Data Deduplication
Hi, What would likely be the de-dupe ratio if tsm clients do archive processing daily (file level, no tdps) with encryption enabled? Thanks. +-- |This was sent by [EMAIL PROTECTED] via Backup Central. |Forward SPAM to [EMAIL PROTECTED] +--
Re: Another archive/expire query
So I'm right to think the dsmc delete backup command will remove the TSM backup files and leave the archived copies alone? -Original Message- From: ADSM: Dist Stor Manager [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of Richard Sims Sent: 22 January 2008 23:56 To: ADSM-L@VM.MARIST.EDU Subject: Re: [ADSM-L] Another archive/expire query Use 'dsmc Delete ARchive' to remove previously archived files. The client manual explains how to manage Archive files. Richard Sims Gallair e-bost yma gynnwys gwybodaeth gyfrinachol a/neu ddeunydd hawlfraint. Os ydych chin meddwl eich bod wedi derbyn yr e-bost yma drwy gamgymeriad rydym yn ymddiheuro am hyn; peidiwch os gwelwch yn dda â datgelu, anfon ymlaen, printio, copïo na dosbarthu gwybodaeth yn yr e-bost yma na gweithredu mewn unrhyw fodd drwy ddibynnu ar ei gynnwys: gwaherddir gwneud hynnyn gyfan gwbl a gallai fod yn anghyfreithlon. Rhowch wybod ir anfonwr fod y neges yma wedi mynd ar goll cyn ei dileu. Mae unrhyw safbwynt neu farn a gyflwynir yn eiddo ir awdur ac nid ydynt o anghenraid yn cynrychioli safbwynt neu farn Ymddiriedolaeth GIG Gogledd Orllewin Cymru. Gallai cynnwys yr e-bost yma gael ei ddatgelu Ir cyhoedd o dan Ddeddf Rhyddid Gwybodaeth 2000. Ni does modd gwarantu cyfrinachedd y neges ac unrhyw ateb Bydd y neges yma ac unrhyw ffeiliau cysylltiedig wedi cael eu gwirio gan feddalwedd canfod firws cyn eu trosglwyddo. Ond rhaid ir sawl syn derbyn wirio rhag firws ei hun cyn agor unrhyw ymgysylltiad. Nid ywr Ymddiriedolaeth yn derbyn unrhyw gyfrifoldeb am unrhyw golled neu niwed a allai gael ei achosi gan firws meddalwedd. This e-mail may contain confidential information and/or copyright material. If you believe that you have received this e-mail in error please accept our apologies; please do not disclose, forward, print, copy or distribute information in this e-mail or take any action in reliance on its contents: to do so is strictly prohibited and may be unlawful. Please inform the sender that this message has gone astray before deleting it. Any views or opinions presented are to be understood as those of the author and do not necessarily represent those of the North West Wales NHS Trust. The contents of this e-mail may be subject to public disclosure under the Freedom of Information Act 2000. The confidentiality of the message and any reply cannot be guaranteed. This message and any attached files will have been checked with virus detection software before transmission. However, recipients must carry out their own virus checks before opening any attachment. The Trust accepts no liability for any loss or damage, which may be caused by software viruses.
Re: Another archive/expire query
On Jan 23, 2008, at 4:28 AM, Angus Macdonald wrote: So I'm right to think the dsmc delete backup command will remove the TSM backup files and leave the archived copies alone? Yes.
Re: TDP for SQL question
Paul, If you need to restore from the new node name, you would launch the CLI or GUI specifying the alternate options file name. For example, in the example below: GUI: TDPSQL /TSMOPTFILE=DSMARCH.OPT CLI: TDPSQLC RESTORE dbname full /TSMOPTFILE=DSMARCH.OPT This will tell Data Protection for SQL to connect to the TSM Server using the alternate options file, thus the alternate NODENAME. Del ADSM: Dist Stor Manager ADSM-L@VM.MARIST.EDU wrote on 01/22/2008 11:54:12 PM: OK - I have done this and it is working as far as backing up the SQL database goes. Now what do I do if I need to restore from this new node name back onto the client? Do I need to do anything with the dsm.opt and dsmarch.opt files before starting the restore? -Original Message- From: ADSM: Dist Stor Manager [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Del Hoobler Sent: Saturday, 4 August 2007 2:37 AM To: ADSM-L@VM.MARIST.EDU Subject: Re: [ADSM-L] TDP for SQL question Paul, Typically... I see that people will name their node the same as their primary SQL node with an extension. Something like: Primary: SQLSRV23_SQL Archive: SQLSRV23_SQL_ARCH And they will have a separate DSM.OPT file, something like DSMARCH.OPT that has the archive nodename. Thanks, Del
Webclient signon error 53
Hi *SM'ers, A customer has recently upgraded client versions on AIX machines running AIX 4.3 and 5.3. TSM server is v5.3.2 on z/OS 1.7 After upgrading the AIX 5.3 servers to the TSM 5.4.1 or 5.5 client, trying to logon to the client using the web interface gives; ANS2622S Invalid ID or Password The same ID and password work fine for CLI operations. Actlog shows; ANR0480W Session 1032 for node nodename (AIX) terminated - connection with client severed. tsmwebcl.log gives 21/01/08 13:46:33 (dsmcad) ANS3006I Processing request for the TSM Web Client (185.2.123.180). 21/01/08 13:46:42 (dsmagent) ANS3002I Session started for user (TCP/IP 10.11.5.10). the dsmerror.log shows 21/01/08 13:46:42 scSignOnAsAdmin: Error 53 receiving SignOnAsAdminResp verb from server All the AIX 4.3, TSM 5.1.5 clients have continued to work fine. Error 53 I believe is this; /* Definitions for server signon reject codes */ /* These error codes are in the range (51 to 99) inclusive.