Hi Steve... Well, my backup windows is something like 10 12 hours, size of a full backup is near of 2TB and incremental per day not bigger than 20G.
My idea is to perform a full backup on thursday (to keep a copy off the office on weekend) and incremental/differential during the week. OK, new thing, I've TWO TS3100, so I'm going to make a copy of the tape on another library, but I think this is not a problem with my backup windows as it will be copied from library to library without prodcution server involved, right? Thanks again folks... -- Flávio do Carmo Júnior aka waKKu Florianópolis/SC - Brazil On Sat, Aug 1, 2009 at 1:36 PM, Steven Langdale<steven.langd...@cat.com> wrote: > LAN Free will be poor with this kind of data. > > What is your actual backup & restore requirement? What's your backup > window, how much data and how much changed data per day. > > Steven > > Steven Langdale > Global Information Services > EAME SAN/Storage Planning and Implementation > ( Phone : +44 (0)1733 584175 > ( Mob: +44 (0)7876 216782 > ü Conference: +44 (0)208 609 7400 Code: 331817 > + Email: steven.langd...@cat.com > > > > > > Flavio Junior <bil...@gmail.com> > Sent by: "ADSM: Dist Stor Manager" <ADSM-L@VM.MARIST.EDU> > 01/08/2009 17:10 > Please respond to > "ADSM: Dist Stor Manager" <ADSM-L@VM.MARIST.EDU> > > > To > ADSM-L@VM.MARIST.EDU > cc > > Subject > Re: [ADSM-L] TSM 5.5 using LANFree backup really "slow" > > > > > Caterpillar: Confidential Green Retain Until: 31/08/2009 > > > > Hi David, > > Well FileServer is exact what i'm backup ;/ > A lot of files with sizes between 100k and 20Mb. > > So, there is nothing that can be done to improve this, at least for > 100GB/h? > Just to point my head toward right direction.. LANFree backups or LAN > backups. > > Thanks, > > -- > > Flávio do Carmo Júnior aka waKKu > Florianópolis/SC - Brazil > > On Sat, Aug 1, 2009 at 12:02 PM, David > McClelland<david.mcclell...@networkc.co.uk> wrote: >> What is the nature of the data that you're backing up here? Large >> files/objects or lots of smaller files/objects? The classic > recommendation >> for SAN backups direct to tape is that it's best used only for larger >> objects (eg database backups, TDPs or disk image etc) to ensure optimal >> streaming to tape. Backing up a file server with millions of individual >> small files direct to tape won't always produce a great overall > throughput >> figure. >> >> /David Mc >> London, UK >> >> Sent from my iPhone >> >> On 1 Aug 2009, at 15:37, Flavio Junior <bil...@gmail.com> wrote: >> >>> Hi Steve, thanks for answering... >>> >>> Yeah, the destination is tape, i see on StorageAgent console the >>> connection to server and opening tape, during the backup I see the >>> bytes increasing on "Backup by LANFree: " (but, this value is ALWAYS >>> lower than the value of normal backup... i don't know if this is >>> normal). >>> VALIDATE LANFREE node policyset shows me that the node is capable to >>> LANFree backups. >>> >>> During the backup (using webclient interface) I can see two speeds, >>> well.. A screenshot of backup report is at link: >>> http://img18.imageshack.us/img18/9278/backupz.jpg >>> >>> The screenshot is in portuguese but I think is easy to you guess what >>> is each value... >>> Time: 5:45 Hours >>> Size: 181 Gb >>> No compression >>> >>> Rede == Network >>> Agregada == Aggregate, combination... (not sure how TSM show it) >>> >>> Ok, this is what I have... If need more info just let me know. >>> >>> Thanks again. >>> >>> -- >>> >>> Flávio do Carmo Júnior aka waKKu >>> Florianópolis/SC - Brazil >>> >>> On Sat, Aug 1, 2009 at 3:51 AM, Steven Harris<st...@stevenharris.info> >>> wrote: >>>> >>>> Flavio >>>> >>>> Is the destination of your backup pool tape? Have you confirmed with >>>> VALIDATE LANFREE on the server >>>> Are you seeing a "proxied by" message in the client log to indicate > that >>>> the >>>> storage agent is in use? >>>> Is the *network* path configured as 1Gb - I'm suspecting you have a > LAN >>>> backup and that the lan path has issues. >>>> >>>> HTH >>>> >>>> Regards >>>> >>>> Steve >>>> >>>> Steven Harris. >>>> TSM Admin, looking for work, Sydney Australia >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> Flavio Junior wrote: >>>>> >>>>> Hi folks, >>>>> >>>>> I'm here, again, asking for help :) >>>>> More I read, more doubts I have. >>>>> >>>>> I'm now implementing a TSM For SAN setup, to performance comparison >>>>> with my currently LAN backup. >>>>> >>>>> I'll describe my scenario below, any doubt's feel free to ask me: >>>>> - 2 Production nodes using RHEL 5.3 connected to SAN >>>>> - 1 IBM DS4700 storage with 14 FC disks (13 raid5 + 1 hot-spare) >>>>> - Each node have a emulex dual-port HBA >>>>> - 2 Brocade TotalStorage fiber switches, with coherent zonings >>>>> - Library is a IBM TS3100 LTO4 SAN, with only one drive >>>>> >>>>> Ok, i'm using TSM with LAN backups for a week, the transfer rate > comes >>>>> among 60~80GB per hour. >>>>> The tape has a nominal write speed of 120MB/s that says me 430GB/h, >>>>> ok.. this is a *nominal* speed, I was expecting something near >>>>> 300GB/h, good enough for me. >>>>> >>>>> For these tests I've configured TSM Server on node1 and TSM Client on >>>>> node2. Each node has 6 1Gbps NIC's, 4 to public network 2 for >>>>> cluster-heartbeat + backups. >>>>> With this setup I've got, as said above, 60~80GB/h. >>>>> >>>>> So, I decide to setup TSM for SAN.. Download a lot of docs/books and >>>>> start reading/doing. >>>>> I end up with: >>>>> >>>>> - Fabric zoning changes, isolating a HBA port on each dual-port cards >>>>> for >>>>> nodes >>>>> - Installed StorageAgent on node2 >>>>> - Installed TSM Client on node2 >>>>> - - Configured the client to connect on storageagent >>>>> - Redefine all my TSM Server setup >>>>> - - Make Library as shared=yes, configure storage agent as a server, >>>>> configure path, configure datawritepath=lanfree and so on... >>>>> >>>>> Ok, time to backup. >>>>> And, for my surprise i got only ~500MB per minute.. I thought it very >>>>> strange.. I've no idea what is the problem, I've tried with >>>>> compression and without, DATAREADPATH=LAN and SAN, VirtualMountPoints >>>>> or Physical ... >>>>> >>>>> Does anybody have an idea the reason of that bad transfer rate?? The >>>>> servers are Samba Servers, with all kind of file and all size >>>>> >>>>> As I said before, I'm really new with TSM so is really possible that >>>>> I've misconfigured something :) >>>>> >>>>> Anyway, thanks in advance, and any help will be appreciated. >>>>> >>>>> -- >>>>> >>>>> Flávio do Carmo Júnior aka waKKu >>>>> Florianópolis/SC - Brazil >>>>> > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> No virus found in this incoming message. >>>>> Checked by AVG - www.avg.com Version: 8.5.392 / Virus Database: >>>>> 270.13.38/2274 - Release Date: 07/31/09 05:58:00 >>>>> >>>>> >>>> >> >