Re: Resourceutilization=100 ?
Hi Tom, According to the "Installation & User's Guide", it has changed with 8.1.2. -- Best regards / Cordialement / مع تحياتي Erwann SIMON - Mail original - De: "Tom Alverson" À: ADSM-L@VM.MARIST.EDU Envoyé: Vendredi 7 Décembre 2018 21:47:46 Objet: Re: [ADSM-L] Resourceutilization=100 ? Wait. What?? What version of client do you need for this? Will my storage servers explode? How many sessions do you need? On Thu, Dec 6, 2018 at 12:16 PM Erwann SIMON wrote: > Hi all, > > Resourceutilization can now (officially) been set with higher values thant > is the past. Maximum value is now 100 while it was 10. > > How does it now behave ? How many producers and consumers can we expect > with higher values like 100 ? > > -- > Best regards / Cordialement / مع تحياتي > Erwann SIMON >
Re: Resourceutilization=100 ?
With great powers comes great responsibility. As with before, doesn't matter what value you specify, it doesn't mean you will get that many threads or sessions. However, I would thread carefully when going above 10. I'd go up gradually until you hit a point of diminishing return and then scale back. There's no easy math to calculate that magic number, it's trial and error. - Thanks, Marc... Marc Lanteigne Spectrum Protect Specialist AVP / SRT -Original Message- From: Tom Alverson Sent: Friday, December 7, 2018 04:50 PM To: ADSM-L@VM.MARIST.EDU Subject: Re: [ADSM-L] Resourceutilization=100 ? Wait. What?? What version of client do you need for this? Will my storage servers explode? How many sessions do you need? On Thu, Dec 6, 2018 at 12:16 PM Erwann SIMON wrote: > Hi all, > > Resourceutilization can now (officially) been set with higher values > thant is the past. Maximum value is now 100 while it was 10. > > How does it now behave ? How many producers and consumers can we > expect with higher values like 100 ? > > -- > Best regards / Cordialement / مع تحياتي Erwann SIMON >
Re: Resourceutilization=100 ?
Wait. What?? What version of client do you need for this? Will my storage servers explode? How many sessions do you need? On Thu, Dec 6, 2018 at 12:16 PM Erwann SIMON wrote: > Hi all, > > Resourceutilization can now (officially) been set with higher values thant > is the past. Maximum value is now 100 while it was 10. > > How does it now behave ? How many producers and consumers can we expect > with higher values like 100 ? > > -- > Best regards / Cordialement / مع تحياتي > Erwann SIMON >
Resourceutilization=100 ?
Hi all, Resourceutilization can now (officially) been set with higher values thant is the past. Maximum value is now 100 while it was 10. How does it now behave ? How many producers and consumers can we expect with higher values like 100 ? -- Best regards / Cordialement / مع تحياتي Erwann SIMON
Re: Oracle archive log backups and resourceutilization
Hello Richard,
we have implemented something similar to what you want onto one of ours AIX
hosts.
We have two scripts - one for files backup and one for files deletion. Both
are invoked by crontab.
The backup script do dsmc incremental onto specific directory. In the
dsm.sys we have defined include/exclude and resoureutilization:
backup script:
LOGDIR=/dsmcOutputLogDirectory
LOGFILE=$LOGDIR/BackupLog.log
BACKUP_DIR1="/FilesToBackup/"
DSM_DIR=/usr/tivoli/tsm/client/ba/bin64
DSMC=$DSM_DIR/dsmc
DSM_LOG=/usr/tivoli/tsm/client
DSM_CONFIG=$DSM_DIR/dsmNode.opt
export DSM_CONFIG DSM_LOG DSM_DIR DSMC
$DSMC incremental "$BACKUP_DIR1" >> $LOGFILE
The script for deletions queries TSM for every single file (older than 7
days in our case) in the directory for successful backup. If the file
exists, then it's deleted. As far as the Oracle archive logs are with
unique filenames, this is a working solution.
deletion script:
WORKDIR="/BackedUpFiles/"
DSM_DIR=/usr/tivoli/tsm/client/ba/bin64
DSMC="$DSM_DIR/dsmc"
DSM_CONFIG="$DSM_DIR/dsmNode.opt"
FIND=/usr/bin/find
export DSM_CONFIG DSM_DIR
Delete( ) {
F=$1
echo "Checking $F ..."
$DSMC query backup $F -inactive
ERR=$?
if [ $ERR -ne 0 ]
then
echo "$F seems not to be backuped up. Could not be deleted!"
else
echo "Deleting $F... \c"
rm $F
echo "Done."
fi
}
for file in $($FIND $WORKDIR -mtime +7)
do
Delete "$file"
done
You can gather log file for the delete process by defining it in the
crontab
00 * * * * /del_script.sh >> /del_script.log
Not sure if this will help if you don't have enough space to hold the
archive logs.
Best Regards,
Maria
On Wed, Feb 22, 2017 at 10:27 PM, Rhodes, Richard L. <
rrho...@firstenergycorp.com> wrote:
> Our DBA's have scripts that backup their Oracle archive logs.
> It causes us pain.
>
> (AIX 7.1 with BA clients 6.4 and up)
>
> Their scripts run from cron every few minutes.
> If it finds archive logs, it processes as below:
>
> For each archive log (individual log file)
> run dsmc on the log file
> check dsmc output for whether it worked or failed
> delete the log file if backup worked
>
> So they process the log files one at a time on separate dsmc cmds.
>
> Now, if there are a bunch of files (30, 40, 100, or multiple 100's), it
> kicks into high
> gear and runs up to 8 dsmc cmds in parallel.
>
> What I'd like to know is, if they were to put all
> the log file names into a filelist, and run ONE dsmc cmd
> specifying the filelist along with -resourceutilization=10,
> will dsmc parallel some number of files concurrently back to
> the TSM server?
>
>
> The DBA's really, really want to get the archive logs
> off the server and into TSM ASAP! We have big Oracle
> servers that do several thousand TSM session per day
> with this processing.
>
>
> Note: all log files are in the same filesystem
>
>
>
> -
>
> The information contained in this message is intended only for the
> personal and confidential use of the recipient(s) named above. If the
> reader of this message is not the intended recipient or an agent
> responsible for delivering it to the intended recipient, you are hereby
> notified that you have received this document in error and that any review,
> dissemination, distribution, or copying of this message is strictly
> prohibited. If you have received this communication in error, please notify
> us immediately, and delete the original message.
>
Oracle archive log backups and resourceutilization
Our DBA's have scripts that backup their Oracle archive logs. It causes us pain. (AIX 7.1 with BA clients 6.4 and up) Their scripts run from cron every few minutes. If it finds archive logs, it processes as below: For each archive log (individual log file) run dsmc on the log file check dsmc output for whether it worked or failed delete the log file if backup worked So they process the log files one at a time on separate dsmc cmds. Now, if there are a bunch of files (30, 40, 100, or multiple 100's), it kicks into high gear and runs up to 8 dsmc cmds in parallel. What I'd like to know is, if they were to put all the log file names into a filelist, and run ONE dsmc cmd specifying the filelist along with -resourceutilization=10, will dsmc parallel some number of files concurrently back to the TSM server? The DBA's really, really want to get the archive logs off the server and into TSM ASAP! We have big Oracle servers that do several thousand TSM session per day with this processing. Note: all log files are in the same filesystem - The information contained in this message is intended only for the personal and confidential use of the recipient(s) named above. If the reader of this message is not the intended recipient or an agent responsible for delivering it to the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that you have received this document in error and that any review, dissemination, distribution, or copying of this message is strictly prohibited. If you have received this communication in error, please notify us immediately, and delete the original message.
Does resourceutilization start sessions before checking?
Does a resourceutilization setting greater than the default start extra sessions on the client before checking whether they can be put to useful work? We are considering adding a resourceutilization option (maybe '5') to a cloptset, in view of reducing file scan times on clients with multiple large filespaces. But, there are many clients in the same domain who could not use extra sessions. Would fruitless starting and stopping of extra sessions cause a significant waste of TSM resources? We have 445 nodes on one TSM server. 363 on another. TSM 5.5.4.1. on Linux, HP DL585-G5. With my thanks, Keith Arbogast Indiana University
Re: Resourceutilization allows more tape mounts than
On Sep 25, 2008, at 11:12 AM, Richard Sims wrote: ... in the presence of multiple management classes and absence of DIRMc, it is not the case that directories inherently go to the default management class: the TSM architectural convention is that they go to the management class where the copy group RETOnly value I got interrupted when writing that, and lost my continuity. That should say, the management class where the backup copy group has the longest RETOnly value. Richard Sims
Re: Resourceutilization allows more tape mounts than
On Sep 25, 2008, at 10:49 AM, Schneider, John wrote: Richard, We don't use the DIRMc option, because our policies are simple enough that the default management class is the right place to put the directories, and they all go to the same media, which in this case is virtual tape. John - If the default management class is your only management class, then directories will go where you expect. But, in the presence of multiple management classes and absence of DIRMc, it is not the case that directories inherently go to the default management class: the TSM architectural convention is that they go to the management class where the copy group RETOnly value, basically speaking. (You can perform some 'dsmc query backup' commands on directories of interest, to verify current bindings.) At least one other customer finds this condition, so if your investigation bears fruit, you'll get the gold star. :-) Richard Sims
Re: Resourceutilization allows more tape mounts than
Richard, We don't use the DIRMc option, because our policies are simple enough that the default management class is the right place to put the directories, and they all go to the same media, which in this case is virtual tape. I don't know much about ACLs or GPFS, except I have checked with our admins and I know we aren't using them. So although those are both excellent thoughts and I thank you for the suggestion, I don't think they apply to my case. I will try your suggestion with Q CONTENT and go through the actlog to see what tapes are getting mounted for what sessions. I will post again if I learn anything interesting. Best Regards, John D. Schneider Phone: 314-364-3150 Cell: 314-750-8721 Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] -Original Message- From: ADSM: Dist Stor Manager [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Richard Sims Sent: Thursday, September 25, 2008 6:47 AM To: ADSM-L@VM.MARIST.EDU Subject: Re: [ADSM-L] Resourceutilization allows more tape mounts than Your original email included "Win2003 clients". If you are now discounting their participation and focusing on only the AIX client sessions, then it's possible that they are using ACLs (particularly for GPFS), where DIRMc considerations could be a factor. In any case, why leave this a mystery when you can readily examine the physical evidence, as per my last posting, and get a real sense of what's going on in those sessions? It's possible that collocation values are contributing to this. Richard Sims On Sep 24, 2008, at 4:19 PM, Schneider, John wrote: > Richard, > Thank you for your reply. > The clients I am referring to are AIX, as my original email > indicated. Andy's explanation is a good one, and says the same thing > that the Performance Guide says. > Neither explains the behavior we are seeing. Resourceutil=10 > should yield a maximum of 4 consumer sessions, and therefore a maximum > of 4 tape mounts. So if maxnummp=4, then why are we still getting > the: > > ANR0539W Transaction failed for session 163135 for node APLORA01. This > node has exceeded its maximum number of mount points. > > messages? Are we the only site seeing this? Am I just nuts, or is TSM > really working differently than documented? (Or both) I guess I will > just reduce the resourceutil parameter until the problem goes away, > and > just leave it a mystery. This e-mail contains information which (a) may be PROPRIETARY IN NATURE OR OTHERWISE PROTECTED BY LAW FROM DISCLOSURE, and (b) is intended only for the use of the addressee(s) named above. If you are not the addressee, or the person responsible for delivering this to the addressee(s), you are notified that reading, copying or distributing this e-mail is prohibited. If you have received this e-mail in error, please contact the sender immediately.
Re: Resourceutilization allows more tape mounts than
Richard, I'm seeing this quite a bit as well. I removed the "resourceutilization" parameter altogether, and get this message on some of my nodes. So, if you find a fix, let us know. The interesting thing is we're not seeing it on all our AIX nodes. I'm going to have to research to see if its focused on a version of AIX, or a version of the TSM client or both. See Ya' Howard > -Original Message- > From: ADSM: Dist Stor Manager [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf > Of Schneider, John > Sent: Wednesday, September 24, 2008 3:20 PM > To: ADSM-L@VM.MARIST.EDU > Subject: Re: [ADSM-L] Resourceutilization allows more tape mounts than > > Richard, > Thank you for your reply. > The clients I am referring to are AIX, as my original email > indicated. Andy's explanation is a good one, and says the same thing > that the Performance Guide says. > Neither explains the behavior we are seeing. Resourceutil=10 > should yield a maximum of 4 consumer sessions, and therefore a maximum > of 4 tape mounts. So if maxnummp=4, then why are we still getting the: > > ANR0539W Transaction failed for session 163135 for node APLORA01. This > node has exceeded its maximum number of mount points. > > messages? Are we the only site seeing this? Am I just nuts, or is TSM > really working differently than documented? (Or both) I guess I will > just reduce the resourceutil parameter until the problem goes away, and > just leave it a mystery. > > By the way, this is a shared library, and as per Technote #1315592, > Resetdrives=yes on our shared library. > > > Best Regards, > > John D. Schneider > Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > -Original Message- > From: ADSM: Dist Stor Manager [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf > Of > Richard Sims > Sent: Wednesday, September 24, 2008 2:44 PM > To: ADSM-L@VM.MARIST.EDU > Subject: Re: [ADSM-L] Resourceutilization allows more tape mounts than > > Whenever you see a Windows backup using more drives than expected, all > the implications of DIRMc should pop into consciousness. You can > examine what's most recently going to the tapes by using Query CONtent > with a negative Count value. > > And we are grateful for Andy's past illumination on > RESOURceutilization: > http://www.mail-archive.com/adsm-l@vm.marist.edu/msg33426.html > > Richard Sims http://people.bu.edu/rbs/ > This e-mail contains information which (a) may be PROPRIETARY IN NATURE > OR > OTHERWISE PROTECTED BY LAW FROM DISCLOSURE, and (b) is intended only > for the > use of the addressee(s) named above. If you are not the addressee, or > the > person responsible for delivering this to the addressee(s), you are > notified > that reading, copying or distributing this e-mail is prohibited. If you > have > received this e-mail in error, please contact the sender immediately.
