@VM.MARIST.EDU] On Behalf Of
Zoltan Forray
Sent: Friday, August 16, 2013 10:30 AM
To: ADSM-L@VM.MARIST.EDU
Subject: [ADSM-L] Maximum TSM nodes per server
We are starting to experiencing performance issues on a server that acts as
the head for multiple (31 currently) TSM nodes. This server CIFS
On 08/19/2013 09:16 AM, Zoltan Forray wrote:
DB overhead? This is a V6.2/DB2 server. That shouldn't be an issue (or so
we are told) any more, like with 5.5? On this TSM server, the DB is a 245GB
and Buffer pool hit ratio is 99.3% and Package cache hit ratio is 99.7%.
I have tried discussing
Currently, I have simply distributed the schedules for the nodes (each has
its own since the OBJECT of the schedule is the share name (e.g. \\
rose.adm.adp.vcu.edu\healthadmin)
Traffic to/from the TSM server is not the issue. Traffic from this head
server to each mount point, is. Just had a
On 08/19/2013 12:24 PM, Zoltan Forray wrote:
Currently, I have simply distributed the schedules for the nodes
(each has its own since the OBJECT of the schedule is the share name
(e.g. \\rose.adm.adp.vcu.edu
http://rose.adm.adp.vcu.edu\healthadmin)
I see what you're getting at, but unless
On 08/19/2013 12:38 PM, Zoltan Forray wrote:
TSMManager does the session analysis for me. I am attaching a
screenshot to show what I mean - not sure if it will make it through. It
shows that on this TSM server, I peak around 55-concurrent sessions
around the 3am time-frame.
The image came
MOON is the TSM server the CIFS head server backs up the 31-nodes to.
The graph shows total sessions active at any given time for the period
selected, i.e. how busy is the client backup traffic to/from this TSM
server. Yes, if I needed to get deeper, I could, but at this point, the
CIFS head is
We are starting to experiencing performance issues on a server that acts as
the head for multiple (31 currently) TSM nodes. This server CIFS mounts
multiple departmental filesystems - all in various EMC SAN's. Each
filesystem is a different TSM node.
The head server is running Windows 2012
You lost me at the point where you cifs mount san devices...
Doing share backups isnt very fast as the backup is validating security
stuff with dc's.
Would recommenr either mounting luns or install clients at the source.
Kind regards,
Karel
Op 16 aug. 2013 17:30 schreef Zoltan Forray
-
From: ADSM: Dist Stor Manager [mailto:ADSM-L@VM.MARIST.EDU] On Behalf Of
Zoltan Forray
Sent: Friday, August 16, 2013 10:30 AM
To: ADSM-L@VM.MARIST.EDU
Subject: [ADSM-L] Maximum TSM nodes per server
We are starting to experiencing performance issues on a server that acts as
the head
If I'm understanding the problem correctly, you're running into a
problem with a TSM client node, not with your TSM server.
We have a similar setup, although our proxy nodes are RHEL and use NFS
rather than CIFS. We have a pool of nine 10GbE-attached nodes that
backup a variety of storage
On 08/16/2013 11:29 AM, Zoltan Forray wrote:
We are starting to experiencing performance issues on a server that acts as
the head for multiple (31 currently) TSM nodes.
[...]
Anyone out there something like this? What are the realistic limits? I
have tried spreading the backup start times
I'd actually argue that as long as you don't run out of address space in
your client processes, disabling memoryefficientbackup is actually a
win. At least for NFS, there's a reasonable degree of parallelism
between data and metadata operations.
With memoryefficientbackup enabled, TSM walks a
-Original Message-
From: ADSM: Dist Stor Manager [mailto:ADSM-L@VM.MARIST.EDU] On Behalf Of Zoltan
Forray
Sent: Friday, August 16, 2013 11:30 AM
To: ADSM-L@VM.MARIST.EDU
Subject: [ADSM-L] Maximum TSM nodes per server
We are starting to experiencing performance issues on a server that acts
On 08/16/2013 01:09 PM, Skylar Thompson wrote:
I'd actually argue that as long as you don't run out of address space in
your client processes, disabling memoryefficientbackup is actually a
win. [...] We've found our throughput to
be much higher with memoryefficientbackup disabled than
14 matches
Mail list logo
