and split the SCSI bus between disks and tapes; which implies adding a second SCSI adapter for the B50, using up its second expansion slot (first would be for another FE adapter). Otherwise you could end up with a serious performance bottleneck that could totally negate whatever the B50 is capable of handling. It's also uniprocessor which could potentially mean some CPU contention for various resources (tapes, disks, network, cpu) when it's busy. In short, the B50 should work out ok, but you appear to be quite pushing the very limits of its packaging for your _current_ needs, nevermind long-term future growth needs. You would be highly advised to get a slightly beefier machine, or at least a machine with more PCI slots than the B50. Right now, the next step up above the B50 would be the pSeries 6C1 or 6C4, at about double to triple the cost of the B50. Unfortunately, we have not found any other intermediate range machines between these. I do use a B50 for some TSM testing so I know it works fine as long as you don't try to push more data through it than what its adapters can handle. -Dan
Re: Small TSM deployment
I've never had the volumes you're talking about, but I ran a TSM 5.1.5 server on an 85Mhz SPARCStation 5 running Solaris 8 with 128MB of RAM connected to an old 4mm tape library and an optical jukebox. It was mostly an exercise in learning about TSM on Solaris -- but it successfully backed up a couple desktop machines and some AIX servers from my dev lab. It wasn't fast, but it performed the job admirably. The biggest limitation (aside from installing Solaris on an 85Mhz machine) was network bandwidth. Using a modern 43p (w/100baseT ethernet) with a bunch of RAM and some nice fast disks will likely serve you well. -JD. has anyone deployed TSM from a B50 or a 43p 140 ? I need to back up about 4 GB a night on a local network from 2 clients and maintain a total tape pool of about 2.5 TB on about 100,000 objects or less. thank you for any assistance or guidance. Don Levinson
Re: Linux kernel for Redhat
www.kernel.org has every Linux kernel known to man - doesn't really matter if you are putting it on RedHat or any other distribution, the kernels remain the same. If you are comfortable with it - just grab the source here and compile to avoid the rpm issues, but this can be frustrating if you haven't done it before. On the other hand, its a fun way to kill a weekend(which may make me pretty hopeless). dave >>> [EMAIL PROTECTED] 04/04/03 19:06 PM >>> Does anyone know where to get the kernel-2.4.9-31.i386.rpm for redhat 7.2? All the sites I have checked only have the much newer kernels and associated dependencies. I even checked the source rpm's and the oldest I could get was 2.4.9-34. Has IBM said anything about releasing newer tape drivers? Has anyone had any luck using the Linux supplied tape and library drivers instead of the tsm drivers? This transmittal may contain confidential information intended solely for the addressee. If you are not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that you have received this transmittal in error; any review, dissemination, distribution or copying of this transmittal is strictly prohibited. If you have received this communication in error, please notify us immediately by reply or by telephone (collect at 907-564-1000) and ask to speak with the message sender. In addition, please immediately delete this message and all attachments. Thank you.
Show of Hands, TSM on Mainframe, Using STK 9840 Drives in 3590 Im age Mode
Looking for users of STK 9840 drives with mainframe TSM, running in 3590 image mode. Any issues? Using LBI? Thanks, Bernie Survoy Consulting Systems Engineer Phone: 216 615-9324 Cell: 330 321-3787 StorageTek Information made Powerful
Re: TSM on Mainframe
Once a month... too often. -Original Message- From: Wayne T. Smith [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, April 04, 2003 4:34 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: TSM on Mainframe Though I'm not advocating someone install TSM or TSM on a mainframe, I'll offer that we don't IPL our mainframe very often. Here's the output of a command I just entered ... q cplevel VM/ESA Version 2 Release 3.0, service level 9803 Generated at 07/09/98 12:19:20 EST IPL at 03/18/01 07:17:35 EST But then the mainframe isn't as big as some of our Linux/AIX/Solaris servers. ;-) cheers, wayne
Re: Linux kernel for Redhat
ftp://ftp.redhat.com/pub/redhat/support/enterprise/isv/kernel-archive/7.2/2.4.9-31/ sal > -Original Message- > From: ADSM: Dist Stor Manager [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of > Levinson, Donald A. > Sent: Friday, April 04, 2003 10:03 PM > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: Linux kernel for Redhat > > > Does anyone know where to get the kernel-2.4.9-31.i386.rpm for redhat 7.2? > All the sites I have checked only have the much newer kernels and associated > dependencies. > I even checked the source rpm's and the oldest I could get was 2.4.9-34. > > Has IBM said anything about releasing newer tape drivers? > Has anyone had any luck using the Linux supplied tape and library drivers > instead of the tsm drivers? > > > This transmittal may contain confidential information intended solely for > the addressee. If you are not the intended recipient, you are hereby > notified that you have received this transmittal in error; any review, > dissemination, distribution or copying of this transmittal is strictly > prohibited. If you have received this communication in error, please notify > us immediately by reply or by telephone (collect at 907-564-1000) and ask to > speak with the message sender. In addition, please immediately delete this > message and all attachments. Thank you. > >