Re: Resourceutilization allows more tape mounts than
Your original email included "Win2003 clients". If you are now discounting their participation and focusing on only the AIX client sessions, then it's possible that they are using ACLs (particularly for GPFS), where DIRMc considerations could be a factor. In any case, why leave this a mystery when you can readily examine the physical evidence, as per my last posting, and get a real sense of what's going on in those sessions? It's possible that collocation values are contributing to this. Richard Sims On Sep 24, 2008, at 4:19 PM, Schneider, John wrote: Richard, Thank you for your reply. The clients I am referring to are AIX, as my original email indicated. Andy's explanation is a good one, and says the same thing that the Performance Guide says. Neither explains the behavior we are seeing. Resourceutil=10 should yield a maximum of 4 consumer sessions, and therefore a maximum of 4 tape mounts. So if maxnummp=4, then why are we still getting the: ANR0539W Transaction failed for session 163135 for node APLORA01. This node has exceeded its maximum number of mount points. messages? Are we the only site seeing this? Am I just nuts, or is TSM really working differently than documented? (Or both) I guess I will just reduce the resourceutil parameter until the problem goes away, and just leave it a mystery.
Re: Resourceutilization allows more tape mounts than
Richard, Thank you for your reply. The clients I am referring to are AIX, as my original email indicated. Andy's explanation is a good one, and says the same thing that the Performance Guide says. Neither explains the behavior we are seeing. Resourceutil=10 should yield a maximum of 4 consumer sessions, and therefore a maximum of 4 tape mounts. So if maxnummp=4, then why are we still getting the: ANR0539W Transaction failed for session 163135 for node APLORA01. This node has exceeded its maximum number of mount points. messages? Are we the only site seeing this? Am I just nuts, or is TSM really working differently than documented? (Or both) I guess I will just reduce the resourceutil parameter until the problem goes away, and just leave it a mystery. By the way, this is a shared library, and as per Technote #1315592, Resetdrives=yes on our shared library. Best Regards, John D. Schneider Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] -Original Message- From: ADSM: Dist Stor Manager [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Richard Sims Sent: Wednesday, September 24, 2008 2:44 PM To: ADSM-L@VM.MARIST.EDU Subject: Re: [ADSM-L] Resourceutilization allows more tape mounts than Whenever you see a Windows backup using more drives than expected, all the implications of DIRMc should pop into consciousness. You can examine what's most recently going to the tapes by using Query CONtent with a negative Count value. And we are grateful for Andy's past illumination on RESOURceutilization: http://www.mail-archive.com/adsm-l@vm.marist.edu/msg33426.html Richard Sims http://people.bu.edu/rbs/ This e-mail contains information which (a) may be PROPRIETARY IN NATURE OR OTHERWISE PROTECTED BY LAW FROM DISCLOSURE, and (b) is intended only for the use of the addressee(s) named above. If you are not the addressee, or the person responsible for delivering this to the addressee(s), you are notified that reading, copying or distributing this e-mail is prohibited. If you have received this e-mail in error, please contact the sender immediately.
Re: Resourceutilization allows more tape mounts than
Whenever you see a Windows backup using more drives than expected, all the implications of DIRMc should pop into consciousness. You can examine what's most recently going to the tapes by using Query CONtent with a negative Count value. And we are grateful for Andy's past illumination on RESOURceutilization: http://www.mail-archive.com/adsm-l@vm.marist.edu/msg33426.html Richard Sims http://people.bu.edu/rbs/
Resourceutilization allows more tape mounts than
Greetings, This is an TSM 5.4.3.0 server, TSM 5.4.2 client environment. AIX 5.3ML5 servers, AIX 5.3 and Win2003 clients. Multiple TSM servers share a virtual tape library and a physical tape library via TSM library sharing. We have been gradually migrating from traditional disk pool to a virtual tape environment, and have begun getting a lot of messages like: ANR0539W Transaction failed for session 163135 for node APLORA01. This node has exceeded its maximum number of mount points. It looks to me like our set up is right, and "resourceutilization" is not working as documented. I know, you've heard that before! But hear me out. Here is the table from the Performance Guide: RESOURCEUTILIZATION valueMaximum number Unique number of Threshold of sessions producer sessions (seconds) 1 1 0 45 2 2 1 45 3 3 1 45 4 3 1 30 5 4 2 30 6 4 2 20 7 5 2 20 8 6 2 20 9 7 3 20 10 8 4 10 0 (default)2 1 30 I misunderstood this before, but a "producer" session is one that scans a file system looking for files to backup. The rest of the sessions are "consumer" sessions that send data to the TSM server. Right? If so, according to this, a "resourceutil 10" should not be asking for more than 4 tape drives. If the max is 8, and there are 4 producer sessions, then there should only be 4 consumer sessions, righrt? And here is a recent list of some of the servers getting the errors: NODE_NAME PLATFORM_NAME KEEP_MP MAX_MP_ALLOWED ---- -- MAXORA01UTAIXYES 4 RMNORA02 AIXYES 4 MHPORA01D AIXYES 4 APLORA01 AIXYES 6 TECDB02 AIXYES 4 TIBORA20 AIXYES 6 MAXORA10T AIXYES 4 GRDORA01 AIXYES 4 CREDORA01 AIXYES 4 So why are they getting the error? Why should any of them mount more than 4 mounts? The only thing I can think is that it does not work the way it is documented. We are not running multiple TSM schedulers on the same server, or anything like that. (These machines also run Oracle RMAN backups, but through a separate TSM client definition, i.e. APLORA01_ORACLE, so it will not interfer with the number of tape mounts allowed for this client.) One thing we thought is the keep_mp being yes might create a situation where a tape was filled, and while it is dismounting, TSM tries to mount another tape, but that pushes it up over the threshold. But I don't think that can be it; we increased a couple of the clients to maxnummp=6 as you can see, and it still happens. I know some of you will just say to increase maxnummp to a large number and forget it; but we have a finite number of virtual tape drives, so we can't go that way. We are thinking we may just drop "resourceutil" to 4 to see how many tapes it mounts then. Best Regards, John D. Schneider Lead Systems Administrator - Storage Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] This e-mail contains information which (a) may be PROPRIETARY IN NATURE OR OTHERWISE PROTECTED BY LAW FROM DISCLOSURE, and (b) is intended only for the use of the addressee(s) named above. If you are not the addressee, or the person responsible for delivering this to the addressee(s), you are notified that reading, copying or distributing this e-mail is prohibited. If you have received this e-mail in error, please contact the sender immediately.
usage of collocatebyfilespec + resourceutilization ?
Hi, we have tsm5.5.1 / solaris + 3494/4*J1A+4*E05 I have a question with our general ClientOption-Set defined to all Clients. We have around 600 Clients and backups are running into file-Pools and then migrating onto tapes. The only 2 option we currently distribute via client-OptionSet are compressalways no dirmc directory To make the restores faster it seems to be okay, generally using the 'resourceutilization 3' - to enable the client reading vom 3 tapes at one time. To have this feature just 'available' I would like to move this option resourceutilization 3 into the default Clientoption set. The problem now is : we are using groupcollocation and the resourceutilizaion also effects the backup and it is not necessary to have the client backups running parallel and opening more than one file(20GB) in the primary filepool. This may also lead to splitting data on more tapes and may be a waste on file-volumes The Option collocatebyfilespec yes seems to do what I want regarding backup. The question is If a client has 3 filespaces and the backup is running with the options ... 'resourceutilization 3' !collocatebyfilespec yes' ... will a backup run with 1 or 3 sessions ? Are you spreading the 'resorceutilization' vie the Client Optionset ? tanks for any hints Rainer -- Rainer Wolf eMail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] kiz - Abt. Infrastruktur Tel/Fax: ++49 731 50-22482/22471 Universitaet Ulm wwweb:http://kiz.uni-ulm.de
Re: Windows clients Resourceutilization
Mmmm not necessarily. Backups are done with two basic kinds of threads: * Producer thread that scans the file system looking for changed files, and queuing up transactions of changed files to be backed up. * Consumer thread that picks the transactions off the queue from the producer thread, then backs up the txn. There is also a performance monitor thread that keeps an eye out for how well the consumer thread is keeping up with work provided by the producer. If the consumer needs some help (producer is creating more work than the consumer can keep up with), then a new consumer thread (backup session) could be started. The performance monitor also keeps an eye on how the producer thread is doing with processing file specifications, e.g., C:, E:, F:. If the producer is too busy processing one file spec (scanning the file system), then another producer could be started to work on another file spec. Likewise the performance monitor will shut down producer or consumer threads if they are too idle, i.e., not enough work for them to do. So even with a lower RESOURCEUTILIZATION setting, it is possible for more than one backup session to kick off... if there is sufficient work to do. If the client is processing a file system with very few changes (for example), there might not be enough work to kick off another backup session. Higher RESOURCEUTILIZATION settings tell the client that it can initiate another producer, in which case you'll also get another backup sessin. But in general, RESOURCEUTILIZATION is more of a "suggestion" to the client, than a mandate. So even with a higher setting, it is not guaranteed that you'll get a bunch of backup sessions if there is not enough work to warrant it. Regards, Andy Andy Raibeck IBM Software Group Tivoli Storage Manager Client Product Development Level 3 Team Lead Internal Notes e-mail: Andrew Raibeck/Tucson/[EMAIL PROTECTED] Internet e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] IBM Tivoli Storage Manager support web page: http://www.ibm.com/software/sysmgmt/products/support/IBMTivoliStorageManager.html The only dumb question is the one that goes unasked. The command line is your friend. "Good enough" is the enemy of excellence. "ADSM: Dist Stor Manager" wrote on 09/20/2007 10:47:22 AM: > I believe the performance tuning guide explains the resourceutilization > parameter better. In short, you have to set it to at least 5 to get 2 > backup sessions. > > > > __ > > John Monahan > Consultant > Logicalis, Inc. > 5500 Wayzata Blvd Suite 315 > Golden Valley, MN 55416 > Office: 763-417-0552 x109 > Mobile: 952-221-6938 > Fax: 763-417-0554 > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > http://www.us.logicalis.com > > > > > David Longo <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Sent by: "ADSM: Dist Stor Manager" > 09/19/2007 05:42 PM > Please respond to > "ADSM: Dist Stor Manager" > > > To > ADSM-L@VM.MARIST.EDU > cc > > Subject > Windows clients Resourceutilization > > > > > > > I have used RESOURCEutilization on AIX clients for a long > time and works fine. I have a Windows client I would like to use it on. > > TSM Server is 5.3.4.0 and Windows client is 5.2.2.5, W2K SP4. > It is an IBM x345 (8670-61X), with 2x 2.8 Ghz Xeon CPU and > 1 GB RAM. > > I set to Resourceutil 4 and it still just uses one backup session. > There are multiple drives on this system and would like to use > multiple sessions. I even looked at the manual for 5.4 clients and > has no more info about this parameter. > > What is needed or what is the determining factor in actually > using multiple backup sessions on Windows clients? (I use > the basic Client scheduler - not Acceptor Daemon.) > > Thanks, > David Longo > > > # > This message is for the named person's use only. It may > contain confidential, proprietary, or legally privileged > information. No confidentiality or privilege is waived or > lost by any mistransmission. If you receive this message > in error, please immediately delete it and all copies of it > from your system, destroy any hard copies of it, and notify > the sender. You must not, directly or indirectly, use, > disclose, distribute, print, or copy any part of this message > if you are not the intended recipient. Health First reserves > the right to monitor all e-mail communications through its > networks. Any views or opinions expressed in this message > are solely those of the individual sender, except (1) where > the message states such views or opinions are on behalf of > a particular entity; and (2) the sender is authorized by > the entity to give such views or opinions. > #
Re: Windows clients Resourceutilization
I believe the performance tuning guide explains the resourceutilization parameter better. In short, you have to set it to at least 5 to get 2 backup sessions. __ John Monahan Consultant Logicalis, Inc. 5500 Wayzata Blvd Suite 315 Golden Valley, MN 55416 Office: 763-417-0552 x109 Mobile: 952-221-6938 Fax: 763-417-0554 [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.us.logicalis.com David Longo <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent by: "ADSM: Dist Stor Manager" 09/19/2007 05:42 PM Please respond to "ADSM: Dist Stor Manager" To ADSM-L@VM.MARIST.EDU cc Subject Windows clients Resourceutilization I have used RESOURCEutilization on AIX clients for a long time and works fine. I have a Windows client I would like to use it on. TSM Server is 5.3.4.0 and Windows client is 5.2.2.5, W2K SP4. It is an IBM x345 (8670-61X), with 2x 2.8 Ghz Xeon CPU and 1 GB RAM. I set to Resourceutil 4 and it still just uses one backup session. There are multiple drives on this system and would like to use multiple sessions. I even looked at the manual for 5.4 clients and has no more info about this parameter. What is needed or what is the determining factor in actually using multiple backup sessions on Windows clients? (I use the basic Client scheduler - not Acceptor Daemon.) Thanks, David Longo # This message is for the named person's use only. It may contain confidential, proprietary, or legally privileged information. No confidentiality or privilege is waived or lost by any mistransmission. If you receive this message in error, please immediately delete it and all copies of it from your system, destroy any hard copies of it, and notify the sender. You must not, directly or indirectly, use, disclose, distribute, print, or copy any part of this message if you are not the intended recipient. Health First reserves the right to monitor all e-mail communications through its networks. Any views or opinions expressed in this message are solely those of the individual sender, except (1) where the message states such views or opinions are on behalf of a particular entity; and (2) the sender is authorized by the entity to give such views or opinions. #
Re: Windows clients Resourceutilization
Hello,
See the "Table 2. Resource Utilization Settings" of IBM Tivoli Storage
Manager Performance Tuning Guide SC32-0141-00.
I hope it will help you.
Best regards,
Igor Yakovenko
David Longo
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]
TH-FIRST.ORG> To
Sent by: "ADSM: ADSM-L@VM.MARIST.EDU
Dist Stor cc
Manager"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject
.EDU> [ADSM-L] Windows clients
Resourceutilization
20.09.2007 02:44
Please respond to
"ADSM: Dist Stor
Manager"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]
.EDU>
I have used RESOURCEutilization on AIX clients for a long
time and works fine. I have a Windows client I would like to use it on.
TSM Server is 5.3.4.0 and Windows client is 5.2.2.5, W2K SP4.
