I don't have much experience with filesystems outside of nss/ntfs, but I haven't noticed any slowness at our site because of it. One difference from Debbie's situation is that we do have the directories getting backed up to disk, never going to tape. I ran a quick test (that's still running). So far after one hour, I've restored 52,873 files with a total size of 26.5GB. The tsm server is on a gigabit switch with the restore server. Our tsm server is v5.2.2.2, and the client is running v5.3. My first inkling is that she either needs to change where her directories get backed up, or check out the dsm.opt & dsmserv.opt settings. Troy Frank Network Services University of Wisconsin Medical Foundation 608.829.5384
>>> [EMAIL PROTECTED] 8/4/2005 8:57:20 AM >>> Hi Debbie, If your diskpool is big enoufh, you can try a "move nodedata <nodename> from=<tapepool> to=<diskpool>" first, so you can restore from disk. Than you know if the problem is in the library or not. I also know that Netware is not so fast in building big directory structures, so you can also win alot with dirmc, than TSM restores the directory stucture first, and than the files. If posible you can even use a small diskpool for dirmc's only, what you don't migrate to tape, this is also a big winner when restoring "slow" FS's as Netware and NTFS. Regards, Maurice ----- Original Message ----- From: Debbie Bassler To: [email protected] Sent: Wednesday, August 03, 2005 10:19 PM Subject: Re: [ADSM-L] Technote 1200328 Oops, I meant to include that in the email. The bottom of this doc shows the transfer rates.. Lawrence Clark < [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent by: "ADSM: Dist Stor Manager" < [email protected] > 08/03/2005 04:10 PM Please respond to "ADSM: Dist Stor Manager" To: [email protected] cc: Subject: Re: [ADSM-L] Technote 1200328 What did the tranfer rate show as? 1024 x 6.24 = 6389MB (megabyte) Network is usually in Megabit, yes? 6389MB x 8 = 51112 (megabit) >>> [EMAIL PROTECTED] 08/03/2005 3:49:17 PM >>> This doc offers alot of information about improving performance. I'm especially interested in this because it took 56 minutes to restore 6.24G of data, from Novell server to Novell server, over a 100MB pipe. Our TSM version is 5.1.1 ( I know,,,we need to upgrade)...and the client version is 5.2. In the dsmserv.opt file the MIRRORWRITE DB = SEQUENTIAL. According to this doc, we'll get better performance is we change MIRRORWRITE DB to PARALLEL. I thought I would do this then add the DBPAGESHADOW = YES parameter. (the MIRRORWRITE LOG = PARALLEL) My plan is to make small changes to see if there is an impact, positive or negative. We have 2G of virtual memory, so I changed the bufpoolsize from 262144 to 524288 and thought I'd make the MIRRORWRITE DB change also. Has anyone made these changes and seen any performance improvements/degredations? Any experiences or advice is welcome..... Thanks for any input, Debbie Confidentiality Notice follows: The information in this message (and the documents attached to it, if any) is confidential and may be legally privileged. It is intended solely for the addressee. Access to this message by anyone else is unauthorized. 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. If you have received this message in error, please delete all electronic copies of this message (and the documents attached to it, if any), destroy any hard copies you may have created and notify me immediately by replying to this email. Thank you.
