IBM does not support same disk and tape across the same HBA on Windows.
Basically, for optimal performance the disk and tape need different values
for a couple of items and they are not testing both disk and tape on the
same HBA.

Here is the reality.  I have been running disk and tape on the same adapters
on AIX and Solaris very successfully.  I have McData Switches with ES-1000s.
The issue is are you using arbitrated hubs or real switches.  LIPs can cause
all types of problems.  In a Brocade switch or McData switch environment
with ES-1000s it is not a problem.

However, there is a case where performance will lag.  FC has a receive and
transmit link.  Remember disk reads and type writes on a backup.  So, if you
are trying to run heavy production processing read/write disk at the same
time with heavy tape backups, it is just like any other interface, it does
not perform very well.  But, if you are reading from disk and writing to
tape with large blocks, it flys.  It performs poorly when the block sizes
are small and there is a lot of chat going on about IO completes or IO
starts.

Sorry, I cannot identify the cause of the performance issue here if it is
single HBA related.  I believe you would be better if you had 2 HBAs and ran
load balancing software to the disk if it is available.  However, I think
the issue is more fundamental, disk pool migrations in the middle of doing
backups, not recommended.  Under that scenario you are doing a lot of IO
against your TSM Database and storage pools.  Have you tuned your database
specifications for buffers, etc.  I believe your problem is the database
activity on the mirrored drives that conflicts with the backup processes and
migration processes.  These migrations are probably lots of little files
causing lots of writes and reads to the database to update the information.
Look to see if the database drives are taking a pounding during this
process.

-----Original Message-----
From: Allen Barth [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] 
Sent: Thursday, February 21, 2002 4:59 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Bad performance with FC attached disk and tape


Joshua,

I've heard this before, but I couldn't find anyone at IBM to confirm it.
SO.........

I've been running tape and dasd thru the same FC adapter for about a year
now.  Traffic goes from rs6k to an IBM2109 (brocade) switch and then splits
from there.  I suspect the switch is handling the arbirated loop (3590) and
point to point (ess aka shark) communication conversions.

Gotchas?

Al Barth
Zurich Scudder Investments




 

                    "Joshua S.

                    Bassi"               To:     [EMAIL PROTECTED]

                    <[EMAIL PROTECTED]       cc:

                    OM>                  Subject:     Re: Bad performance
with FC attached disk and tape           
                    Sent by:

                    "ADSM: Dist

                    Stor Manager"

                    <[EMAIL PROTECTED]

                    IST.EDU>

 

 

                    02/21/02 12:56

                    PM

                    Please respond

                    to "ADSM: Dist

                    Stor Manager"

 

 





Not only is sending disk and tape data across the same FC card a bad idea, I
believe IBM doesn't even support that configuration.



--
Joshua S. Bassi
Sr. Solutions Architect @ rs-unix.com
IBM Certified - AIX/HACMP, SAN, Shark
Tivoli Certified Consultant- ADSM/TSM
Cell (415) 215-0326

-----Original Message-----
From: ADSM: Dist Stor Manager [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] On Behalf Of Wu,
Jie
Sent: Thursday, February 21, 2002 8:31 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Bad performance with FC attached disk and tape

>From the info you provided, your primary stgpool, the diskpool on
Compaq
disk cabinet, and the migrationpool defined on the 3584-L32 are sharing the
same FC card. If thishis is the case, it is a bad design. You may use two FC
card on the P610. One for the Compaq FC disk cabinet and the other for the
3584-L32. I believe this way you will get better performance.

Jie

-----Original Message-----
From: Daniel Sparrman [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Thursday, February 21, 2002 1:22 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Bad performance with FC attached disk and tape


Hi

We have a system configured as follows:

One P-Series 610 with dual 450 PowerPC processors
1GB RAM
2 18.2GB Ultra3 15K drives which are mirrored and contains AIX system and
Tivoli logs 2GB Ultra3 15K drives which are mirrored and contains Tivoli
database (30GB large) One IBM FibreChannel card One locally attached IBM
Magstar 3575-L32 with 3 3570C drives.

The system is attached to a SAN and has a dispool of totally 150GB on a
Compaq FC disk cabinett.

The system also is attached to a IBM 3584-L32 which as 2 SCSI drives
connected through a IBM SAN Data Router (2108-R03) and one fibre attached
LTO drive which is connected through a SAN switch(Compaq).

The system uses 3 100Mbs Ethernet adapters, one which really are a Gigabit
Ethernet card but is running at 100Mbs speed.

When backup occurs, we have a good performance; normally about
15.000-16.000KB/s in Network speed, and about 6000-7000KB/s in Aggregate
Transfer Rate.

However, when the diskpool gets full in the middle of the night, and the TSM
server starts migrating data to the drives in the 3584-L32, performance
drops. We only get about 500KB/s-600KB/s throughput in the fibre attached
drive. The AIX server however, has a good throughput through the FC adapter,
and the Compaq disk cabinett has a throughput of about 10-14MB/s to the AIX
server.

If we do a storagepool backup from the 3575-L32 to the 3584-L32, the speed
is good.

If we do reclamation, or database backup, the speed of the FC drive is also
good.

Can this has something to do with the FC adapter? Should this configuration
require 2 FC adapters?

The first thing that hits me is that the FC adapter can't handle the
throughput, doing both backup from clients to SAN attached disk, and doing
migration from SAN &nbsp;attached disk to SAN attached drives.

If we do a migration in the morning, when no backups are running, we get a
speed of around 27MB/s on the fibre attached drive with compression. So, the
FC drive has good performance, when no backups are running.

Can somebody tell me whats wrong?

Best Regards

Daniel Sparrman



-----------------------------------
Daniel Sparrman
Exist i Stockholm AB
Bergk�llav�gen 31D
192 79 SOLLENTUNA
V�xel: 08 - 754 98 00
Mobil: 070 - 399 27 51






******************* PLEASE NOTE *******************
This message, along with any attachments, may be confidential or legally
privileged.  It is intended only for the named person(s), who is/are the
only authorized recipients.  If this message has reached you in error,
destroy it without review and notify the sender immediately.  Thank you.
**********************************************************

Reply via email to