It is an IBM x345 (8670-61X), with 2x 2.8 Ghz Xeon CPU and
1 GB RAM.
I set to Resourceutil 4 and it still just uses one backup session.
There are multiple drives on this system and would like to use
multiple sessions. I even looked at the manual for 5.4 clients and
has no more info about this parameter.
What is needed or what is the determining factor in actually
using multiple backup sessions on Windows clients? (I use
the basic Client scheduler - not Acceptor Daemon.)
Thanks,
David Longo
#
This message is for the named person's use only. It may
contain confidential, proprietary, or legally privileged
information. No confidentiality or privilege is waived or
lost by any mistransmission. If you receive this message
in error, please immediately delete it and all copies of it
from your system, destroy any hard copies of it, and notify
the sender. You must not, directly or indirectly, use,
disclose, distribute, print, or copy any part of this message
if you are not the intended recipient. Health First reserves
the right to monitor all e-mail communications through its
networks. Any views or opinions expressed in this message
are solely those of the individual sender, except (1) where
the message states such views or opinions are on behalf of
a particular entity; and (2) the sender is authorized by
the entity to give such views or opinions.
#
Windows clients Resourceutilization
I have used RESOURCEutilization on AIX clients for a long time and works fine. I have a Windows client I would like to use it on. TSM Server is 5.3.4.0 and Windows client is 5.2.2.5, W2K SP4. It is an IBM x345 (8670-61X), with 2x 2.8 Ghz Xeon CPU and 1 GB RAM. I set to Resourceutil 4 and it still just uses one backup session. There are multiple drives on this system and would like to use multiple sessions. I even looked at the manual for 5.4 clients and has no more info about this parameter. What is needed or what is the determining factor in actually using multiple backup sessions on Windows clients? (I use the basic Client scheduler - not Acceptor Daemon.) Thanks, David Longo # This message is for the named person's use only. It may contain confidential, proprietary, or legally privileged information. No confidentiality or privilege is waived or lost by any mistransmission. If you receive this message in error, please immediately delete it and all copies of it from your system, destroy any hard copies of it, and notify the sender. You must not, directly or indirectly, use, disclose, distribute, print, or copy any part of this message if you are not the intended recipient. Health First reserves the right to monitor all e-mail communications through its networks. Any views or opinions expressed in this message are solely those of the individual sender, except (1) where the message states such views or opinions are on behalf of a particular entity; and (2) the sender is authorized by the entity to give such views or opinions. #
Re: Fw: RESOURCEUTILIZATION for EXCHANGE TDP?
You should use the same NODENAME. You don't want to launch these serially in a batch file since that will not accomplish your desired goal of running these backups at the same time. Try something like this: START /B TDPEXCC BACKUP SG1 FULL >> SG1-LOG.OUT START /B TDPEXCC BACKUP SG2 FULL >> SG2-LOG.OUT START /B TDPEXCC BACKUP SG3 FULL >> SG3-LOG.OUT START /B TDPEXCC BACKUP SG4 FULL >> SG4-LOG.OUT The "START" command will launch the command and immediately return. You can look at the other options of the START command to see if any of them are important to you. If you use START /B, don't rely on a return code of the START command to tell you whether the backup was successful or not. Ideally, you would launch these separate commands slightly staggered. There are various ways to place a delay into a batch file, pick your favorite. For example: PING localhost -n 30 -w 100 1>NUL 2>NUL The other way is to have 4 separate command files (one to back up each storage group) and you would have 4 separate schedules to launch them. Thanks, Del "ADSM: Dist Stor Manager" wrote on 04/19/2007 10:51:05 AM: > Del, > > Be patient with my ignorance. The EXCHANGE admin is off this > week, and I'm trying to work this out with a WinNT admin. > > Neither of us can find about running multiple instances in > the doc. Does that mean a separate node define for each SG? > Or do we just have to fix the basic command file which reads > something like > > backup SG1 > backup SG2 > backup SG3 > backup SG4 > > Setting MAXNUMMP=4 has no effect since Windows executes these > commands serially. Would a separate command file for each SG > work? Does it make a difference that this is a clustered > environment? > > > > Original message > >Date: Mon, 16 Apr 2007 11:32:29 -0400 > >From: Del Hoobler <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > >Subject: [ADSM-L] Fw: RESOURCEUTILIZATION for EXCHANGE TDP? > >To: ADSM-L@VM.MARIST.EDU > > > >Fred, > > > >You can back up multiple Exchange storage groups at the same > time. > >You will need to start a separate instance of Data Protection > >for Exchange for each storage group to back up. > >Also note, if you will be backing these up to tape, > >or they can migrate to tape, you should make sure > >that your node has the MAXNUMMP is set to the number > >of simultaneous storage groups you want to back up. > >You should also make sure to collocate by filespace. > > > >Thanks, > > > >Del > > > > > > > >"ADSM: Dist Stor Manager" wrote on > 04/13/2007 > >12:38:05 PM: > > > >> I thought the answer was something like that. But I'd like > >> to know if there's a way to have the different storage > groups > >> back up simultaneously instead of seriatim. > >>
Re: Fw: RESOURCEUTILIZATION for EXCHANGE TDP?
Del, Be patient with my ignorance. The EXCHANGE admin is off this week, and I'm trying to work this out with a WinNT admin. Neither of us can find about running multiple instances in the doc. Does that mean a separate node define for each SG? Or do we just have to fix the basic command file which reads something like backup SG1 backup SG2 backup SG3 backup SG4 Setting MAXNUMMP=4 has no effect since Windows executes these commands serially. Would a separate command file for each SG work? Does it make a difference that this is a clustered environment? Original message >Date: Mon, 16 Apr 2007 11:32:29 -0400 >From: Del Hoobler <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >Subject: [ADSM-L] Fw: RESOURCEUTILIZATION for EXCHANGE TDP? >To: ADSM-L@VM.MARIST.EDU > >Fred, > >You can back up multiple Exchange storage groups at the same time. >You will need to start a separate instance of Data Protection >for Exchange for each storage group to back up. >Also note, if you will be backing these up to tape, >or they can migrate to tape, you should make sure >that your node has the MAXNUMMP is set to the number >of simultaneous storage groups you want to back up. >You should also make sure to collocate by filespace. > >Thanks, > >Del > > > >"ADSM: Dist Stor Manager" wrote on 04/13/2007 >12:38:05 PM: > >> I thought the answer was something like that. But I'd like >> to know if there's a way to have the different storage groups >> back up simultaneously instead of seriatim. >> >> >> >> Original message >> >Date: Fri, 13 Apr 2007 12:09:27 -0400 >> >From: Richard Sims <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >> >Subject: Re: [ADSM-L] RESOURCEUTILIZATION for EXCHANGE TDP? >> >To: ADSM-L@VM.MARIST.EDU >> > >> >On Apr 13, 2007, at 12:02 PM, Fred Johanson wrote: >> > >> >> Is it possible to set RESOURCEUTILIZATION as an option for >> >> EXCHANGE? I can't find it in the online documentation. >> > >> >The TDPs are based upon the TSM API. RESOURceutilization is >> not >> >available in the API: the option is used to funnel data at >> the file >> >level, and the TSM API does not perform any file I/O. >> > >> >Richard Sims >> Fred Johanson Fred Johanson
Fw: RESOURCEUTILIZATION for EXCHANGE TDP?
Fred, You can back up multiple Exchange storage groups at the same time. You will need to start a separate instance of Data Protection for Exchange for each storage group to back up. Also note, if you will be backing these up to tape, or they can migrate to tape, you should make sure that your node has the MAXNUMMP is set to the number of simultaneous storage groups you want to back up. You should also make sure to collocate by filespace. Thanks, Del "ADSM: Dist Stor Manager" wrote on 04/13/2007 12:38:05 PM: > I thought the answer was something like that. But I'd like > to know if there's a way to have the different storage groups > back up simultaneously instead of seriatim. > > > > Original message > >Date: Fri, 13 Apr 2007 12:09:27 -0400 > >From: Richard Sims <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > >Subject: Re: [ADSM-L] RESOURCEUTILIZATION for EXCHANGE TDP? > >To: ADSM-L@VM.MARIST.EDU > > > >On Apr 13, 2007, at 12:02 PM, Fred Johanson wrote: > > > >> Is it possible to set RESOURCEUTILIZATION as an option for > >> EXCHANGE? I can't find it in the online documentation. > > > >The TDPs are based upon the TSM API. RESOURceutilization is > not > >available in the API: the option is used to funnel data at > the file > >level, and the TSM API does not perform any file I/O. > > > >Richard Sims > Fred Johanson
Re: RESOURCEUTILIZATION for EXCHANGE TDP?
I thought the answer was something like that. But I'd like to know if there's a way to have the different storage groups back up simultaneously instead of seriatim. Original message >Date: Fri, 13 Apr 2007 12:09:27 -0400 >From: Richard Sims <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >Subject: Re: [ADSM-L] RESOURCEUTILIZATION for EXCHANGE TDP? >To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > >On Apr 13, 2007, at 12:02 PM, Fred Johanson wrote: > >> Is it possible to set RESOURCEUTILIZATION as an option for >> EXCHANGE? I can't find it in the online documentation. > >The TDPs are based upon the TSM API. RESOURceutilization is not >available in the API: the option is used to funnel data at the file >level, and the TSM API does not perform any file I/O. > >Richard Sims Fred Johanson
Re: RESOURCEUTILIZATION for EXCHANGE TDP?
On Apr 13, 2007, at 12:02 PM, Fred Johanson wrote: Is it possible to set RESOURCEUTILIZATION as an option for EXCHANGE? I can't find it in the online documentation. The TDPs are based upon the TSM API. RESOURceutilization is not available in the API: the option is used to funnel data at the file level, and the TSM API does not perform any file I/O. Richard Sims
RESOURCEUTILIZATION for EXCHANGE TDP?
Is it possible to set RESOURCEUTILIZATION as an option for EXCHANGE? I can't find it in the online documentation. Fred Johanson
Re: ? Should we set Resourceutilization > 10 if appropriate ?
I have experimented with resourceutilization values above 10, but we do not use them in production. You are correct that IBM does not support them and the documentation says the highest value is 10. As far as I can tell, they don't hard code any limit. If the communication method is TCP, I have tested it at 60 and seen 50 some threads created. Although, as you say, the greater number of threads just had to wait longer and didn't produce any faster aggregate speed. If the communication method is shared mem, then the limit is 30 on Solaris. You can set resourceutilization as high as you want, but you won't start more than 30 threads. This is a consequence of the fact that dsmserv allocates a fixed memory buffer for client-server communication. This is only sufficient to sustain 30 client threads. Once clients are at/near the limit of 30, you will get a shared memory error if you try to start a client. The fixed memory buffer size used by dsmserv was coded many years ago when prevailing server memory sizes were much smaller than today. I submitted an enhancement request to increase this a few weeks ago. dsmc threads increase and decrease throughout the backup job. It starts one producer threads for each file system that it backs up. Each producer thread can start one or more consumer threads. The number of consumer threads seems to depend on how busy they are kept. As more files are found by producer thread that need to be backed up and all consumer threads are busy, then it will spin up more consumer threads. Conversely, once the demand for consumer threads subsides, it will eventually kill some of them. Resourceutilization parms above 10 offer potential benefits by starting more producer threads, assuming that the backup time is bound primarily by the time to examine all the files. This could also be achieved by starting separate dsmc backups for specified file system sets. Roy J. Martin mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] -Original Message- From: ADSM: Dist Stor Manager [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Roger Deschner Sent: Tuesday, June 06, 2006 10:56 AM To: ADSM-L@VM.MARIST.EDU Subject: Re: ? Should we set Resourceutilization > 10 if appropriate ? At one point I was tempted to do this, with a client who backs up 1tb/night. But it would not help, in fact things got slower as the numerous processes competed with each other and created worse disk I/O contention on BOTH the client and the server. Bandwidth utilization measured at the client NIC actually declined. You might have heard me whining about this problem on this list back in February of this year. What was effective, was attacking the backup performance problem at its source, by tuning the disk I/O subsystems on both the client and the server. At the server level, I had to work on both the disk storage pool which that client was backing up into, and the TSM database. There are no silver bullets here, but there might be bronze bullets - look at raising your TSM DB bufpoolsize, and also your OS' settings for disk buffers on the TSM disk storage pool volumes. More effective than that, however, was simply buying more disk drives for both the database and the storage pool, and spreading the I/O load out farther. The disk tuning worked. This client is now backing up in a reasonable time with RESOURCEUTILIZATION 10. But I watch it carefully. One of my key measures of TSM server performance is how long this huge client takes to back up. Roger Deschner University of Illinois at Chicago [EMAIL PROTECTED] On Mon, 5 Jun 2006, James R Owen wrote: >Andy, et al. >[Is anyone out there using RESOURCEUTILZATION n w/ n > 10 ??] > >Andy Raibeck's presentation @ Oxford's 2001 TSM Symposium > http://tsm-symposium.oucs.ox.ac.uk/2001/papers/ > Raibeck.APeekUnderTheHood.PDF >includes this table showing what will result from setting: > >RESOURCEUTILIZATION n Max.Sess. ProducerSess. Threshold(Seconds) >- -- > 2 1 30 > 1 1 0 45 > 2 2 1 45 > 3 3 1 45 > 4 3 1 30 > 5 4 2 30 > 6 4 2 20 > 7 5 2 20 > 8 6 3 20 > 9 7 3 20 > 10 8 4 10 > (undocumented: > 11<=n<=100) n 0.5n10 > >and also includes these warnings: >Undocumented, internal values subject to change without notice. >RESOURCEUTILIZATION > 10
Re: ? Should we set Resourceutilization > 10 if appropriate ?
