Re: AW: MediaW

[Nicholas Cassimatis]

Tab,

I'm thinking you could have a script/cmd file that shares out the
directories on the drive, then assigns drive letters to the shares, and
another script that undoes this, and have them as your pre and post-sched
commands.  Or even a script that would share a directory, attach to it,
back it up, detach, unshare, then go on to the next one.

What you're trying to do isn't really pretty, but might be fun to play
with.

Nick Cassimatis
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

Think twice, type once.

Re: AW: MediaW

[Tab Trepagnier]

Richard,

Thanks.

"Gosh, Tab, are you still using the world's last wholly proprietary
operating system and enduring all the pain of System Objects??  ;-)"

Yes. Even though we sometimes have to spend as much as $2500 for a new
server, and only about 98 out of every 100 job applicants know anything
about it. ;-)

I have another approach I want to try to simulate virtual mount points in
Windows.  If successful, I'll share with the forum.

Tab







Richard Sims <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent by: "ADSM: Dist Stor Manager" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
06/16/2003 08:16 AM
Please respond to "ADSM: Dist Stor Manager"


To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
cc:
Subject:Re: AW: MediaW


>Richard,
>
>I'm glad you mentioned VirtualMountPoint.  Is there ANY way to simulate
>that in Windows?

Gosh, Tab, are you still using the world's last wholly proprietary
operating system and enduring all the pain of System Objects??  ;-)

I'm not aware of any way in Windows to achieve the same effect.
VIRTUALMountpoint is limited to the Unix environment.  (And, oddly,
though Macintosh OS X is certainly Unix, the TSM Mac client does not
support VIRTUALMountpoint.  As of TSM 5.2, the Mac client does support
Unicode, as the Windows client has.  Your features may vary.)

  Richard Sims, BU

Re: AW: MediaW

[Richard Sims]

>Richard,
>
>I'm glad you mentioned VirtualMountPoint.  Is there ANY way to simulate
>that in Windows?

Gosh, Tab, are you still using the world's last wholly proprietary
operating system and enduring all the pain of System Objects??  ;-)

I'm not aware of any way in Windows to achieve the same effect.
VIRTUALMountpoint is limited to the Unix environment.  (And, oddly,
though Macintosh OS X is certainly Unix, the TSM Mac client does not
support VIRTUALMountpoint.  As of TSM 5.2, the Mac client does support
Unicode, as the Windows client has.  Your features may vary.)

  Richard Sims, BU

Re: AW: MediaW

[Tab Trepagnier]

Richard,

I'm glad you mentioned VirtualMountPoint.  Is there ANY way to simulate
that in Windows?

What I've found is that the TSM client can back up the local machine via
its shares, and that gives better granularity if you want to use
backupsets,especially on a large file server.  But what I would like to do
is create a share point that no one can connect to so that we don't end up
with wierd mappings out in the field.  But once you do that, then TSM
can't connect to it either, and you're right back to going through the
local file system.

Any ideas?

Thanks.

Tab Trepagnier
TSM Administrator
Laitram LLC








Richard Sims <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent by: "ADSM: Dist Stor Manager" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
06/13/2003 08:08 AM
Please respond to "ADSM: Dist Stor Manager"


To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
cc:
Subject:Re: AW: MediaW


>That begs the question of why a collocated session can not have
>multiple backup threads.

Collocation is often diminished in List discussions for lack of
qualification.  That is, there are two types of Collocation:
by node, and by filespace.  Therein lies additional opportunity,
further enhanced by VIRTUALMountpoint.  Subdivide and conquer.
The beauty of the product is all the flexibility it offers in
tailoring backup and restoral.

  Richard Sims, BU

Re: AW: MediaW

[Richard Sims]

>That begs the question of why a collocated session can not have
>multiple backup threads.

Collocation is often diminished in List discussions for lack of
qualification.  That is, there are two types of Collocation:
by node, and by filespace.  Therein lies additional opportunity,
further enhanced by VIRTUALMountpoint.  Subdivide and conquer.
The beauty of the product is all the flexibility it offers in
tailoring backup and restoral.