*/ .. .. #define DSM_RC_REJECT_ID_UNKNOWN 53 .. .. In the first instance I've searched google and IBM, IBM gives PK03989, which is ZFS related. TsmWiki nor Quickfacts has any info, has anyone here seen anything similar? Thanks, Matt. This message and any attachments (the message) is intended solely for the addressees and is confidential. If you receive this message in error, please delete it and immediately notify the sender. Any use not in accord with its purpose, any dissemination or disclosure, either whole or partial, is prohibited except formal approval. The internet can not guarantee the integrity of this message. BNP PARIBAS (and its subsidiaries) shall (will) not therefore be liable for the message if modified. Do not print this message unless it is necessary, consider the environment. - Ce message et toutes les pieces jointes (ci-apres le message) sont etablis a l'intention exclusive de ses destinataires et sont confidentiels. Si vous recevez ce message par erreur, merci de le detruire et d'en avertir immediatement l'expediteur. Toute utilisation de ce message non conforme a sa destination, toute diffusion ou toute publication, totale ou partielle, est interdite, sauf autorisation expresse. L'internet ne permettant pas d'assurer l'integrite de ce message, BNP PARIBAS (et ses filiales) decline(nt) toute responsabilite au titre de ce message, dans l'hypothese ou il aurait ete modifie. N'imprimez ce message que si necessaire, pensez a l'environnement.
Re: Webclient signon error 53
Hi, Matthew - I haven't run into that before, but my guess would be that the TSM client is having trouble identifying the peer, probably because the 10.x.x.x private net address is not DNS reverse-lookupable into a host/node name. TSM 5.2 changed IP address handling a bit, in concert with the DNSLOOKUP option, new at that level. Richard Sims at Boston University
Re: Data Deduplication
As with all questions like this, the answer is it depends. It depends on the make-up of your data (# of DB full dumps, % of DB dumps to filesystem data, % of change on the client, etc) It depends on the vendor of DeDupe you are using. FWIW, I am about to replace a 100TB of LTO tape with a DataDomain 560 dedupe box starting next week. Once the migration from tape to disk is complete, I will be reporting what I saw in my environment. The DD folks are saying that the worst case scenario will be a 7X reduction (i.e. 70TB of data squeezed into a 10TB DataDomain appliance). We shall see. Ben -Original Message- From: ADSM: Dist Stor Manager [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of lamont Sent: Wednesday, January 23, 2008 1:29 AM To: ADSM-L@VM.MARIST.EDU Subject: [ADSM-L] Data Deduplication Hi, What would likely be the de-dupe ratio if tsm clients do archive processing daily (file level, no tdps) with encryption enabled? Thanks. +-- |This was sent by [EMAIL PROTECTED] via Backup Central. |Forward SPAM to [EMAIL PROTECTED] +-- The Blue Cross of Idaho Email Firewall Server made the following annotations: -- *Confidentiality Notice: This E-Mail is intended only for the use of the individual or entity to which it is addressed and may contain information that is privileged, confidential and exempt from disclosure under applicable law. If you have received this communication in error, please do not distribute, and delete the original message. Thank you for your compliance. You may contact us at: Blue Cross of Idaho 3000 E. Pine Ave. Meridian, Idaho 83642 1.208.345.4550 ==
Re: Webclient signon error 53
thanks, I'll follow that up, post how it goes. Matt. Internet [EMAIL PROTECTED] To ADSM-L Sent by: ADSM-L@VM.MARIST.EDU cc 23/01/2008 14:48 Subject Re: [ADSM-L] Webclient signon error 53 Please respond to ADSM-L@VM.MARIST.EDU Hi, Matthew - I haven't run into that before, but my guess would be that the TSM client is having trouble identifying the peer, probably because the 10.x.x.x private net address is not DNS reverse-lookupable into a host/node name. TSM 5.2 changed IP address handling a bit, in concert with the DNSLOOKUP option, new at that level. Richard Sims at Boston University This message and any attachments (the message) is intended solely for the addressees and is confidential. If you receive this message in error, please delete it and immediately notify the sender. Any use not in accord with its purpose, any dissemination or disclosure, either whole or partial, is prohibited except formal approval. The internet can not guarantee the integrity of this message. BNP PARIBAS (and its subsidiaries) shall (will) not therefore be liable for the message if modified. Do not print this message unless it is necessary, consider the environment. - Ce message et toutes les pieces jointes (ci-apres le message) sont etablis a l'intention exclusive de ses destinataires et sont confidentiels. Si vous recevez ce message par erreur, merci de le detruire et d'en avertir immediatement l'expediteur. Toute utilisation de ce message non conforme a sa destination, toute diffusion ou toute publication, totale ou partielle, est interdite, sauf autorisation expresse. L'internet ne permettant pas d'assurer l'integrite de ce message, BNP PARIBAS (et ses filiales) decline(nt) toute responsabilite au titre de ce message, dans l'hypothese ou il aurait ete modifie. N'imprimez ce message que si necessaire, pensez a l'environnement.