At one point I was tempted to do this, with a client who backs up 1tb/night. But it would not help, in fact things got slower as the numerous processes competed with each other and created worse disk I/O contention on BOTH the client and the server. Bandwidth utilization measured at the client NIC actually declined. You might have heard me whining about this problem on this list back in February of this year. What was effective, was attacking the backup performance problem at its source, by tuning the disk I/O subsystems on both the client and the server. At the server level, I had to work on both the disk storage pool which that client was backing up into, and the TSM database. There are no silver bullets here, but there might be bronze bullets - look at raising your TSM DB bufpoolsize, and also your OS' settings for disk buffers on the TSM disk storage pool volumes. More effective than that, however, was simply buying more disk drives for both the database and the storage pool, and spreading the I/O load out farther. The disk tuning worked. This client is now backing up in a reasonable time with RESOURCEUTILIZATION 10. But I watch it carefully. One of my key measures of TSM server performance is how long this huge client takes to back up. Roger Deschner University of Illinois at Chicago [EMAIL PROTECTED] On Mon, 5 Jun 2006, James R Owen wrote: >Andy, et al. >[Is anyone out there using RESOURCEUTILZATION n w/ n > 10 ??] > >Andy Raibeck's presentation @ Oxford's 2001 TSM Symposium > http://tsm-symposium.oucs.ox.ac.uk/2001/papers/ > Raibeck.APeekUnderTheHood.PDF >includes this table showing what will result from setting: > >RESOURCEUTILIZATION n Max.Sess. ProducerSess. Threshold(Seconds) >- -- > 2 1 30 > 1 1 0 45 > 2 2 1 45 > 3 3 1 45 > 4 3 1 30 > 5 4 2 30 > 6 4 2 20 > 7 5 2 20 > 8 6 3 20 > 9 7 3 20 > 10 8 4 10 > (undocumented: > 11<=n<=100) n 0.5n10 > >and also includes these warnings: >Undocumented, internal values subject to change without notice. >RESOURCEUTILIZATION > 10 is unsupported. > >Management discourages use of undocumented/unsupported settings, >but I'm arguing that we need to specify RESOURCEUTILIZATION 30 >in order to effect efficient backups for our email servers: > 4 IMAP servers, each w/4 CPUs, running linux client 5.2.3, > each backs up 15 FS sending ~200GB/night (compressed) > via 100Mb -> Gb ethernet > to our TSM 5.2.3 service's disk stgpool > >With RESOURCEUTILIZATION 10 specified, we never see more than 8 >simultaneous FS backups, and some of 8 large IMAP filesystems are >always the last backups to start, serially after other smaller FS >backups complete! Testing w/ RESOURCEUTILIZATION 30 causes one >client to start up 31 sessions enabling all 15 FS backups to start >essentially simultaneously. I expect the smaller FS backups will >complete first w/ the 8 larger IMAP FS backups completing later, but >w/ all FS backups for each client finishing faster because none will >wait to start serially after other FS backups because insufficient >backup sessions were started. > >Asking only for your own advice, recognizing IBM probably does not >allow you recommend using unsupported/undocumented optional settings: > >Is my understanding of the unsupported/undocumented setting (w/ N>10) >correct? Are we risking some unanticipated problems trying to use >RESOURCEUTILIZAION 30 to backup all four of these email servers >simultaneously? [I believe we have sufficient network bandwidth, >disk I/O capacity and CPU's for TSM clients and service.] > >Is there some important reason that IBM did not choose to document >and support N>10 for RESOURCEUTILIZATION? [The higher settings would >seem to be useful and appropriate for some high-bandwidth circumstances, >or did I miss something?] > >Is there a simple way to specify the order in which FS are selected for >backup when multi-threading is active? > >Thanks [hoping] for your advice! >-- >[EMAIL PROTECTED] (203.432.6693) >
Re: ? Should we set Resourceutilization > 10 if appropriate ?
I do not have the definitive answer on this, but I suspect the documented limit was put in place because larger values offer diminishing returns. That is, adding more sessions might increase session count, but show no significant increase in backup performance (or maybe even hurt overall backup performance). Besides performance, I am not aware of any negative impact to using a higher value, but neither can I endorse using a higher value. If you have a need for a higher limit on this setting, you should open a requirement. If indeed you can run with a higher value (of 30, as you say) such that the overall backup time is substantially shorter than using the max value of 10, then perhaps there is rationale for raising the supported value. Other alternatives: - Use multiple nodes and schedulers to back up the file systems concurrently. - See if specifying the file systems in the desired order in the DOMAIN statement makes any difference. Regards, Andy Andy Raibeck IBM Software Group Tivoli Storage Manager Client Development Internal Notes e-mail: Andrew Raibeck/Tucson/[EMAIL PROTECTED] Internet e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] IBM Tivoli Storage Manager support web page: http://www-306.ibm.com/software/sysmgmt/products/support/IBMTivoliStorageManager.html The only dumb question is the one that goes unasked. The command line is your friend. "Good enough" is the enemy of excellence. "ADSM: Dist Stor Manager" wrote on 06/05/2006 02:45:00 PM: > Andy, et al. > [Is anyone out there using RESOURCEUTILZATION n w/ n > 10 ??] > > Andy Raibeck's presentation @ Oxford's 2001 TSM Symposium >http://tsm-symposium.oucs.ox.ac.uk/2001/papers/ >Raibeck.APeekUnderTheHood.PDF > includes this table showing what will result from setting: > > RESOURCEUTILIZATION n Max.Sess. ProducerSess. Threshold(Seconds) > - -- > 2 1 30 >1 1 0 45 >2 2 1 45 >3 3 1 45 >4 3 1 30 >5 4 2 30 >6 4 2 20 >7 5 2 20 >8 6 3 20 >9 7 3 20 >10 8 4 10 > (undocumented: >11<=n<=100) n 0.5n 10 > > and also includes these warnings: > Undocumented, internal values subject to change without notice. > RESOURCEUTILIZATION > 10 is unsupported. > > Management discourages use of undocumented/unsupported settings, > but I'm arguing that we need to specify RESOURCEUTILIZATION 30 > in order to effect efficient backups for our email servers: >4 IMAP servers, each w/4 CPUs, running linux client 5.2.3, >each backs up 15 FS sending ~200GB/night (compressed) >via 100Mb -> Gb ethernet >to our TSM 5.2.3 service's disk stgpool > > With RESOURCEUTILIZATION 10 specified, we never see more than 8 > simultaneous FS backups, and some of 8 large IMAP filesystems are > always the last backups to start, serially after other smaller FS > backups complete! Testing w/ RESOURCEUTILIZATION 30 causes one > client to start up 31 sessions enabling all 15 FS backups to start > essentially simultaneously. I expect the smaller FS backups will > complete first w/ the 8 larger IMAP FS backups completing later, but > w/ all FS backups for each client finishing faster because none will > wait to start serially after other FS backups because insufficient > backup sessions were started. > > Asking only for your own advice, recognizing IBM probably does not > allow you recommend using unsupported/undocumented optional settings: > > Is my understanding of the unsupported/undocumented setting (w/ N>10) > correct? Are we risking some unanticipated problems trying to use > RESOURCEUTILIZAION 30 to backup all four of these email servers > simultaneously? [I believe we have sufficient network bandwidth, > disk I/O capacity and CPU's for TSM clients and service.] > > Is there some important reason that IBM did not choose to document > and support N>10 for RESOURCEUTILIZATION? [The higher settings would > seem to be useful and appropriate for some high-bandwidth circumstances, > or did I miss something?] > > Is there a simple way to specify the order in which FS are selected for > backup when multi-threading is active? > > Thanks [hoping] for your advice! > -- > [EMAIL PROTECTED] (203.432.6693)
Re: ? Should we set Resourceutilization > 10 if appropriate ?
James R Owen wrote: > Management discourages use of undocumented/unsupported settings, > but I'm arguing that we need to specify RESOURCEUTILIZATION 30 > in order to effect efficient backups for our email servers: > 4 IMAP servers, each w/4 CPUs, running linux client 5.2.3, > each backs up 15 FS sending ~200GB/night (compressed) > via 100Mb -> Gb ethernet > to our TSM 5.2.3 service's disk stgpool > I guess your problem is that finding a small amount of changed files in these large filesystems. I solved this by: 1- generating a list of virtualmountpoints, basically, TSM is still faster in doing an incremental of 100 filesystems of 100,000 files each than (even mutithreaded) 1 filesystem of 10,000,000 files. 2- doing an 'incremental bydate' during weekdays and only normal incrementals during the weekend. also, you might want to look into the type of filesystem you are using. In these cases reiserfs could perform better than any other filesystem. Basically, My guess is that increasing your resourceutil is not that usefull. in these cases the disks just don't keep up, whatever you do. If you do want to control the order things are done in, my bet would be on the domain statement, of course, you need to update that in case you add a filesystem (I've heard of scripts that do this). -- Met vriendelijke groeten, Remco Post SARA - Reken- en Netwerkdiensten http://www.sara.nl High Performance Computing Tel. +31 20 592 3000Fax. +31 20 668 3167 PGP Key fingerprint = 6367 DFE9 5CBC 0737 7D16 B3F6 048A 02BF DC93 94EC "I really didn't foresee the Internet. But then, neither did the computer industry. Not that that tells us very much of course - the computer industry didn't even foresee that the century was going to end." -- Douglas Adams
? Should we set Resourceutilization > 10 if appropriate ?
Andy, et al. [Is anyone out there using RESOURCEUTILZATION n w/ n > 10 ??] Andy Raibeck's presentation @ Oxford's 2001 TSM Symposium http://tsm-symposium.oucs.ox.ac.uk/2001/papers/ Raibeck.APeekUnderTheHood.PDF includes this table showing what will result from setting: RESOURCEUTILIZATION n Max.Sess. ProducerSess. Threshold(Seconds) - -- 2 1 30 1 1 0 45 2 2 1 45 3 3 1 45 4 3 1 30 5 4 2 30 6 4 2 20 7 5 2 20 8 6 3 20 9 7 3 20 10 8 4 10 (undocumented: 11<=n<=100) n 0.5n10 and also includes these warnings: Undocumented, internal values subject to change without notice. RESOURCEUTILIZATION > 10 is unsupported. Management discourages use of undocumented/unsupported settings, but I'm arguing that we need to specify RESOURCEUTILIZATION 30 in order to effect efficient backups for our email servers: 4 IMAP servers, each w/4 CPUs, running linux client 5.2.3, each backs up 15 FS sending ~200GB/night (compressed) via 100Mb -> Gb ethernet to our TSM 5.2.3 service's disk stgpool With RESOURCEUTILIZATION 10 specified, we never see more than 8 simultaneous FS backups, and some of 8 large IMAP filesystems are always the last backups to start, serially after other smaller FS backups complete! Testing w/ RESOURCEUTILIZATION 30 causes one client to start up 31 sessions enabling all 15 FS backups to start essentially simultaneously. I expect the smaller FS backups will complete first w/ the 8 larger IMAP FS backups completing later, but w/ all FS backups for each client finishing faster because none will wait to start serially after other FS backups because insufficient backup sessions were started. Asking only for your own advice, recognizing IBM probably does not allow you recommend using unsupported/undocumented optional settings: Is my understanding of the unsupported/undocumented setting (w/ N>10) correct? Are we risking some unanticipated problems trying to use RESOURCEUTILIZAION 30 to backup all four of these email servers simultaneously? [I believe we have sufficient network bandwidth, disk I/O capacity and CPU's for TSM clients and service.] Is there some important reason that IBM did not choose to document and support N>10 for RESOURCEUTILIZATION? [The higher settings would seem to be useful and appropriate for some high-bandwidth circumstances, or did I miss something?] Is there a simple way to specify the order in which FS are selected for backup when multi-threading is active? Thanks [hoping] for your advice! -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] (203.432.6693)
Re: Resourceutilization option and TDP for Domino
Take also a look at Technote Ref# 1114638 http://www.ibm.com/software/sysmgmt/products/support//IBMTivoliStorageManagerforMail.html Eduardo TSM User <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent by: "ADSM: Dist Stor Manager" 12/09/2005 04:35 PM Please respond to "ADSM: Dist Stor Manager" To ADSM-L@VM.MARIST.EDU cc Subject Resourceutilization option and TDP for Domino Hi to all The Resourceutilization option can be used in the TDP for Domino I can generate multiple sessions ? Thank you
Re: Resourceutilization option and TDP for Domino
On Dec 9, 2005, at 3:35 PM, TSM User wrote: Hi to all The Resourceutilization option can be used in the TDP for Domino I can generate multiple sessions ? Thank you See: http://www.mail-archive.com/adsm-l@vm.marist.edu/msg56829.html TDPs are based upon the TSM API, where RESOURceutilization is not applicable, as the option is used to funnel data at the file level, and the TSM API does not perform any file I/O. That is not to say that parallelism in general cannot be achieved by creative use of existing facilities. Richard Sims
Resourceutilization option and TDP for Domino
Hi to all The Resourceutilization option can be used in the TDP for Domino I can generate multiple sessions ? Thank you
Re: Resourceutilization
Hi Maurice, > Only the second link contains wrong data.. > The level of resourceutil is not the number of sessions. Yes it is... for *restore* operations. There is an earlier page in that link that contains correct values for backup. Have another look! :-) Best regards, Andy Andy Raibeck IBM Software Group Tivoli Storage Manager Client Development Internal Notes e-mail: Andrew Raibeck/Tucson/[EMAIL PROTECTED] Internet e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] IBM Tivoli Storage Manager support web page: http://www-306.ibm.com/software/sysmgmt/products/support/IBMTivoliStorageManager.html The only dumb question is the one that goes unasked. The command line is your friend. "Good enough" is the enemy of excellence. "ADSM: Dist Stor Manager" wrote on 2005-10-06 06:52:02: > Only the second link contains wrong data.. > The level of resourceutil is not the number of sessions. > > Regards, > Maurice > > - Original Message - > From: "Richard Sims" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: > Sent: Thursday, October 06, 2005 3:24 PM > Subject: Re: [ADSM-L] Resourceutilization > > > > On Oct 6, 2005, at 9:10 AM, David E Ehresman wrote: > > > > > At Share a few years ago, I received a chart showing the number of > > > data mover threads that would be started at each > > > resourceutilization level. I can't find the chart anymore. Anyone > > > know where I can find that information? > > > > > > David > > > > > > > Google finds: > > http://tsm-symposium.oucs.ox.ac.uk/2001/papers/ > > Raibeck.APeekUnderTheHood.PDF > > and > > http://shareweb.share.org/proceedings/sh98/data/S5734.PDF > > > > Richard Sims > >
Re: Resourceutilization
Only the second link contains wrong data.. The level of resourceutil is not the number of sessions. Regards, Maurice - Original Message - From: "Richard Sims" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: Sent: Thursday, October 06, 2005 3:24 PM Subject: Re: [ADSM-L] Resourceutilization > On Oct 6, 2005, at 9:10 AM, David E Ehresman wrote: > > > At Share a few years ago, I received a chart showing the number of > > data mover threads that would be started at each > > resourceutilization level. I can't find the chart anymore. Anyone > > know where I can find that information? > > > > David > > > > Google finds: > http://tsm-symposium.oucs.ox.ac.uk/2001/papers/ > Raibeck.APeekUnderTheHood.PDF > and > http://shareweb.share.org/proceedings/sh98/data/S5734.PDF > > Richard Sims >
Re: Resourceutilization
On Oct 6, 2005, at 9:10 AM, David E Ehresman wrote: At Share a few years ago, I received a chart showing the number of data mover threads that would be started at each resourceutilization level. I can't find the chart anymore. Anyone know where I can find that information? David Google finds: http://tsm-symposium.oucs.ox.ac.uk/2001/papers/ Raibeck.APeekUnderTheHood.PDF and http://shareweb.share.org/proceedings/sh98/data/S5734.PDF Richard Sims
Resourceutilization
At Share a few years ago, I received a chart showing the number of data mover threads that would be started at each resourceutilization level. I can't find the chart anymore. Anyone know where I can find that information? David
Re: Resourceutilization & Backup Question
Thanks for the input, Ben.
