Zoltan Forray/AC/VCU wrote: > I thought it was 800-bytes for each entry? >
I once calculated it to be about 350 for a mainly unix environment... > We will continue to expand our 3494 library. We can easily add a rack of > 12-3592 drives. All it takes is $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$. > One other thing to consider is using CDP for files. That eases off a lot of your TSM server database load and per default probably only backs up the files you want to keep. > > > Remco Post <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Sent by: "ADSM: Dist Stor Manager" <[email protected]> > 04/28/2008 05:51 PM > Please respond to > "ADSM: Dist Stor Manager" <[email protected]> > > > To > [email protected] > cc > > Subject > Re: [ADSM-L] TSM server scaling/sizing for lots (>20000) nodes > > > > > > > Zoltan Forray/AC/VCU wrote: >> Crazy project time........... >> >> I have been asked to research the >> feasability/probability/scaleability/sizing of TSM to possibly handle >> backing up thousands (actually close to 20,000 or more) desktops! >> >> Anybody have experience doing very, very large scale backups of so many >> nodes? Don't expect much in storage occupancy since we would exclude >> things like MP3, etc. It would just be the ##### of files/database size >> (sounds like this would have to wait for V6 since DB2 should scale much >> better). >> >> Does anyone run their TSM servers, open? Trying to >> administer/register/monitor this many clients would be a nightmare. >> >> They are talking about budgeting close to $1M, which would include more >> bodies as well as the equipment/software! > > Well, you are an experienced TSM admin, so I guess you know the drill, > about 500 bytes for each version of each file. Get a rough estimate of > the number of files. The number of nodes you mention is an issue, even > if each stores just a few files (they won't I guess). > > You'll need lots of TSM instances, and lots of db spindles. Really, > there is a use for 15k RPM 72 GB (or even 36 GB) disks in raid1, and > you just found one. > > In my experience, there are a few things to make life easier, Gresham > EDT is one of them, with autolabeling and decent library sharing, you > really gain over TSM's native library sharing. On the plus-side, you are > limited to ACSLS libraries, which you'll probably need anyway for larger > amounts of data (how many options are there, really? ;-) ). > > -- > > Met vriendelijke groeten, > > Remco Post -- Met vriendelijke groeten, Remco Post, PLCS