Re: Data Deduplication
Encryption might have a DRAMATIC effect, completely eliminating the benefits of either deduplication or compression. I predict 1:1. i.e. NO savings for dedupliaction, with TSM client encryption. This is why encryption at the tape drive is a very popular option with LTO4. You can both encrypt and compress at the same time. Roger Deschner University of Illinois at Chicago [EMAIL PROTECTED] Academic Computing Communications Center On Wed, 23 Jan 2008, Ben Bullock wrote: As with all questions like this, the answer is it depends. It depends on the make-up of your data (# of DB full dumps, % of DB dumps to filesystem data, % of change on the client, etc) It depends on the vendor of DeDupe you are using. FWIW, I am about to replace a 100TB of LTO tape with a DataDomain 560 dedupe box starting next week. Once the migration from tape to disk is complete, I will be reporting what I saw in my environment. The DD folks are saying that the worst case scenario will be a 7X reduction (i.e. 70TB of data squeezed into a 10TB DataDomain appliance). We shall see. Ben -Original Message- From: ADSM: Dist Stor Manager [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of lamont Sent: Wednesday, January 23, 2008 1:29 AM To: ADSM-L@VM.MARIST.EDU Subject: [ADSM-L] Data Deduplication Hi, What would likely be the de-dupe ratio if tsm clients do archive processing daily (file level, no tdps) with encryption enabled? Thanks. +-- |This was sent by [EMAIL PROTECTED] via Backup Central. |Forward SPAM to [EMAIL PROTECTED] +-- The Blue Cross of Idaho Email Firewall Server made the following annotations: -- *Confidentiality Notice: This E-Mail is intended only for the use of the individual or entity to which it is addressed and may contain information that is privileged, confidential and exempt from disclosure under applicable law. If you have received this communication in error, please do not distribute, and delete the original message. Thank you for your compliance. You may contact us at: Blue Cross of Idaho 3000 E. Pine Ave. Meridian, Idaho 83642 1.208.345.4550 ==
Re: Data Deduplication
Oooh, what a great question! I'd guess if client encryption is on and working, the dedup ratio should be about 1:1; because the data should never encrypt the same way twice. On 1/23/08, lamont [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hi, What would likely be the de-dupe ratio if tsm clients do archive processing daily (file level, no tdps) with encryption enabled? Thanks. +-- |This was sent by [EMAIL PROTECTED] via Backup Central. |Forward SPAM to [EMAIL PROTECTED] +--
Re: Data Deduplication[-UNSECURE-]
You are right, if client compression is turned on, you will get next to no compression. In the DataDomain best practices for TSM documentation, they say to have client compression turned off for the DD appliance to do its thing. We don't have client compression turned on because we hate the hit it takes on the clients and we have sufficiently big network pipes. So we are set up OK for their appliance to work it's magic. Ben -Original Message- From: ADSM: Dist Stor Manager [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Wanda Prather Sent: Wednesday, January 23, 2008 8:42 AM To: ADSM-L@VM.MARIST.EDU Subject: Re: [ADSM-L] Data Deduplication Oooh, what a great question! I'd guess if client encryption is on and working, the dedup ratio should be about 1:1; because the data should never encrypt the same way twice. On 1/23/08, lamont [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hi, What would likely be the de-dupe ratio if tsm clients do archive processing daily (file level, no tdps) with encryption enabled? Thanks. +- +- |This was sent by [EMAIL PROTECTED] via Backup Central. |Forward SPAM to [EMAIL PROTECTED] +- +- The Blue Cross of Idaho Email Firewall Server made the following annotations: -- *Confidentiality Notice: This E-Mail is intended only for the use of the individual or entity to which it is addressed and may contain information that is privileged, confidential and exempt from disclosure under applicable law. If you have received this communication in error, please do not distribute, and delete the original message. Thank you for your compliance. You may contact us at: Blue Cross of Idaho 3000 E. Pine Ave. Meridian, Idaho 83642 1.208.345.4550 ==
Re: Data Deduplication
I agree about client encryption wrecking dedup ratios. FWIW however, if you turn on both COMPRESSION and ENCRYPTION on the client, the client is also smart enough to compress first, then encrypt, so you get the compression benefits. However, that of course takes a lot of cycles on the client, and can really slow down restores. Outboard compression/encryption in the hardware is definitely superior. On 1/23/08, Roger Deschner [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Encryption might have a DRAMATIC effect, completely eliminating the benefits of either deduplication or compression. I predict 1:1. i.e. NO savings for dedupliaction, with TSM client encryption. This is why encryption at the tape drive is a very popular option with LTO4. You can both encrypt and compress at the same time. Roger Deschner University of Illinois at Chicago [EMAIL PROTECTED] Academic Computing Communications Center On Wed, 23 Jan 2008, Ben Bullock wrote: As with all questions like this, the answer is it depends. It depends on the make-up of your data (# of DB full dumps, % of DB dumps to filesystem data, % of change on the client, etc) It depends on the vendor of DeDupe you are using. FWIW, I am about to replace a 100TB of LTO tape with a DataDomain 560 dedupe box starting next week. Once the migration from tape to disk is complete, I will be reporting what I saw in my environment. The DD folks are saying that the worst case scenario will be a 7X reduction (i.e. 70TB of data squeezed into a 10TB DataDomain appliance). We shall see. Ben -Original