All of our database data goes to tape. My main concern, with
resourceutilization and collocation, is that we're not shooting ourselves
in the foot by using both.
I've decide to shut the database down before doing the back up, when we
start the back up early. Hopefully, this will help ease the pain.
Debbie
Ben Bullock <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent by: "ADSM: Dist Stor Manager"
08/17/2005 12:04 PM
Please respond to "ADSM: Dist Stor Manager"
To: ADSM-L@VM.MARIST.EDU
cc:
Subject:Re: [ADSM-L] Resourceutilization & Backup Question
Debbie,
We find that problem with the resourceutilization/collocation
from time to time. Most nights, all the threads from one host are going
to the diskpool, so they all run at the same time with no problems. The
times we end up in the situation you describe is:
- When the diskpool in front of the collocated tapepool fills up
and starts to migrate. Then we have the migration get the one tape and
the others line up for it because the diskpool is full. A large number
of unusual changes across multiple hosts going to a collocated diskpool
is usually what has happened. Making the diskpool larger could fix the
issue if it happens all the time.
- When the "maxsize" is set on the diskpool in front of the
collocated tapepool is set, and you have a bunch of files that are
larger than the threshold. Then we see all the sessions queue up for the
same tape. One way to get around it is to lower the maxsize attribute,
but then your diskpool may fill (see situation one).
You might be able to alleviate the issue by changing the
tapepool to "collocation=filesystem" but then the number of partially
filled tapes may skyrocket.
___
As for the backups taking longer than usual when it runs at
different times of the day, I've seen cases where if an expire inventory
is deleting a bunch of files (many DB updates), the movement of data on
the server will slow down, usually when the backup/migrations running
have many little files to move around (also many db updates). Basically
a bottleneck for I/O to the TSM database.
In your case, however, I'm guessing that these Oracle backup
files are big, so they shouldn't be impacted by heavy TSM DB activity,
as it only needs to make DB inserts once in a while.
Depending on if your oracle data is heading to disk or directly
to tape, there are couple other possibilities.
- If it was going directly to tape and all the tapes were busy
at the time (doing migrations, reclamations, db backups, etc.) then your
session may have waited for a tape mount for a while. I've found the
best way to hunt those down is in one of the fields in the accounting
log on the TSM server that tracks seconds that sessions are in
mediawait. I believe it is field 24.
- If the data was headed to disk and the diskpool was migrating
data to tape, then there might have been some I/O contention on the
disks as many reads and writes could be happening on the same diskpool
volumes.
Those are my meandering thoughts on what may be happening.
Ben
-Original Message-
From: ADSM: Dist Stor Manager [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of
Debbie Bassler
Sent: Wednesday, August 17, 2005 8:32 AM
To: ADSM-L@VM.MARIST.EDU
Subject: Resourceutilization & Backup Question
Is there any benefit to having the resourceutilization parameter set to
5 when the backup is collocated? The other sessions go into media wait
status, waiting on a tape that one of the other sessions is using. Does
this cause contention, slowing the server down?
Also, I have another question. I'm not sure anyone else uses this
technique, but, I'll throw it out there any way. We do hot backups on
our oracle databases via a command script using TSM. We create filelists
for our files. A hot backup means the database can be updated while the
backup is running. We usually run our backup at 9:00 PM, it backs up
200G of data, and takes approx 5 hours to complete. However, due to some
maintenance we wanted to do yesterday, we started the backup at 4:30
PM. It had only backed up 130G of data in 5 hours. In an effort to start
the maintenance, I cancelled the backup. However, it was decided a good
backup was needed, so, we put the maintenance off until tonight. I
started the backup, again, last night at 22:35 and it took 5 hr and 25
minutes to complete the 201G backup.
I can't understand why the big time difference. There was no more
activity in TSM during the slow backup than there is when the backup
normally executes.
We have an internal Gig switch in our SP environment. Our server level
is
5.1.1 and the client level is 5.1.1.5.
We're going to bring the database down, at 4:30 this afternoon, and
perform the backup again. I need to ensure it will execute in the
allotted 5 hour time frame. We don't want to have people waiting 5 hours
in hopes of performing maintenace,
Re: Resourceutilization & Backup Question
Debbie, We find that problem with the resourceutilization/collocation from time to time. Most nights, all the threads from one host are going to the diskpool, so they all run at the same time with no problems. The times we end up in the situation you describe is: - When the diskpool in front of the collocated tapepool fills up and starts to migrate. Then we have the migration get the one tape and the others line up for it because the diskpool is full. A large number of unusual changes across multiple hosts going to a collocated diskpool is usually what has happened. Making the diskpool larger could fix the issue if it happens all the time. - When the "maxsize" is set on the diskpool in front of the collocated tapepool is set, and you have a bunch of files that are larger than the threshold. Then we see all the sessions queue up for the same tape. One way to get around it is to lower the maxsize attribute, but then your diskpool may fill (see situation one). You might be able to alleviate the issue by changing the tapepool to "collocation=filesystem" but then the number of partially filled tapes may skyrocket. ___ As for the backups taking longer than usual when it runs at different times of the day, I've seen cases where if an expire inventory is deleting a bunch of files (many DB updates), the movement of data on the server will slow down, usually when the backup/migrations running have many little files to move around (also many db updates). Basically a bottleneck for I/O to the TSM database. In your case, however, I'm guessing that these Oracle backup files are big, so they shouldn't be impacted by heavy TSM DB activity, as it only needs to make DB inserts once in a while. Depending on if your oracle data is heading to disk or directly to tape, there are couple other possibilities. - If it was going directly to tape and all the tapes were busy at the time (doing migrations, reclamations, db backups, etc.) then your session may have waited for a tape mount for a while. I've found the best way to hunt those down is in one of the fields in the accounting log on the TSM server that tracks seconds that sessions are in mediawait. I believe it is field 24. - If the data was headed to disk and the diskpool was migrating data to tape, then there might have been some I/O contention on the disks as many reads and writes could be happening on the same diskpool volumes. Those are my meandering thoughts on what may be happening. Ben -Original Message- From: ADSM: Dist Stor Manager [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Debbie Bassler Sent: Wednesday, August 17, 2005 8:32 AM To: ADSM-L@VM.MARIST.EDU Subject: Resourceutilization & Backup Question Is there any benefit to having the resourceutilization parameter set to 5 when the backup is collocated? The other sessions go into media wait status, waiting on a tape that one of the other sessions is using. Does this cause contention, slowing the server down? Also, I have another question. I'm not sure anyone else uses this technique, but, I'll throw it out there any way. We do hot backups on our oracle databases via a command script using TSM. We create filelists for our files. A hot backup means the database can be updated while the backup is running. We usually run our backup at 9:00 PM, it backs up 200G of data, and takes approx 5 hours to complete. However, due to some maintenance we wanted to do yesterday, we started the backup at 4:30 PM. It had only backed up 130G of data in 5 hours. In an effort to start the maintenance, I cancelled the backup. However, it was decided a good backup was needed, so, we put the maintenance off until tonight. I started the backup, again, last night at 22:35 and it took 5 hr and 25 minutes to complete the 201G backup. I can't understand why the big time difference. There was no more activity in TSM during the slow backup than there is when the backup normally executes. We have an internal Gig switch in our SP environment. Our server level is 5.1.1 and the client level is 5.1.1.5. We're going to bring the database down, at 4:30 this afternoon, and perform the backup again. I need to ensure it will execute in the allotted 5 hour time frame. We don't want to have people waiting 5 hours in hopes of performing maintenace, just to send them home again. Any ideas or suggestions will be greatly appreciated. Thanks for any help, Debbie
Re: SUSPECT: (MSW) Resourceutilization & Backup Question
The max mount points is 10, that's the number of tape drives we have... This is the first time we've done a hot backup during the afternoon. Hopefully, taking the database down this afternoon will give us better preformance. Thanks for your help, Debbie PAC Brion Arnaud <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent by: "ADSM: Dist Stor Manager" 08/17/2005 11:14 AM Please respond to "ADSM: Dist Stor Manager" To: ADSM-L@VM.MARIST.EDU cc: Subject:Re: [ADSM-L] SUSPECT: (MSW) Resourceutilization & Backup Question Debbie, What is the maxnummp value for this node ? You should not get such a problem if your client has enough mount points ... Concerning the variable duration for your oracle DB backup, I believe it's simply due to the activity on this DB : few people using it at night = most of the cpu available for backup, and few internal activity for Oracle. Inversely, during the day, you'll get less cpu for backup, and Oracle will be very busy commiting his transactions. Just my humble opinion (and some experience in such an environment)... Cheers. Arnaud ** Panalpina Management Ltd., Basle, Switzerland, CIT Department Viadukstrasse 42, P.O. Box 4002 Basel/CH Phone: +41 (61) 226 11 11, FAX: +41 (61) 226 17 01 Direct: +41 (61) 226 19 78 e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ** -Original Message- From: ADSM: Dist Stor Manager [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Debbie Bassler Sent: Wednesday, 17 August, 2005 16:32 To: ADSM-L@VM.MARIST.EDU Subject: SUSPECT: (MSW) Resourceutilization & Backup Question Is there any benefit to having the resourceutilization parameter set to 5 when the backup is collocated? The other sessions go into media wait status, waiting on a tape that one of the other sessions is using. Does this cause contention, slowing the server down? Also, I have another question. I'm not sure anyone else uses this technique, but, I'll throw it out there any way. We do hot backups on our oracle databases via a command script using TSM. We create filelists for our files. A hot backup means the database can be updated while the backup is running. We usually run our backup at 9:00 PM, it backs up 200G of data, and takes approx 5 hours to complete. However, due to some maintenance we wanted to do yesterday, we started the backup at 4:30 PM. It had only backed up 130G of data in 5 hours. In an effort to start the maintenance, I cancelled the backup. However, it was decided a good backup was needed, so, we put the maintenance off until tonight. I started the backup, again, last night at 22:35 and it took 5 hr and 25 minutes to complete the 201G backup. I can't understand why the big time difference. There was no more activity in TSM during the slow backup than there is when the backup normally executes. We have an internal Gig switch in our SP environment. Our server level is 5.1.1 and the client level is 5.1.1.5. We're going to bring the database down, at 4:30 this afternoon, and perform the backup again. I need to ensure it will execute in the allotted 5 hour time frame. We don't want to have people waiting 5 hours in hopes of performing maintenace, just to send them home again. Any ideas or suggestions will be greatly appreciated. Thanks for any help, Debbie
Re: SUSPECT: (MSW) Resourceutilization & Backup Question
Debbie, What is the maxnummp value for this node ? You should not get such a problem if your client has enough mount points ... Concerning the variable duration for your oracle DB backup, I believe it's simply due to the activity on this DB : few people using it at night = most of the cpu available for backup, and few internal activity for Oracle. Inversely, during the day, you'll get less cpu for backup, and Oracle will be very busy commiting his transactions. Just my humble opinion (and some experience in such an environment)... Cheers. Arnaud ** Panalpina Management Ltd., Basle, Switzerland, CIT Department Viadukstrasse 42, P.O. Box 4002 Basel/CH Phone: +41 (61) 226 11 11, FAX: +41 (61) 226 17 01 Direct: +41 (61) 226 19 78 e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ** -Original Message- From: ADSM: Dist Stor Manager [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Debbie Bassler Sent: Wednesday, 17 August, 2005 16:32 To: ADSM-L@VM.MARIST.EDU Subject: SUSPECT: (MSW) Resourceutilization & Backup Question Is there any benefit to having the resourceutilization parameter set to 5 when the backup is collocated? The other sessions go into media wait status, waiting on a tape that one of the other sessions is using. Does this cause contention, slowing the server down? Also, I have another question. I'm not sure anyone else uses this technique, but, I'll throw it out there any way. We do hot backups on our oracle databases via a command script using TSM. We create filelists for our files. A hot backup means the database can be updated while the backup is running. We usually run our backup at 9:00 PM, it backs up 200G of data, and takes approx 5 hours to complete. However, due to some maintenance we wanted to do yesterday, we started the backup at 4:30 PM. It had only backed up 130G of data in 5 hours. In an effort to start the maintenance, I cancelled the backup. However, it was decided a good backup was needed, so, we put the maintenance off until tonight. I started the backup, again, last night at 22:35 and it took 5 hr and 25 minutes to complete the 201G backup. I can't understand why the big time difference. There was no more activity in TSM during the slow backup than there is when the backup normally executes. We have an internal Gig switch in our SP environment. Our server level is 5.1.1 and the client level is 5.1.1.5. We're going to bring the database down, at 4:30 this afternoon, and perform the backup again. I need to ensure it will execute in the allotted 5 hour time frame. We don't want to have people waiting 5 hours in hopes of performing maintenace, just to send them home again. Any ideas or suggestions will be greatly appreciated. Thanks for any help, Debbie
Resourceutilization & Backup Question
Is there any benefit to having the resourceutilization parameter set to 5 when the backup is collocated? The other sessions go into media wait status, waiting on a tape that one of the other sessions is using. Does this cause contention, slowing the server down? Also, I have another question. I'm not sure anyone else uses this technique, but, I'll throw it out there any way. We do hot backups on our oracle databases via a command script using TSM. We create filelists for our files. A hot backup means the database can be updated while the backup is running. We usually run our backup at 9:00 PM, it backs up 200G of data, and takes approx 5 hours to complete. However, due to some maintenance we wanted to do yesterday, we started the backup at 4:30 PM. It had only backed up 130G of data in 5 hours. In an effort to start the maintenance, I cancelled the backup. However, it was decided a good backup was needed, so, we put the maintenance off until tonight. I started the backup, again, last night at 22:35 and it took 5 hr and 25 minutes to complete the 201G backup. I can't understand why the big time difference. There was no more activity in TSM during the slow backup than there is when the backup normally executes. We have an internal Gig switch in our SP environment. Our server level is 5.1.1 and the client level is 5.1.1.5. We're going to bring the database down, at 4:30 this afternoon, and perform the backup again. I need to ensure it will execute in the allotted 5 hour time frame. We don't want to have people waiting 5 hours in hopes of performing maintenace, just to send them home again. Any ideas or suggestions will be greatly appreciated. Thanks for any help, Debbie
