We've used subfiles successfully for large files, but only because we were able to put large amount of fileclass disk behind our primary diskpools. If you do that, collocation and how many subfiles pieces there are becomes a moot point. Don't go there if you're using tape as the back end.
Steve Schaub Systems Engineer, Windows BlueCross BlueShield of Tennessee -----Original Message----- From: ADSM: Dist Stor Manager [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Mark Stapleton Sent: Wednesday, January 21, 2009 10:07 AM To: [email protected] Subject: Re: [ADSM-L] Unexpected behavior - Win2k3, TSM 5.4, NTFS permissions From: ADSM: Dist Stor Manager [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Kinder, Kevin P I haven't used the following two features in combination yet, so a question: If I were backing up using subfile and collocation, would this alleviate the problem of the subfile backups being spread over many volumes? Marginally. You'd still have to wander an individual tape (or tapes) to pick up all the deltas that the subfile process created. This will greatly delay restores, particularly large restores of many small files. Also, remember the file size restrictions enforced by subfile work. As I mentioned earlier, adaptive subfile backup technology was originally designed to accommodate small-ish backups coming through narrow WAN pipes. In the meantime, collocation will increase tape volume usage, overall tape traffic, and daily migration and reclamation processes. As is always true in life, you end up having to rob Peter to pay Paul. -- Mark Stapleton System engineer, CDW No virus found in this outgoing message. Checked by AVG. Version: 7.5.552 / Virus Database: 270.10.10/1905 - Release Date: 1/20/2009 2:34 PM ----------------------------------------------------- Please see the following link for the BlueCross BlueShield of Tennessee E-mail disclaimer: http://www.bcbst.com/email_disclaimer.shtm