Message- From: ADSM: Dist Stor Manager [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of lamont Sent: Wednesday, January 23, 2008 1:29 AM To: ADSM-L@VM.MARIST.EDU Subject: [ADSM-L] Data Deduplication Hi, What would likely be the de-dupe ratio if tsm clients do archive processing daily (file level, no tdps) with encryption enabled? Thanks. +-- |This was sent by [EMAIL PROTECTED] via Backup Central. |Forward SPAM to [EMAIL PROTECTED] +-- The Blue Cross of Idaho Email Firewall Server made the following annotations: -- *Confidentiality Notice: This E-Mail is intended only for the use of the individual or entity to which it is addressed and may contain information that is privileged, confidential and exempt from disclosure under applicable law. If you have received this communication in error, please do not distribute, and delete the original message. Thank you for your compliance. You may contact us at: Blue Cross of Idaho 3000 E. Pine Ave. Meridian, Idaho 83642 1.208.345.4550 ==
Re: Upgrading TSM on an AIX server running multiple TSM instances
The reason to have separate binaries for each instance is that the process in AIX is tied to the binary file and holds it open. Orville L. Lantto From: ADSM: Dist Stor Manager on behalf of Loon, E.J. van - SPLXM Sent: Tue 1/22/2008 02:55 To: ADSM-L@VM.MARIST.EDU Subject: Re: [ADSM-L] Upgrading TSM on an AIX server running multiple TSM instances Hi Orville! Thank you very much for you help! I read the technote (1052631) Richard pointed out. That doesn't mention copying the dsmserv executable. Any reason why you choose to do so? Kindest regards, Eric van Loon KLM Royal Dutch Airlines -Original Message- From: ADSM: Dist Stor Manager [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Orville Lantto Sent: maandag 21 januari 2008 19:11 To: ADSM-L@VM.MARIST.EDU Subject: Re: Upgrading TSM on an AIX server running multiple TSM instances You do not really need a full install of the TSM server code in both locations. Just a separate directory, separate config files, a separate copy of the dsmserv binary and a the appropriate environment to run it in. export DSMSERV_DIR=/usr/tivoli/tsm/server/bin export DSMSERV_CONFIG=/usr/tivoli/tsm/server/instance2/dsmserv.opt Our upgrade procedure is to do the primary install and copy the dsmserv binary to each instance directory. Done. Orville L. Lantto From: ADSM: Dist Stor Manager on behalf of Loon, E.J. van - SPLXM Sent: Mon 1/21/2008 06:11 To: ADSM-L@VM.MARIST.EDU Subject: [ADSM-L] Upgrading TSM on an AIX server running multiple TSM instances Hi *SM-ers! I'm running two TSM server instances on an AIX host. Upgrading them from 5.3 to 5.4.0.0 works fine. I installed the 5.4.0.0 code through smitty, changed the /usr/tivoli/tsm/server path to the second instance and install the 5.4.0.0 code here, using the force (-F) flag. Both instances are on 5.4.0.0 at that point. Now I'm trying the same trick for the upgrade to 5.4.2.0. Upgrading the first instance works fine, but since this is an update, the -F flage is not allowed by smitty during the upgrade of the second instance: Force Apply Failures The following is a list of fileset updates. Updates cannot be specified from the command line when the force flag (-F) is used in combination with the apply flag (-a). Maybe an AIX expert (and I now there are plenty of them on this list) can help me with this one? Thank you VERY much in advance Kindest regards, Eric van Loon KLM Royal Dutch Airlines ** For information, services and offers, please visit our web site: http://www.klm.com http://www.klm.com/ http://www.klm.com/ . This e-mail and any attachment may contain confidential and privileged material intended for the addressee only. If you are not the addressee, you are notified that no part of the e-mail or any attachment may be disclosed, copied or distributed, and that any other action related to this e-mail or attachment is strictly prohibited, and may be unlawful. If you have received this e-mail by error, please notify the sender immediately by return e-mail, and delete this message. Koninklijke Luchtvaart Maatschappij NV (KLM), its subsidiaries and/or its employees shall not be liable for the incorrect or incomplete transmission of this e-mail or any attachments, nor responsible for any delay in receipt. Koninklijke Luchtvaart Maatschappij N.V. (also known as KLM Royal Dutch Airlines) is registered in Amstelveen, The Netherlands, with registered number 33014286 ** ** For information, services and offers, please visit our web site: http://www.klm.com http://www.klm.com/ . This e-mail and any attachment may contain confidential and privileged material intended for the addressee only. If you are not the addressee, you are notified that no part of the e-mail or any attachment may be disclosed, copied or distributed, and that any other action related to this e-mail or attachment is strictly prohibited, and may be unlawful. If you have received this e-mail by error, please notify the sender immediately by return e-mail, and delete this message. Koninklijke Luchtvaart Maatschappij NV (KLM), its subsidiaries and/or its employees shall not be liable for the incorrect or incomplete transmission of this e-mail or any attachments, nor responsible for any delay in receipt. Koninklijke Luchtvaart Maatschappij N.V. (also known as KLM Royal Dutch Airlines) is registered in Amstelveen, The Netherlands, with registered number 33014286 **
Re: Data Deduplication