Re: resourceutilization
Hi Joni, I had no knowledge of the restore requirement, so my suggestion was merely to limit the number of option settings to one (RESOURCEUTILIZATION), rather than two (MAXNUMMP and RESOURCEUTILIZATION). But you are correct, setting the RESOURCEUTILIZATION 1 would limit you to one restore session. Regards, Andy Andy Raibeck IBM Software Group Tivoli Storage Manager Client Development Internal Notes e-mail: Andrew Raibeck/Tucson/[EMAIL PROTECTED] Internet e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] The only dumb question is the one that goes unasked. The command line is your friend. "Good enough" is the enemy of excellence. "ADSM: Dist Stor Manager" wrote on 2005-01-24 11:44:51: > Hi again! > > Won't that then reduce the restore to 1 session as well? I guess I will > have to have them decide what is more important for their server. Thank > you again for your help and suggestions! > > > Joni Moyer > Highmark > Storage Systems > Work:(717)302-6603 > Fax:(717)302-5974 > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > > > "Andrew Raibeck" > <[EMAIL PROTECTED] > OM> To > Sent by: "ADSM: ADSM-L@VM.MARIST.EDU > Dist Stor cc > Manager" > <[EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject > .EDU> Re: resourceutilization > > > 01/24/2005 01:39 > PM > > > Please respond to > "ADSM: Dist Stor > Manager" > <[EMAIL PROTECTED] >.EDU> > > > > > > > Joni, try RESOURCEUTILIZATION 1. > > Regards, > > Andy > > Andy Raibeck > IBM Software Group > Tivoli Storage Manager Client Development > Internal Notes e-mail: Andrew Raibeck/Tucson/[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Internet e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > The only dumb question is the one that goes unasked. > The command line is your friend. > "Good enough" is the enemy of excellence. > > "ADSM: Dist Stor Manager" wrote on 2005-01-24 > 11:27:05: > > > Hi Andy! > > > > I guess I already knew the answer, but was wondering if there is a way > to > > force an archive of multiple files to transfer through 1 session. We > had > > been looking at lan-free and we were seeing multiple (2) tape mounts > > starting for single archive jobs. I guess I could specify maxnummp 1 > and > > then do a resourceutilization 2, but then that limits the clients > ability > > to send their data through more sessions and complete their archive more > > efficiently. To me I would want the data transferred more quickly, but > in > > this case the request has been to keep it to 1 transfer session. In a > > nutshell, I don't know why they want to do it, but since they requested > it > > I thought I would ask... Thanks again! > > > > > > Joni Moyer > > Highmark > > Storage Systems > > Work:(717)302-6603 > > Fax:(717)302-5974 > > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > > > > > > > > "Andrew Raibeck" > > <[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > OM> To > > Sent by: "ADSM: ADSM-L@VM.MARIST.EDU > > Dist Stor cc > > Manager" > > <[EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject > > .EDU> Re: resourceutilization > > > > > > 01/24/2005 01:19 > > PM > > > > > > Please respond to > > "ADSM: Dist Stor > > Manager" > > <[EMAIL PROTECTED] > >.EDU> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I don't understand the question. What specifically is meant by "one > > session per file"? And why is the user concerned with the number of > > sessions? You can set RESOURCEUTILIZATION to 1, maybe that is what your > > user is looking for. > > > > Regards, > > > > Andy > > > > Andy Raibeck > > IBM Software Group > > Tivoli Storage Manager Client Development > > Internal Notes e-mail: Andrew Raibeck/Tucson/[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > Internet e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > > The only dumb question is the one that goes unasked. > > The command line is your friend. > > "Good enough" is the enemy of excellence. > >
Re: resourceutilization
OK.. I will look at the manuals again, and see what I have downloaded.. Must have mislabeled one, or something. Thanks -Original Message- From: ADSM: Dist Stor Manager [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Andrew Raibeck Sent: Monday, January 24, 2005 1:03 PM To: ADSM-L@VM.MARIST.EDU Subject: Re: [ADSM-L] resourceutilization I can see how that might be misleading, but the Windows client manual information is in the context of the Windows OS, and not necessarily that of other operating systems (Unix, NetWare, etc.). If you look in the corresponding manual for the other OSes, you'll see that RESOURCEUTILIZATION appears there, too. I don't know which PDF files you are looking at, but I verified that it goes back at least as far as the version 4.2 books (oldest manual version I have readily available) for Mac, Unix, and NetWare. RESOURCEUTILIZATION is not available in the API because that option is used to funnel data at the file level, and the TSM API does not perform any file I/O. It would be up to the vendor of an API application to implement their own RESOURCEUTILIZATION-like functionality in their application. Regards, Andy Andy Raibeck IBM Software Group Tivoli Storage Manager Client Development Internal Notes e-mail: Andrew Raibeck/Tucson/[EMAIL PROTECTED] Internet e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] The only dumb question is the one that goes unasked. The command line is your friend. "Good enough" is the enemy of excellence. "ADSM: Dist Stor Manager" wrote on 2005-01-24 11:46:56: > Found in the Windows version of "Backup Archive Clients Installation > and User's Guide.pdf", v5.2, page 329, RESOURceutilizaion value... > > Supported Clients > This option is valid for all Windows clients. The server can also > define this option. The Tivoli Storage Manager client API does not > support this option. > > I read that as it is only valid in Windows clients, especially since > the base API doesn't support the value... Do I interpret this incorrectly? > I also find no mention of the option in any of the AIX client pdfs > that I have around. > > -Original Message- > From: ADSM: Dist Stor Manager [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf > Of Andrew Raibeck > Sent: Monday, January 24, 2005 12:31 PM > To: ADSM-L@VM.MARIST.EDU > Subject: Re: [ADSM-L] resourceutilization > > Nothing has changed. When this option was introduced, it was (and > still > is) available for all clients. > > Regards, > > Andy > > Andy Raibeck > IBM Software Group > Tivoli Storage Manager Client Development Internal Notes e-mail: > Andrew Raibeck/Tucson/[EMAIL PROTECTED] Internet e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > The only dumb question is the one that goes unasked. > The command line is your friend. > "Good enough" is the enemy of excellence. > > "ADSM: Dist Stor Manager" wrote on 2005-01-24 > 11:13:46: > > > I thought resourceutilization was a Windows Client option only.. Did > > that change? > > > > -Original Message- > > From: ADSM: Dist Stor Manager [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On > > Behalf Of Joni Moyer > > Sent: Monday, January 24, 2005 11:59 AM > > To: ADSM-L@VM.MARIST.EDU > > Subject: [ADSM-L] resourceutilization > > > > Hello All! > > > > I have a Solaris client at the 5.2.2.0 TSM client level and the user > > would like to know how to stream a single archive that sends > > multiple files to the TSM server through 1 session instead of > > multiple > sessions. > > I have the MAXNUMMP set to 2 for this client and I have looked at > > the dsm.sys file and there is no resourceutilization parameter > > within the file, so I believe it is using the default. I couldn't > > find the value > > > for the default of the number of sessions a client can start on the > > TSM server, which in my case is an AIX 5.2.2.5 server. Here is the > > user's > > question: "If I issue an archive with multiple files TSM starts > > multiple sessions - one for each file. Do we have a approach to > > limit > > > the number of sessions?" Any suggestions/help would be appreciated. > > Also, when issuing an archive, is it possible to override the > > dsm.sys file and specify the resourceutilization for that archive at > > the time it is issue? Thanks again! > > > > > > Joni Moyer > > Highmark > > Storage Systems > > Work:(717)302-6603 > > Fax:(717)302-5974 > > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > >
Re: resourceutilization
I can see how that might be misleading, but the Windows client manual information is in the context of the Windows OS, and not necessarily that of other operating systems (Unix, NetWare, etc.). If you look in the corresponding manual for the other OSes, you'll see that RESOURCEUTILIZATION appears there, too. I don't know which PDF files you are looking at, but I verified that it goes back at least as far as the version 4.2 books (oldest manual version I have readily available) for Mac, Unix, and NetWare. RESOURCEUTILIZATION is not available in the API because that option is used to funnel data at the file level, and the TSM API does not perform any file I/O. It would be up to the vendor of an API application to implement their own RESOURCEUTILIZATION-like functionality in their application. Regards, Andy Andy Raibeck IBM Software Group Tivoli Storage Manager Client Development Internal Notes e-mail: Andrew Raibeck/Tucson/[EMAIL PROTECTED] Internet e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] The only dumb question is the one that goes unasked. The command line is your friend. "Good enough" is the enemy of excellence. "ADSM: Dist Stor Manager" wrote on 2005-01-24 11:46:56: > Found in the Windows version of "Backup Archive Clients Installation and > User's Guide.pdf", v5.2, page 329, RESOURceutilizaion value... > > Supported Clients > This option is valid for all Windows clients. The server can also define > this option. The Tivoli Storage Manager client API does not support this > option. > > I read that as it is only valid in Windows clients, especially since the > base API doesn't support the value... Do I interpret this incorrectly? > I also find no mention of the option in any of the AIX client pdfs that > I have around. > > -Original Message- > From: ADSM: Dist Stor Manager [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of > Andrew Raibeck > Sent: Monday, January 24, 2005 12:31 PM > To: ADSM-L@VM.MARIST.EDU > Subject: Re: [ADSM-L] resourceutilization > > Nothing has changed. When this option was introduced, it was (and still > is) available for all clients. > > Regards, > > Andy > > Andy Raibeck > IBM Software Group > Tivoli Storage Manager Client Development Internal Notes e-mail: Andrew > Raibeck/Tucson/[EMAIL PROTECTED] Internet e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > The only dumb question is the one that goes unasked. > The command line is your friend. > "Good enough" is the enemy of excellence. > > "ADSM: Dist Stor Manager" wrote on 2005-01-24 > 11:13:46: > > > I thought resourceutilization was a Windows Client option only.. Did > > that change? > > > > -Original Message- > > From: ADSM: Dist Stor Manager [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf > > Of Joni Moyer > > Sent: Monday, January 24, 2005 11:59 AM > > To: ADSM-L@VM.MARIST.EDU > > Subject: [ADSM-L] resourceutilization > > > > Hello All! > > > > I have a Solaris client at the 5.2.2.0 TSM client level and the user > > would like to know how to stream a single archive that sends multiple > > files to the TSM server through 1 session instead of multiple > sessions. > > I have the MAXNUMMP set to 2 for this client and I have looked at the > > dsm.sys file and there is no resourceutilization parameter within the > > file, so I believe it is using the default. I couldn't find the value > > > for the default of the number of sessions a client can start on the > > TSM server, which in my case is an AIX 5.2.2.5 server. Here is the > > user's > > question: "If I issue an archive with multiple files TSM starts > > multiple sessions - one for each file. Do we have a approach to limit > > > the number of sessions?" Any suggestions/help would be appreciated. > > Also, when issuing an archive, is it possible to override the dsm.sys > > file and specify the resourceutilization for that archive at the time > > it is issue? Thanks again! > > > > > > Joni Moyer > > Highmark > > Storage Systems > > Work:(717)302-6603 > > Fax:(717)302-5974 > > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > >
Re: resourceutilization
Hi again! Won't that then reduce the restore to 1 session as well? I guess I will have to have them decide what is more important for their server. Thank you again for your help and suggestions! Joni Moyer Highmark Storage Systems Work:(717)302-6603 Fax:(717)302-5974 [EMAIL PROTECTED] "Andrew Raibeck" <[EMAIL PROTECTED] OM>To Sent by: "ADSM: ADSM-L@VM.MARIST.EDU Dist Stor cc Manager" <[EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject .EDU> Re: resourceutilization 01/24/2005 01:39 PM Please respond to "ADSM: Dist Stor Manager" <[EMAIL PROTECTED] .EDU> Joni, try RESOURCEUTILIZATION 1. Regards, Andy Andy Raibeck IBM Software Group Tivoli Storage Manager Client Development Internal Notes e-mail: Andrew Raibeck/Tucson/[EMAIL PROTECTED] Internet e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] The only dumb question is the one that goes unasked. The command line is your friend. "Good enough" is the enemy of excellence. "ADSM: Dist Stor Manager" wrote on 2005-01-24 11:27:05: > Hi Andy! > > I guess I already knew the answer, but was wondering if there is a way to > force an archive of multiple files to transfer through 1 session. We had > been looking at lan-free and we were seeing multiple (2) tape mounts > starting for single archive jobs. I guess I could specify maxnummp 1 and > then do a resourceutilization 2, but then that limits the clients ability > to send their data through more sessions and complete their archive more > efficiently. To me I would want the data transferred more quickly, but in > this case the request has been to keep it to 1 transfer session. In a > nutshell, I don't know why they want to do it, but since they requested it > I thought I would ask... Thanks again! > > > Joni Moyer > Highmark > Storage Systems > Work:(717)302-6603 > Fax:(717)302-5974 > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > > > "Andrew Raibeck" > <[EMAIL PROTECTED] > OM> To > Sent by: "ADSM: ADSM-L@VM.MARIST.EDU > Dist Stor cc > Manager" > <[EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject > .EDU> Re: resourceutilization > > > 01/24/2005 01:19 > PM > > > Please respond to > "ADSM: Dist Stor > Manager" > <[EMAIL PROTECTED] >.EDU> > > > > > > > I don't understand the question. What specifically is meant by "one > session per file"? And why is the user concerned with the number of > sessions? You can set RESOURCEUTILIZATION to 1, maybe that is what your > user is looking for. > > Regards, > > Andy > > Andy Raibeck > IBM Software Group > Tivoli Storage Manager Client Development > Internal Notes e-mail: Andrew Raibeck/Tucson/[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Internet e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > The only dumb question is the one that goes unasked. > The command line is your friend. > "Good enough" is the enemy of excellence. > > "ADSM: Dist Stor Manager" wrote on 2005-01-24 > 10:59:03: > > > Hello All! > > > > I have a Solaris client at the 5.2.2.0 TSM client level and the user > would > > like to know how to stream a single archive that sends multiple files to > > the TSM server through 1 session instead of multiple sessions. I have > the > > MAXNUMMP set to 2 for this client and I have looked at the dsm.sys file > and > > there is no resourceutilization parameter within the file, so I believe > it > > is using the default. I couldn't find the value for the default of the > > number of sessions a client can start on the TSM server, which in my > case > > is an AIX 5.2.2.5 server. Here is the user's question: "If I issue an > > archive with multiple files TSM starts multiple sessions - one for each > > file. Do we have a approach to limit the number of sessions?" Any > > suggestions/help would be appreciated. Also, when issuing an archive, > is > > it possible to override the dsm.sys file and specify the > > resourceutilization for that archive at the time it is issue? Thanks > > again! > > > > > > Joni Moyer > > Highmark > > Storage Systems > > Work:(717)302-6603 > > Fax:(717)302-5974 > > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > >
