Roger, I'll defer to an IBM answer, but my read is "no", they aren't recommending DISK over FILE. I think what they are saying is no more along these lines: IFF you are using DISK storage pools, they will perform better on Raw LV than on cooked JFS2. This is a change from the past, where they had stated a preference for JFS2 over RAW.
I do not think they are stating a preference for DISK over FILE. my 2 cents. ..Paul At 04:27 PM 8/6/2010, Roger Deschner wrote: >I thought the food fight between sequential (devtype FILE) and random >(devtype DISK) primary storage pools had been settled a while ago in >favor of sequential. Indeed, TSM development has added features to make >sequential FILE stgpools quite a bit easier to deal with. > >But now I am reading in "TSM 6.2 Performance Tuning Guide" that: >"Customer experience and measurements in the lab show that raw logical >volumes offer better client backup/restore throughput and server >administrative process performance." (You can only allocate devtype DISK >in raw logical volumes.) It also notes that the previous advantage of >read-ahead provided by some filesystems such as JFS2 is now incorporated >into many disk subsystems, so that is no longer a consideration. > >So it would seem that if you aren't using TSM deduplication, the >Performance Tuning Guide now recommends that you should use random >instead of sequential primary 1st-level disk storage pools. > >Am I reading this right? > >Roger Deschner University of Illinois at Chicago [email protected] > Academic Computing & Communications Center >======I have not lost my mind -- it is backed up on tape somewhere.===== -- Paul Zarnowski Ph: 607-255-4757 Manager, Storage Services Fx: 607-255-8521 719 Rhodes Hall, Ithaca, NY 14853-3801 Em: [email protected]