True as well as any files that are already Compressed We have SQL DB's doing Flat File Dumps to Disk with compression and we see 1.7:1 Ick. Also TDP RMAN backups can use Files per set function which if set to more than 1 RMAN will multiplex each file set differently so you see different data every time. We have our RMAN set to files per set =1 then the DBA's run multiple channels so we see 20:1 of course our DBA's do fulls daily We've even forced Compress = No in a Server Side Client option set, which only applies to File System backups, the compression statement does not apply to the TDP's as far as I know. Also do what you can to have Like Data go to the same dedupe devices (assuming you have more than one). Example Oracle Prod / Non-Prod with their associated OS's go to the Same Dedupe stgpoool, Exchange etc... Data DeDupe can be cool, but if you do not pay attention your data types you can ruin a good thing. I Cant wait to see how the newer Dedupe engines that are coming out that perform the DeDupe process Out Of Band compares to the Inband DeDupe methodology. Of course the Inbound Devices dedupes as data comes in which can affect Backup Performance, (just add more widgets) but it will be interesting to see how Out of Band dedupe methodology will perform if you get behind (i.e. Days one Backup Data is still being DeDuped while your are taking in Day 2's Backup data, then you add in Backup Stgpool, Reclamation etc that will force the dedupe engine to re-dupe / re-factor the data everytime the data is read. There's been many Dedupe Threads in this user list, you could almost write a VTL - DeDupe Best Practice Guide. -Original Message- From: ADSM: Dist Stor Manager [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Wanda Prather Sent: Wednesday, January 23, 2008 9:42 AM To: ADSM-L@VM.MARIST.EDU Subject: Re: [ADSM-L] Data Deduplication Oooh, what a great question! I'd guess if client encryption is on and working, the dedup ratio should be about 1:1; because the data should never encrypt the same way twice. On 1/23/08, lamont [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hi, What would likely be the de-dupe ratio if tsm clients do archive processing daily (file level, no tdps) with encryption enabled? Thanks. +- +- |This was sent by [EMAIL PROTECTED] via Backup Central. |Forward SPAM to [EMAIL PROTECTED] +- +- This e-mail, including attachments, may include confidential and/or proprietary information, and may be used only by the person or entity to which it is addressed. If the reader of this e-mail is not the intended recipient or his or her authorized agent, the reader is hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution or copying of this e-mail is prohibited. If you have received this e-mail in error, please notify the sender by replying to this message and delete this e-mail immediately.
Re: Data Deduplication
Hmm, I was going to say I'd expect almost none, because the eencryption wouldn't generate the same data each time through. But maybe It depends on encyption scheme, on how keys are managed (I would expect the same data to encrypt the same way if the same keys are used - although I am no cryptologist), on the level at which the data is 'collated' - changed block, whole files, etc.. etc.. and how the de-dupe algorithm of choice does it's thing. Matt. Internet [EMAIL PROTECTED] To ADSM-L Sent by: ADSM-L@VM.MARIST.EDU cc 23/01/2008 15:47 Subject Re: [ADSM-L] Data Deduplication Please respond to ADSM-L@VM.MARIST.EDU As with all questions like this, the answer is it depends. It depends on the make-up of your data (# of DB full dumps, % of DB dumps to filesystem data, % of change on the client, etc) It depends on the vendor of DeDupe you are using. FWIW, I am about to replace a 100TB of LTO tape with a DataDomain 560 dedupe box starting next week. Once the migration from tape to disk is complete, I will be reporting what I saw in my environment. The DD folks are saying that the worst case scenario will be a 7X reduction (i.e. 70TB of data squeezed into a 10TB DataDomain appliance). We shall see. Ben -Original Message- From: ADSM: Dist Stor Manager [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of lamont Sent: Wednesday, January 23, 2008 1:29 AM To: ADSM-L@VM.MARIST.EDU Subject: [ADSM-L] Data Deduplication Hi, What would likely be the de-dupe ratio if tsm clients do archive processing daily (file level, no tdps) with encryption enabled? Thanks. +-- |This was sent by [EMAIL PROTECTED] via Backup Central. |Forward SPAM to [EMAIL PROTECTED] +-- The Blue Cross of Idaho Email Firewall Server made the following annotations: -- *Confidentiality Notice: This E-Mail is intended only for the use of the individual or entity to which it is addressed and may contain information that is privileged, confidential and exempt from disclosure under applicable law. If you have received this communication in error, please do not distribute, and delete the original message. Thank you for your compliance. You may contact us at: Blue Cross of Idaho 3000 E. Pine Ave. Meridian, Idaho 83642 1.208.345.4550 == This message and any attachments (the message) is intended solely for the addressees and is confidential. If you receive this message in error, please delete it and immediately notify the sender. Any use not in accord with its purpose, any dissemination or disclosure, either whole or partial, is prohibited except formal approval. The internet can not guarantee the integrity of this message. BNP PARIBAS (and its subsidiaries) shall (will) not therefore be liable for the message if modified. Do not print this message unless it is necessary, consider the environment. - Ce message et toutes les pieces jointes (ci-apres le message) sont etablis a l'intention exclusive de ses destinataires et sont confidentiels. Si vous recevez ce message par erreur, merci de le detruire et d'en avertir immediatement l'expediteur. Toute utilisation de ce message non conforme a sa destination, toute diffusion ou toute publication, totale ou partielle, est interdite, sauf autorisation expresse. L'internet ne permettant pas d'assurer l'integrite de ce message, BNP PARIBAS (et ses filiales) decline(nt) toute responsabilite au titre de ce message, dans l'hypothese ou il aurait ete modifie. N'imprimez ce message que si necessaire, pensez a l'environnement.