  Richard Sims, BU

AW: MediaW

[Salak Juraj]

Not quite sure where is you problem:

You want both collocation and parallel backup threads.

Using a (large enough) disk primary storage pool 
as backup cache gives you the ability to backup using many threads. 
Migrationg from disk to tape can use multiple tapes as well.

The only things which does not work is concurrent 
migration of single node´s/filesystem data to more tapes, 
but this would definitely preclude your own collocation requirement!?
And - this limitation causes significant slowdown only if you have one exta
large node/filesystem.
Once you have 2 or more large nodes it does not matter.

Or do you think about restores while speaking about backups? 
In this case Zlatko´s reply about disabling collocation might make sense.

regards
Juraj


-Ursprüngliche Nachricht-
Von: David E Ehresman [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Gesendet: Freitag, 13. Juni 2003 13:28
An: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Betreff: Re: MediaW


Our target is satisfactory restore time.  It has been our experience
that if one has adequate set up for restore the backups run just fine.
In our shop, adequate restore time requires collocation.  That said, in
my shop one must also take into account workplace politics.  If that is
not the case at your place of employment, good for you!

That begs the question of why a collocated session can not have
multiple backup threads.  In my ideal design of things, if a collocated
backup uses multiple sessions/threads, then it uses multiple tapes
instead of having one session wait until the 1st is done with a single
tape.

David

>>> [EMAIL PROTECTED] 06/13/03 12:57AM >>>
What is your *exact* target - collocation, IBM/Tivoli happiness or
faster
backups/restores. Have in mind that even IBMers are human beings and
can
err. Sometimes disabling collocation might give *improvements*
(usually
does not)

Zlatko Krastev
IT Consultant






David E Ehresman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent by: "ADSM: Dist Stor Manager" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
12.06.2003 15:29
Please respond to "ADSM: Dist Stor Manager"


To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
cc:
Subject:Re: MediaW


IBM/TSM reps spent a lot of capital and management spent a lot of
money
to get us to an environment where we COULD collocate.  There's no
going
back now.

David

>>> [EMAIL PROTECTED] 06/12/03 03:21AM >>>
David,

why not to create another primary pool and direct that node in such
"own"
pool (or shared with few similar requirements nodes). Setting
collocation
off will have little or no impact on your restores. In fact allowing
backups to parallelize, you will set the ground for parallel restores.

Zlatko Krastev
IT Consultant






David E Ehresman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent by: "ADSM: Dist Stor Manager" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
11.06.2003 17:56
Please respond to "ADSM: Dist Stor Manager"


To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
cc:
Subject:Re: MediaW


Thanks Geoff.  We'd much rather have the session wait during backups
than during restore so we'll leave collocation on and ignore the
MediaW.

David

>>> [EMAIL PROTECTED] 06/11/03 10:32AM >>>
David,

We have had these same types of problems when collocation is set to
yes.
Try turning it off and running your backup again, I bet you will see
it
pick
up more drives.

Geoff

-Original Message-
From: David E Ehresman [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, June 11, 2003 9:27 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: MediaW


Collocation is set YES.  Can collocation not go to multiple tapes?

>>> [EMAIL PROTECTED] 06/10/03 03:44PM >>>
David,

Have you verified that collocation is set to NO on the tape storage
pool
that this client is backing up to.

Geoff Raymer
EDS - Tulsa BUR and Leveraged Storage
MS 326
4000 N. Mingo Road
Tulsa, OK  74116-5020

* phone: +01-918-292-4364
* cell: +01-918-629-1819
* mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
www.eds.com



-Original Message-
From: David E Ehresman [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, June 10, 2003 2:27 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: MediaW


I have a client node that backs up over the lan to tape.  When I do a
Q
SESS during a backup, there are 3-4 sessions running.  One session has
a
tape mounted but one of the others remains in MediaW.  The node has
Maximum Mount Points Allowed: 2 defined.  The device class has Mount
Limit: DRIVES defined.  There are empty tape drives available.  Any
ideas why a tape is not being mounted?

TSM server is TSM 5.1.6.3 running on AIX 5.1 64 bit mode.  Client is
TSM 5.1.5.11 running on Aix 5.1 32 bit mode.

David Ehresman