Re: RAW vs. JFS question

2004-01-23 Thread Zoltan Forray/AC/VCU
:Re: RAW vs. JFS question There are not any performance improvements when the TSM Recovery Log or TSM Data Base is put on RAW volumes. It would be much easier to manage if the environment is all JFS. There may also be a need in the future to run multiple instances of the TSM server code on the same

Re: RAW vs. JFS question

2004-01-23 Thread Robin Sharpe
: | |Re: RAW vs. JFS question

RAW vs. JFS question

2004-01-22 Thread Bill Boyer
The new TSM runing guide recommends using RAW volumes for performance reasons. I have a client that doesn't want to go RAW because the JFS logging goes away. I'm not that AIX savy to be able to argue one way or the other with him... Going RAW for performance, does that take away from

Re: RAW vs. JFS question

2004-01-22 Thread Richard Sims
The new TSM runing guide recommends using RAW volumes for performance reasons. I have a client that doesn't want to go RAW because the JFS logging goes away. I'm not that AIX savy to be able to argue one way or the other with him... Bill - See The Advantages of Using Journal File System Files in

Re: RAW vs. JFS question

2004-01-22 Thread Gerhard Rentschler
I think the most interesting question is still unanswered: how much performance do I gain with raw volumes? More exactly: how much less time will an expiration take on a 100 GB TSM data base? I don't think raw volumes would make sense for disk caches. Does anyone have experience in this area?

Re: RAW vs. JFS question

2004-01-22 Thread Bill Boyer
PROTECTED] Subject: Re: RAW vs. JFS question The new TSM runing guide recommends using RAW volumes for performance reasons. I have a client that doesn't want to go RAW because the JFS logging goes away. I'm not that AIX savy to be able to argue one way or the other with him... Bill - See

Re: RAW vs. JFS question

2004-01-22 Thread French, Michael
French Savvis Communications IDS01 Santa Clara, CA (408)450-7812 -- desk (408)239-9913 -- mobile -Original Message- From: ADSM: Dist Stor Manager [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Gerhard Rentschler Sent: Thursday, January 22, 2004 9:05 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: RAW vs. JFS

Re: RAW vs. JFS question

2004-01-22 Thread Zoltan Forray/AC/VCU
noticable) performance benefits from RAW. French, Michael [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent by: ADSM: Dist Stor Manager [EMAIL PROTECTED] 01/22/2004 10:12 AM Please respond to ADSM: Dist Stor Manager To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] cc: Subject:Re: RAW vs. JFS question I

Re: RAW vs. JFS question

2004-01-22 Thread Richard Sims
I can't speak to AIX, I use Solaris but I just converted all of my volumes from mounted, VXFS ones to RAW and the performance difference has been huge. ... This might be an indication that file system operations in that environment - particulary, sync() - may be quite expensive. Many are

Re: RAW vs. JFS question

2004-01-22 Thread Stef Coene
On Thursday 22 January 2004 15:38, Bill Boyer wrote: The new TSM runing guide recommends using RAW volumes for performance reasons. I have a client that doesn't want to go RAW because the JFS logging goes away. I'm not that AIX savy to be able to argue one way or the other with him... Going

Re: RAW vs. JFS question

2004-01-22 Thread Paul Zarnowski
At 06:24 PM 1/22/2004 +0100, you wrote: On Thursday 22 January 2004 15:38, Bill Boyer wrote: The new TSM runing guide recommends using RAW volumes for performance reasons. I think IBM's recommendation is raw for DB and LOG, and JFS for stgpool volumes (because of potential readahead benefits in

Re: RAW vs. JFS question

2004-01-22 Thread James Hunt
PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, January 22, 2004 1:36 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: RAW vs. JFS question At 06:24 PM 1/22/2004 +0100, you wrote: On Thursday 22 January 2004 15:38, Bill Boyer wrote: The new TSM runing guide recommends using RAW volumes for performance reasons. I think IBM's

Re: RAW vs. JFS question

2004-01-22 Thread Paul Zarnowski
At 03:01 PM 1/22/2004 -0500, James Hunt wrote: There are not any performance improvements when the TSM Recovery Log or TSM Data Base is put on RAW volumes. Moving from JFS to RAW (for DB and LOG vols) does in fact help performance somewhat on larger systems. On smaller systems which are not

Re: RAW vs. JFS question

2004-01-22 Thread Steve Harris
Bill, JFS journalling doesn't journal data changes, only changes to metadata. So in a filesystem with lots of file and directory creates and deletes its useful. In the TSM situation, such changes are rare, and so JFS doesn't buy you a lot in terms of recoverability. Steve Steve Harris AIX

Re: RAW vs. JFS question

2004-01-22 Thread Coats, Jack
several years ago (4?) I was working on TSM on Solaris, and working for a VAR we did some testing. Putting TSM files (everything) on a raw JBOD was significantly faster than using a big raid array. for customers, we did use (in the old days, online disk suite) and a white paper from Sun, to use