Re: Data Deduplication
The other posters are correct. You will get 1:1. Dedupe works by finding patterns. There are no patterns in encrypted data. One question would be why would you do that? Most people are encrypting data as it leaves their site. The best way to do that is hardware encryption (tape drive or SAN-based). Do that on the other side of your dedupe box and before it goes to tape -- not at the client -- and you'll have no issues with dedupe. --- W. Curtis Preston Backup Blog @ www.backupcentral.com VP Data Protection, GlassHouse Technologies -Original Message- From: ADSM: Dist Stor Manager [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of lamont Sent: Wednesday, January 23, 2008 12:29 AM To: ADSM-L@VM.MARIST.EDU Subject: [ADSM-L] Data Deduplication Hi, What would likely be the de-dupe ratio if tsm clients do archive processing daily (file level, no tdps) with encryption enabled? Thanks. +-- |This was sent by [EMAIL PROTECTED] via Backup Central. |Forward SPAM to [EMAIL PROTECTED] +--
Re: Upgrading TSM on an AIX server running multiple TSM instances
Orville, Can you clarify exactly what is the problem with multiple TSM service instances running from a shared dsmserv binary? AFAIK, IBM/Tivoli does not suggest to copy and run a separate executable for each TSM instance. We have not seen any problems sharing the same executable among several TSM instances. Do you use this technique to allow production TSM services to continue running while you upgrade the default installation TSM service? Have you used this technique to safely run different maintenance levels of TSM service simultaneously on the same AIX host? If so, have you experienced any problems doing this? Did you ever need to copy additional files to the running directories for the other TSM services? I'm also looking for advice: how best to make an inoperative AUTOSRVR entry in /etc/inittab? We leave the tiny default TSM service in the installation directory for upgrade processing, and never want it to start up automatically, but the upgrade process recreates the entry if it has been removed. -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] (203.432.6693) Orville Lantto wrote: The reason to have separate binaries for each instance is that the process in AIX is tied to the binary file and holds it open. Orville L. Lantto From: ADSM: Dist Stor Manager on behalf of Loon, E.J. van - SPLXM Sent: Tue 1/22/2008 02:55 To: ADSM-L@VM.MARIST.EDU Subject: Re: [ADSM-L] Upgrading TSM on an AIX server running multiple TSM instances Hi Orville! Thank you very much for you help! I read the technote (1052631) Richard pointed out. That doesn't mention copying the dsmserv executable. Any reason why you choose to do so? Kindest regards, Eric van Loon KLM Royal Dutch Airlines -Original Message- From: ADSM: Dist Stor Manager [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Orville Lantto Sent: maandag 21 januari 2008 19:11 To: ADSM-L@VM.MARIST.EDU Subject: Re: Upgrading TSM on an AIX server running multiple TSM instances You do not really need a full install of the TSM server code in both locations. Just a separate directory, separate config files, a separate copy of the dsmserv binary and a the appropriate environment to run it in. export DSMSERV_DIR=/usr/tivoli/tsm/server/bin export DSMSERV_CONFIG=/usr/tivoli/tsm/server/instance2/dsmserv.opt Our upgrade procedure is to do the primary install and copy the dsmserv binary to each instance directory. Done. Orville L. Lantto From: ADSM: Dist Stor Manager on behalf of Loon, E.J. van - SPLXM Sent: Mon 1/21/2008 06:11 To: ADSM-L@VM.MARIST.EDU Subject: [ADSM-L] Upgrading TSM on an AIX server running multiple TSM instances Hi *SM-ers! I'm running two TSM server instances on an AIX host. Upgrading them from 5.3 to 5.4.0.0 works fine. I installed the 5.4.0.0 code through smitty, changed the /usr/tivoli/tsm/server path to the second instance and install the 5.4.0.0 code here, using the force (-F) flag. Both instances are on 5.4.0.0 at that point. Now I'm trying the same trick for the upgrade to 5.4.2.0. Upgrading the first instance works fine, but since this is an update, the -F flage is not allowed by smitty during the upgrade of the second instance: Force Apply Failures The following is a list of fileset updates. Updates cannot be specified from the command line when the force flag (-F) is used in combination with the apply flag (-a). Maybe an AIX expert (and I now there are plenty of them on this list) can help me with this one? Thank you VERY much in advance Kindest regards, Eric van Loon KLM Royal Dutch Airlines ** For information, services and offers, please visit our web site: http://www.klm.com http://www.klm.com/ http://www.klm.com/ . This e-mail and any attachment may contain confidential and privileged material intended for the addressee only. If you are not the addressee, you are notified that no part of the e-mail or any attachment may be disclosed, copied or distributed, and that any other action related to this e-mail or attachment is strictly prohibited, and may be unlawful. If you have received this e-mail by error, please notify the sender immediately by return e-mail, and delete this message. Koninklijke Luchtvaart Maatschappij NV (KLM), its subsidiaries and/or its employees shall not be liable for the incorrect or incomplete transmission of this e-mail or any attachments, nor responsible for any delay in receipt. Koninklijke Luchtvaart Maatschappij N.V. (also known as KLM Royal Dutch Airlines) is registered in Amstelveen, The Netherlands, with registered number 33014286 ** ** For information, services and offers, please visit our web site: http://www.klm.com http://www.klm.com/ . This e-mail and any attachment may contain confidential and