Re: resourceutilization
Found in the Windows version of "Backup Archive Clients Installation and User's Guide.pdf", v5.2, page 329, RESOURceutilizaion value... Supported Clients This option is valid for all Windows clients. The server can also define this option. The Tivoli Storage Manager client API does not support this option. I read that as it is only valid in Windows clients, especially since the base API doesn't support the value... Do I interpret this incorrectly? I also find no mention of the option in any of the AIX client pdfs that I have around. -Original Message- From: ADSM: Dist Stor Manager [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Andrew Raibeck Sent: Monday, January 24, 2005 12:31 PM To: ADSM-L@VM.MARIST.EDU Subject: Re: [ADSM-L] resourceutilization Nothing has changed. When this option was introduced, it was (and still is) available for all clients. Regards, Andy Andy Raibeck IBM Software Group Tivoli Storage Manager Client Development Internal Notes e-mail: Andrew Raibeck/Tucson/[EMAIL PROTECTED] Internet e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] The only dumb question is the one that goes unasked. The command line is your friend. "Good enough" is the enemy of excellence. "ADSM: Dist Stor Manager" wrote on 2005-01-24 11:13:46: > I thought resourceutilization was a Windows Client option only.. Did > that change? > > -Original Message- > From: ADSM: Dist Stor Manager [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf > Of Joni Moyer > Sent: Monday, January 24, 2005 11:59 AM > To: ADSM-L@VM.MARIST.EDU > Subject: [ADSM-L] resourceutilization > > Hello All! > > I have a Solaris client at the 5.2.2.0 TSM client level and the user > would like to know how to stream a single archive that sends multiple > files to the TSM server through 1 session instead of multiple sessions. > I have the MAXNUMMP set to 2 for this client and I have looked at the > dsm.sys file and there is no resourceutilization parameter within the > file, so I believe it is using the default. I couldn't find the value > for the default of the number of sessions a client can start on the > TSM server, which in my case is an AIX 5.2.2.5 server. Here is the > user's > question: "If I issue an archive with multiple files TSM starts > multiple sessions - one for each file. Do we have a approach to limit > the number of sessions?" Any suggestions/help would be appreciated. > Also, when issuing an archive, is it possible to override the dsm.sys > file and specify the resourceutilization for that archive at the time > it is issue? Thanks again! > > > Joni Moyer > Highmark > Storage Systems > Work:(717)302-6603 > Fax:(717)302-5974 > [EMAIL PROTECTED] >
Re: resourceutilization
Joni, try RESOURCEUTILIZATION 1. Regards, Andy Andy Raibeck IBM Software Group Tivoli Storage Manager Client Development Internal Notes e-mail: Andrew Raibeck/Tucson/[EMAIL PROTECTED] Internet e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] The only dumb question is the one that goes unasked. The command line is your friend. "Good enough" is the enemy of excellence. "ADSM: Dist Stor Manager" wrote on 2005-01-24 11:27:05: > Hi Andy! > > I guess I already knew the answer, but was wondering if there is a way to > force an archive of multiple files to transfer through 1 session. We had > been looking at lan-free and we were seeing multiple (2) tape mounts > starting for single archive jobs. I guess I could specify maxnummp 1 and > then do a resourceutilization 2, but then that limits the clients ability > to send their data through more sessions and complete their archive more > efficiently. To me I would want the data transferred more quickly, but in > this case the request has been to keep it to 1 transfer session. In a > nutshell, I don't know why they want to do it, but since they requested it > I thought I would ask... Thanks again! > > > Joni Moyer > Highmark > Storage Systems > Work:(717)302-6603 > Fax:(717)302-5974 > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > > > "Andrew Raibeck" > <[EMAIL PROTECTED] > OM> To > Sent by: "ADSM: ADSM-L@VM.MARIST.EDU > Dist Stor cc > Manager" > <[EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject > .EDU> Re: resourceutilization > > > 01/24/2005 01:19 > PM > > > Please respond to > "ADSM: Dist Stor > Manager" > <[EMAIL PROTECTED] > .EDU> > > > > > > > I don't understand the question. What specifically is meant by "one > session per file"? And why is the user concerned with the number of > sessions? You can set RESOURCEUTILIZATION to 1, maybe that is what your > user is looking for. > > Regards, > > Andy > > Andy Raibeck > IBM Software Group > Tivoli Storage Manager Client Development > Internal Notes e-mail: Andrew Raibeck/Tucson/[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Internet e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > The only dumb question is the one that goes unasked. > The command line is your friend. > "Good enough" is the enemy of excellence. > > "ADSM: Dist Stor Manager" wrote on 2005-01-24 > 10:59:03: > > > Hello All! > > > > I have a Solaris client at the 5.2.2.0 TSM client level and the user > would > > like to know how to stream a single archive that sends multiple files to > > the TSM server through 1 session instead of multiple sessions. I have > the > > MAXNUMMP set to 2 for this client and I have looked at the dsm.sys file > and > > there is no resourceutilization parameter within the file, so I believe > it > > is using the default. I couldn't find the value for the default of the > > number of sessions a client can start on the TSM server, which in my > case > > is an AIX 5.2.2.5 server. Here is the user's question: "If I issue an > > archive with multiple files TSM starts multiple sessions - one for each > > file. Do we have a approach to limit the number of sessions?" Any > > suggestions/help would be appreciated. Also, when issuing an archive, > is > > it possible to override the dsm.sys file and specify the > > resourceutilization for that archive at the time it is issue? Thanks > > again! > > > > > > Joni Moyer > > Highmark > > Storage Systems > > Work:(717)302-6603 > > Fax:(717)302-5974 > > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > >
Re: resourceutilization
Hi Andy! I guess I already knew the answer, but was wondering if there is a way to force an archive of multiple files to transfer through 1 session. We had been looking at lan-free and we were seeing multiple (2) tape mounts starting for single archive jobs. I guess I could specify maxnummp 1 and then do a resourceutilization 2, but then that limits the clients ability to send their data through more sessions and complete their archive more efficiently. To me I would want the data transferred more quickly, but in this case the request has been to keep it to 1 transfer session. In a nutshell, I don't know why they want to do it, but since they requested it I thought I would ask... Thanks again! Joni Moyer Highmark Storage Systems Work:(717)302-6603 Fax:(717)302-5974 [EMAIL PROTECTED] "Andrew Raibeck" <[EMAIL PROTECTED] OM>To Sent by: "ADSM: ADSM-L@VM.MARIST.EDU Dist Stor cc Manager" <[EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject .EDU> Re: resourceutilization 01/24/2005 01:19 PM Please respond to "ADSM: Dist Stor Manager" <[EMAIL PROTECTED] .EDU> I don't understand the question. What specifically is meant by "one session per file"? And why is the user concerned with the number of sessions? You can set RESOURCEUTILIZATION to 1, maybe that is what your user is looking for. Regards, Andy Andy Raibeck IBM Software Group Tivoli Storage Manager Client Development Internal Notes e-mail: Andrew Raibeck/Tucson/[EMAIL PROTECTED] Internet e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] The only dumb question is the one that goes unasked. The command line is your friend. "Good enough" is the enemy of excellence. "ADSM: Dist Stor Manager" wrote on 2005-01-24 10:59:03: > Hello All! > > I have a Solaris client at the 5.2.2.0 TSM client level and the user would > like to know how to stream a single archive that sends multiple files to > the TSM server through 1 session instead of multiple sessions. I have the > MAXNUMMP set to 2 for this client and I have looked at the dsm.sys file and > there is no resourceutilization parameter within the file, so I believe it > is using the default. I couldn't find the value for the default of the > number of sessions a client can start on the TSM server, which in my case > is an AIX 5.2.2.5 server. Here is the user's question: "If I issue an > archive with multiple files TSM starts multiple sessions - one for each > file. Do we have a approach to limit the number of sessions?" Any > suggestions/help would be appreciated. Also, when issuing an archive, is > it possible to override the dsm.sys file and specify the > resourceutilization for that archive at the time it is issue? Thanks > again! > > > Joni Moyer > Highmark > Storage Systems > Work:(717)302-6603 > Fax:(717)302-5974 > [EMAIL PROTECTED] >
Re: resourceutilization
Nothing has changed. When this option was introduced, it was (and still is) available for all clients. Regards, Andy Andy Raibeck IBM Software Group Tivoli Storage Manager Client Development Internal Notes e-mail: Andrew Raibeck/Tucson/[EMAIL PROTECTED] Internet e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] The only dumb question is the one that goes unasked. The command line is your friend. "Good enough" is the enemy of excellence. "ADSM: Dist Stor Manager" wrote on 2005-01-24 11:13:46: > I thought resourceutilization was a Windows Client option only.. Did > that change? > > -Original Message- > From: ADSM: Dist Stor Manager [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of > Joni Moyer > Sent: Monday, January 24, 2005 11:59 AM > To: ADSM-L@VM.MARIST.EDU > Subject: [ADSM-L] resourceutilization > > Hello All! > > I have a Solaris client at the 5.2.2.0 TSM client level and the user > would like to know how to stream a single archive that sends multiple > files to the TSM server through 1 session instead of multiple sessions. > I have the MAXNUMMP set to 2 for this client and I have looked at the > dsm.sys file and there is no resourceutilization parameter within the > file, so I believe it is using the default. I couldn't find the value > for the default of the number of sessions a client can start on the TSM > server, which in my case is an AIX 5.2.2.5 server. Here is the user's > question: "If I issue an archive with multiple files TSM starts > multiple sessions - one for each file. Do we have a approach to limit > the number of sessions?" Any suggestions/help would be appreciated. > Also, when issuing an archive, is it possible to override the dsm.sys > file and specify the resourceutilization for that archive at the time it > is issue? Thanks again! > > > Joni Moyer > Highmark > Storage Systems > Work:(717)302-6603 > Fax:(717)302-5974 > [EMAIL PROTECTED] >
Re: resourceutilization
I don't understand the question. What specifically is meant by "one session per file"? And why is the user concerned with the number of sessions? You can set RESOURCEUTILIZATION to 1, maybe that is what your user is looking for. Regards, Andy Andy Raibeck IBM Software Group Tivoli Storage Manager Client Development Internal Notes e-mail: Andrew Raibeck/Tucson/[EMAIL PROTECTED] Internet e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] The only dumb question is the one that goes unasked. The command line is your friend. "Good enough" is the enemy of excellence. "ADSM: Dist Stor Manager" wrote on 2005-01-24 10:59:03: > Hello All! > > I have a Solaris client at the 5.2.2.0 TSM client level and the user would > like to know how to stream a single archive that sends multiple files to > the TSM server through 1 session instead of multiple sessions. I have the > MAXNUMMP set to 2 for this client and I have looked at the dsm.sys file and > there is no resourceutilization parameter within the file, so I believe it > is using the default. I couldn't find the value for the default of the > number of sessions a client can start on the TSM server, which in my case > is an AIX 5.2.2.5 server. Here is the user's question: "If I issue an > archive with multiple files TSM starts multiple sessions - one for each > file. Do we have a approach to limit the number of sessions?" Any > suggestions/help would be appreciated. Also, when issuing an archive, is > it possible to override the dsm.sys file and specify the > resourceutilization for that archive at the time it is issue? Thanks > again! > > > Joni Moyer > Highmark > Storage Systems > Work:(717)302-6603 > Fax:(717)302-5974 > [EMAIL PROTECTED] >
Re: resourceutilization
I thought resourceutilization was a Windows Client option only.. Did that change? -Original Message- From: ADSM: Dist Stor Manager [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Joni Moyer Sent: Monday, January 24, 2005 11:59 AM To: ADSM-L@VM.MARIST.EDU Subject: [ADSM-L] resourceutilization Hello All! I have a Solaris client at the 5.2.2.0 TSM client level and the user would like to know how to stream a single archive that sends multiple files to the TSM server through 1 session instead of multiple sessions. I have the MAXNUMMP set to 2 for this client and I have looked at the dsm.sys file and there is no resourceutilization parameter within the file, so I believe it is using the default. I couldn't find the value for the default of the number of sessions a client can start on the TSM server, which in my case is an AIX 5.2.2.5 server. Here is the user's question: "If I issue an archive with multiple files TSM starts multiple sessions - one for each file. Do we have a approach to limit the number of sessions?" Any suggestions/help would be appreciated. Also, when issuing an archive, is it possible to override the dsm.sys file and specify the resourceutilization for that archive at the time it is issue? Thanks again! Joni Moyer Highmark Storage Systems Work:(717)302-6603 Fax:(717)302-5974 [EMAIL PROTECTED]
resourceutilization
Hello All! I have a Solaris client at the 5.2.2.0 TSM client level and the user would like to know how to stream a single archive that sends multiple files to the TSM server through 1 session instead of multiple sessions. I have the MAXNUMMP set to 2 for this client and I have looked at the dsm.sys file and there is no resourceutilization parameter within the file, so I believe it is using the default. I couldn't find the value for the default of the number of sessions a client can start on the TSM server, which in my case is an AIX 5.2.2.5 server. Here is the user's question: "If I issue an archive with multiple files TSM starts multiple sessions - one for each file. Do we have a approach to limit the number of sessions?" Any suggestions/help would be appreciated. Also, when issuing an archive, is it possible to override the dsm.sys file and specify the resourceutilization for that archive at the time it is issue? Thanks again! Joni Moyer Highmark Storage Systems Work:(717)302-6603 Fax:(717)302-5974 [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: ResourceUtilization in TSM 5.x client - have you tried it, has it improved performance, do you have concerns/problems using it ?