New to List and Question
I've been on ADSM.ORG for some time, just not on the list. I have an interesting query: We're going to be upgrading to TSM 5.5 (hopefully unless serious problems are revealed) in the near future, and then adding a secondary server to offload some of the backups, restores, and admin processes etc. My question is what is the best way to get the clients, and their data over to the new secondary server when both servers will be sharing a Library. The config as I'm mulling it over now is: Server 1, 10 LTO3's Server 2, 8 LTO2's. I'll leave it at that for now, and see what comes up. See Ya' Howard Coles Jr. Sr. Systems Engineer Ardent Health Services Nashville, TN John 3:16!
Re: Upgrading TSM on an AIX server running multiple TSM instances
-Original Message- From: ADSM: Dist Stor Manager [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of James R Owen Sent: Wednesday, January 23, 2008 1:18 PM To: ADSM-L@VM.MARIST.EDU Subject: Re: [ADSM-L] Upgrading TSM on an AIX server running multiple TSM instances Orville, Can you clarify exactly what is the problem with multiple TSM service instances running from a shared dsmserv binary? AFAIK, IBM/Tivoli does not suggest to copy and run a separate executable for each TSM instance. We have not seen any problems sharing the same executable among several TSM instances. Do you use this technique to allow production TSM services to continue running while you upgrade the default installation TSM service? Have you used this technique to safely run different maintenance levels of TSM service simultaneously on the same AIX host? If so, have you experienced any problems doing this? Did you ever need to copy additional files to the running directories for the other TSM services? I'm also looking for advice: how best to make an inoperative AUTOSRVR entry in /etc/inittab? We leave the tiny default TSM service in the installation directory for upgrade processing, and never want it to start up automatically, but the upgrade process recreates the entry if it has been removed. -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] (203.432.6693) Orville Lantto wrote: The reason to have separate binaries for each instance is that the process in AIX is tied to the binary file and holds it open. Orville L. Lantto From: ADSM: Dist Stor Manager on behalf of Loon, E.J. van - SPLXM Sent: Tue 1/22/2008 02:55 To: ADSM-L@VM.MARIST.EDU Subject: Re: [ADSM-L] Upgrading TSM on an AIX server running multiple TSM instances Hi Orville! Thank you very much for you help! I read the technote (1052631) Richard pointed out. That doesn't mention copying the dsmserv executable. Any reason why you choose to do so? Kindest regards, Eric van Loon KLM Royal Dutch Airlines -Original Message- From: ADSM: Dist Stor Manager [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Orville Lantto Sent: maandag 21 januari 2008 19:11 To: ADSM-L@VM.MARIST.EDU Subject: Re: Upgrading TSM on an AIX server running multiple TSM instances You do not really need a full install of the TSM server code in both locations. Just a separate directory, separate config files, a separate copy of the dsmserv binary and a the appropriate environment to run it in. export DSMSERV_DIR=/usr/tivoli/tsm/server/bin export DSMSERV_CONFIG=/usr/tivoli/tsm/server/instance2/dsmserv.opt Our upgrade procedure is to do the primary install and copy the dsmserv binary to each instance directory. Done. Orville L. Lantto Hi *SM-ers! I'm running two TSM server instances on an AIX host. Upgrading them from 5.3 to 5.4.0.0 works fine. I installed the 5.4.0.0 code through smitty, changed the /usr/tivoli/tsm/server path to the second instance and install the 5.4.0.0 code here, using the force (-F) flag. Both instances are on 5.4.0.0 at that point. Now I'm trying the same trick for the upgrade to 5.4.2.0. Upgrading the first instance works fine, but since this is an update, the -F flage is not allowed by smitty during the upgrade of the second instance: Force Apply Failures The following is a list of fileset updates. Updates cannot be specified from the command line when the force flag (-F) is used in combination with the apply flag (-a). Maybe an AIX expert (and I now there are plenty of them on this list) can help me with this one? Thank you VERY much in advance Kindest regards, Eric van Loon KLM Royal Dutch Airlines I'm with Jim Owen above, I don't think you need completely separate binaries, unless You WANT to keep the two at different versions. But, something inside me vaguely remembers reading about running two different versions on 1 box and having problems. Anyway, all you have to do is make sure you run the dbupgrade for each instance before you start up the server for all of them. See Ya' Howard