For backup and archive, RESOURCEUTILIZATION does not map to the number of
drives that will be used. Rather, it provides a guideline for the number
of resources the client should use. Based on the real-time performance
characteristics and the value of RESOURCEUTILIZATION, the client will
increase or decrease the number of resources it uses. The purpose of this
setting is to not simply dictate the number of sessions to use, but to put
a little intelligence behind the number of sessions that will be used.
In particular, the resources are the number of producer sessions (sessions
that figure out what to back up) and the number of consumer sessions
(sessions that actually back up or archive the data). The higher the
RESOURCEUTILIZATION value, the more producer/consumer sessions the client
*may* use. If the system is starved for other resources, or the number of
files to process does not warrant it, then a larger number of sessions may
not be used, even with a large RESOURCEUTILIZATION value.
With a RESOURCEUTILIZATION value of 10, the client will use up to four
producer sessions and four consumer sessions. The idle sessions you saw
were the producer sessions (probably scanning the client file system for
work to do) and the sessions with tapes were the consumer sessions. With
RESOURCEUTILIZATION set to 9, you will get up to three producer sessions
and four consumer sessions. A value of 10 will give you up to four
producer sessions and four consumer sessions.
If you need tighter control over the number of sessions that will be used
(i.e. you *must* have four sessions sending data) , then try dividing the
file systems as evenly as possible into four groups, and creating a script
to launch four separate instances of the client, each instance backing up
a particular set of file systems.
Regards,
Andy
Andy Raibeck
IBM Software Group
Tivoli Storage Manager Client Development
Internal Notes e-mail: Andrew Raibeck/Tucson/IBM@IBMUS
Internet e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (change eye to i to reply)
The only dumb question is the one that goes unasked.
The command line is your friend.
"Good enough" is the enemy of excellence.
Kent Monthei <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent by: "ADSM: Dist Stor Manager" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
11/25/2002 17:29
Please respond to "ADSM: Dist Stor Manager"
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
cc:
Subject:ResourceUtilization in TSM 5.x client - have you tried it,
has it
improved performance, do you have concerns/problems using it ?
I've been trying to make use of ResourceUtilization to backup a 1TB Oracle
database directly to tape (4 drives), but am just about ready to give up
on it.
My objective is to have the TSM Client open 4 concurrent data sessions,
each backing up a separate filespace going to a separate tape drive,
utilizing all 4 tape drives 100% of the time. My plan was to bind all 20
filespaces to an MC whose CopyGroup is directed to a tapepool, and set
client ResourceUtilization to 5. I expected the TSM Client to initiate 4
concurrent data sessions/threads, and the TSM Server to mount/use 4 tapes,
1 per thread.
Not so. With ResourceUtilization=5, TSM Client opened 5 server sessions,
but only 2 sessions went into MediaW status and only 2 tape-mounts were
performed by the server. 2 sessions remained in IdleW status. I
confirmed all drives/paths were online.
With ResourceUtilization=7, TSM Client opened 7 sessions with the server.
4 went into MediaW state immediately. However, the server only mounted 1
tape. 3 sessions sat in MediaW and 2 in IdleW status for almost 50
minutes before I terminated the test. Throughout the test 'q mount'
reported only 1 in-use tape and no additional pending mounts. There were
no mount-related errors in the TSM Server Activity Log and no sign of
problems in the Client schedlog.
With ResourceUtilization=10 (max), TSM Client opened 8 sessions with the
server. 4 went into MediaW immediately and shortly after that 4 tapes
were mounted and in-use. This is almost the desired behavior. However, 3
other sessions sat in IdleW the whole time, and the TSM Client & Server
logs provided very little insight or progress-reporting. It also
appeared that only one thread/session (the 1st filespace backed up) was
actively appending to the schedlog, even though 4 tapes were
mounted/in-use and Collocation=Filespace was set on the TSM Server
tapepool.
With ResourceUtilization, it seems that I can neither predict nor see what
is actually happening. On a 1 TB database backup comprised of >20
filespaces that will take up to 24 hours to complete, I absolutely must
have the ability to accurately control and monitor the progress/status of
the backup. ResourceUtilization isn't giving me that control or insight.
Comments?rsvp, thanks
Kent Monthei
GlaxoSmithKline
ResourceUtilization in TSM 5.x client - have you tried it, has it improved performance, do you have concerns/problems using it ?
I've been trying to make use of ResourceUtilization to backup a 1TB Oracle database directly to tape (4 drives), but am just about ready to give up on it. My objective is to have the TSM Client open 4 concurrent data sessions, each backing up a separate filespace going to a separate tape drive, utilizing all 4 tape drives 100% of the time. My plan was to bind all 20 filespaces to an MC whose CopyGroup is directed to a tapepool, and set client ResourceUtilization to 5. I expected the TSM Client to initiate 4 concurrent data sessions/threads, and the TSM Server to mount/use 4 tapes, 1 per thread. Not so. With ResourceUtilization=5, TSM Client opened 5 server sessions, but only 2 sessions went into MediaW status and only 2 tape-mounts were performed by the server. 2 sessions remained in IdleW status. I confirmed all drives/paths were online. With ResourceUtilization=7, TSM Client opened 7 sessions with the server. 4 went into MediaW state immediately. However, the server only mounted 1 tape. 3 sessions sat in MediaW and 2 in IdleW status for almost 50 minutes before I terminated the test. Throughout the test 'q mount' reported only 1 in-use tape and no additional pending mounts. There were no mount-related errors in the TSM Server Activity Log and no sign of problems in the Client schedlog. With ResourceUtilization=10 (max), TSM Client opened 8 sessions with the server. 4 went into MediaW immediately and shortly after that 4 tapes were mounted and in-use. This is almost the desired behavior. However, 3 other sessions sat in IdleW the whole time, and the TSM Client & Server logs provided very little insight or progress-reporting. It also appeared that only one thread/session (the 1st filespace backed up) was actively appending to the schedlog, even though 4 tapes were mounted/in-use and Collocation=Filespace was set on the TSM Server tapepool. With ResourceUtilization, it seems that I can neither predict nor see what is actually happening. On a 1 TB database backup comprised of >20 filespaces that will take up to 24 hours to complete, I absolutely must have the ability to accurately control and monitor the progress/status of the backup. ResourceUtilization isn't giving me that control or insight. Comments?rsvp, thanks Kent Monthei GlaxoSmithKline
Re: resourceutilization questions
From: ADSM: Dist Stor Manager [mailto:ADSM-L@;VM.MARIST.EDU]On Behalf Of Frost, Dave > Does anybody else have problems with backups which have the > resourceutilization option set to greater than one ? Well, for starters, resourceutilization, if not set, defaults to 2. Resourceutilization set to 1 forces a client to use only one threaded connection to the server, which means that data flow and control flow are forced into one pipe. Try taking the resourceutilization line out altogether and see what you get. -- Mark Stapleton ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) Certified TSM consultant Certified AIX system engineer MCSE
Re: resourceutilization questions
Set your timeout longer, say 120 minutes and see if that solves the problem, and anyway even if your non active session times out it should reconnect, if within the backup window. This should not prevent the active session from carrying on and completing the backup normally. You just do not get the backup statistics sent back to the server. "Frost, Dave" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> on 10/17/2002 10:02:52 AM Please respond to "ADSM: Dist Stor Manager" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] cc:(bcc: John Naylor/HAV/SSE) Subject: resourceutilization questions Hi, Does anybody else have problems with backups which have the resourceutilization option set to greater than one ? When the option first became available, we experimented with different values. However, we found that the controlling thread would frequently go into IDLEWAIT for long periods of time. If the IDLEWAIT state exceeds the server IDLEWAIT timeout, then the session is terminated. We have seen this result in a backup showing as 'completed' with all associated stats, but not actually completing. If the filespaces are viewed, the backup shows as not completed. We circumvented this problem by always setting the resourceutilization to one. Now, with the release of the version 5 server & client, there is the functionality for a multi-threaded restore. This requires MAXNUMMP and RESOURCEUTILIZATION to be set to greater than one, to allow a restore to use more than one tape and thus reap the performance benefits. However, even with a version 5.1.1.4 server and version 5.1.1 client, we still see the controlling thread timeout of a multi-thread backup. Our IDLEWAIT parameter is set to 45 mins. The resourceutlization parameter is now of some considerable use when doing restores, but does not seem to function correctly when backing up. Has anybody else seen this and if so, have you found a fix. Thanks regards, -=Dave=- -- +44 (0)20 7608 7140 Accountants' minds are always in NumLock! This email has been scanned for all viruses by the MessageLabs SkyScan service. For more information on a proactive anti-virus service working around the clock, around the globe, visit http://www.messagelabs.com ** The information in this E-Mail is confidential and may be legally privileged. It may not represent the views of Scottish and Southern Energy plc. It is intended solely for the addressees. Access to this E-Mail by anyone else is unauthorised. If you are not the intended recipient, any disclosure, copying, distribution or any action taken or omitted to be taken in reliance on it, is prohibited and may be unlawful. Any unauthorised recipient should advise the sender immediately of the error in transmission. Scottish Hydro-Electric, Southern Electric, SWALEC and S+S are trading names of the Scottish and Southern Energy Group. **
resourceutilization questions
Hi, Does anybody else have problems with backups which have the resourceutilization option set to greater than one ? When the option first became available, we experimented with different values. However, we found that the controlling thread would frequently go into IDLEWAIT for long periods of time. If the IDLEWAIT state exceeds the server IDLEWAIT timeout, then the session is terminated. We have seen this result in a backup showing as 'completed' with all associated stats, but not actually completing. If the filespaces are viewed, the backup shows as not completed. We circumvented this problem by always setting the resourceutilization to one. Now, with the release of the version 5 server & client, there is the functionality for a multi-threaded restore. This requires MAXNUMMP and RESOURCEUTILIZATION to be set to greater than one, to allow a restore to use more than one tape and thus reap the performance benefits. However, even with a version 5.1.1.4 server and version 5.1.1 client, we still see the controlling thread timeout of a multi-thread backup. Our IDLEWAIT parameter is set to 45 mins. The resourceutlization parameter is now of some considerable use when doing restores, but does not seem to function correctly when backing up. Has anybody else seen this and if so, have you found a fix. Thanks regards, -=Dave=- -- +44 (0)20 7608 7140 Accountants' minds are always in NumLock! This email has been scanned for all viruses by the MessageLabs SkyScan service. For more information on a proactive anti-virus service working around the clock, around the globe, visit http://www.messagelabs.com
Re: RESOURCEUTILIZATION - NT client 4.1.2.12
Monte, Since you likely have only one NIC the RESOURCEUTILIZATION parameter is only as usefull as you have bandwidth to exploit. You can verify this at the server with Query SEssions while the client is backing-up. You will see some sessions sending data from the server to the client and some sessions receiving data from the client. When you have multiple receive sessions they will go into receive wait while they all attempt to pass data. Steffan - Original Message - From: "Michael, Monte" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Monday, March 11, 2002 1:19 PM Subject: RESOURCEUTILIZATION - NT client 4.1.2.12 > Has anyone experienced greater backup throughput by setting the > RESOURCUTILIZATION parameter greater than the default value on an NT CLIENT? > When you increase the resourceutilization on a client, are there any server > settings that need changed as well? > > TSM Environment information: > AIX SERVER - 4.2.1.9 > AIX CLIENTS - 4.1.3 > NT CLIENTS - 4.1.2.12 > > I have set the resourceutilization to 5 in my dsm.opt file on one of our > large file/print servers, and I was only able to decrease the backup runtime > by an average of 35 minutes. Please reply with any experiences you may of > had with adjusting this parameter above the default value. > > Thank You, > > Monte
Re: RESOURCEUTILIZATION - NT client 4.1.2.12
I have this set to 10 for all my NT client, however I needed to increase my max sessions on the server to accomadate the extra connections. Buffpoolsize may need to be increased as well. Works great.. Joe -Original Message- From: Michael, Monte [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Monday, March 11, 2002 4:19 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: RESOURCEUTILIZATION - NT client 4.1.2.12 Has anyone experienced greater backup throughput by setting the RESOURCUTILIZATION parameter greater than the default value on an NT CLIENT? When you increase the resourceutilization on a client, are there any server settings that need changed as well? TSM Environment information: AIX SERVER - 4.2.1.9 AIX CLIENTS - 4.1.3 NT CLIENTS - 4.1.2.12 I have set the resourceutilization to 5 in my dsm.opt file on one of our large file/print servers, and I was only able to decrease the backup runtime by an average of 35 minutes. Please reply with any experiences you may of had with adjusting this parameter above the default value. Thank You, Monte
RESOURCEUTILIZATION - NT client 4.1.2.12
Has anyone experienced greater backup throughput by setting the RESOURCUTILIZATION parameter greater than the default value on an NT CLIENT? When you increase the resourceutilization on a client, are there any server settings that need changed as well? TSM Environment information: AIX SERVER - 4.2.1.9 AIX CLIENTS - 4.1.3 NT CLIENTS - 4.1.2.12 I have set the resourceutilization to 5 in my dsm.opt file on one of our large file/print servers, and I was only able to decrease the backup runtime by an average of 35 minutes. Please reply with any experiences you may of had with adjusting this parameter above the default value. Thank You, Monte