Seeking thoughts/experiences on backing up large amounts (say 50 Petabytes) of data
Folks: Our group has been approached by a customer who asked if we could backup/archive 50 petabytes of data. And yes, they are serious. We've begun building questions for the customer, but as this is roughly 1000 times the current amount of data we backup, we are on unfamiliar turf here. At a high level, here are some of the questions we are asking: 1) Is the 50 Petabytes an initial, or envisioned data size? If envisioned, how big is the initial data load and how fast will it grow? 2) What makes up the data: databases, video/audio files, other? (subtext: how many objects are involved? What are the opportunities to compress/deduplicate?) 3) how is the data distributed - over a number of systems or from a supercluster? 4) Is the data static, or changing slowly or changing rapidly? (subtext: is it a backup or archive scenario) 5) What are the security requirments? 6) What are the restore (aka RTO) requirements? We are planning on approaching vendors to get some sense of the probable data center requirements (cooling, power, footprint). If anyone in the community has experience with managing petatybes of backup data, we'd appreciate any feedback we could incorporate. Thanks in advance!
Re: New to List and Question
On Wed, 23 Jan 2008 13:36:55 -0600, Howard Coles [EMAIL PROTECTED] said: I have an interesting query: We're going to be upgrading to TSM 5.5 (hopefully unless serious problems are revealed) in the near future, and then adding a secondary server to offload some of the backups, restores, and admin processes etc. My question is what is the best way to get the clients, and their data over to the new secondary server when both servers will be sharing a Library. The config as I'm mulling it over now is: Server 1, 10 LTO3's Server 2, 8 LTO2's. I'll leave it at that for now, and see what comes up. At the risk of sounding like a parrot: http://open-systems.ufl.edu/services/NSAM/whitepapers/50ways.html Was a compilation of detailed methods I came up with, once, when I was trying to list all of them. I haven't gotten any suggestions of You missed X for some time, but that may just be because I'm being ignored. ;) - Allen S. Rout
Re: Re: Upgrading TSM on an AIX server running multiple TSM instances
James R Owen wrote: I'm also looking for advice: how best to make an inoperative AUTOSRVR entry in /etc/inittab? We leave the tiny default TSM service in the installation directory for upgrade processing, and never want it to start up automatically, but the upgrade process recreates the entry if it has been removed. Change the once to off in the inittab entry. I'm not sure if the installation/upgrade process will change it back or not, though. But don't do this if the running dsmserv was started by that autosrvr entry, or init will kill the running server! (Related trick for starting the TSM server after a TSM halt without rebooting or manually running the dsmserv process: change the 2 to 2a in inittab, then use telinit a to make init start the TSM server the same way it would at boot.) -- Hello World.David Bronder - Systems Admin Segmentation Fault ITS-SPA, Univ. of Iowa Core dumped, disk trashed, quota filled, soda warm. [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Data Deduplication
Hi Curtis, Unfortunately, this was already the case when I came, client encryption is the only option and the tapes are needed to be sent to offsite. I think we need to consider this - enabling/disabling client encryption and see how - in the test case on the upcoming POC with a de-dupe vendor. Thanks. cpreston wrote: The other posters are correct. You will get 1:1. Dedupe works by finding patterns. There are no patterns in encrypted data. One question would be why would you do that? Most people are encrypting data as it leaves their site. The best way to do that is hardware encryption (tape drive or SAN-based). Do that on the other side of your dedupe box and before it goes to tape -- not at the client -- and you'll have no issues with dedupe. --- W. Curtis Preston Backup Blog @ www.backupcentral.com VP Data Protection, GlassHouse Technologies -Original Message- From: ADSM: Dist Stor Manager [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of lamont Sent: Wednesday, January 23, 2008 12:29 AM To: ADSM-L@VM.MARIST.EDU Subject: [ADSM-L] Data Deduplication Hi, What would likely be the de-dupe ratio if tsm clients do archive processing daily (file level, no tdps) with encryption enabled? Thanks. +-- |This was sent by [EMAIL PROTECTED] via Backup Central. |Forward SPAM to [EMAIL PROTECTED] +-- +-- |This was sent by [EMAIL PROTECTED] via Backup Central. |Forward SPAM to [EMAIL PROTECTED] +--
