Sounds like you've got a handle on the issues... you will help performance
of concurrent sessions by defining the disk pool volumes so they're the
lined up with the physical volumes, and match or exceed the number of
concurrent sessions you plan to run. You might just use 4 volumes, one each
for the 4 physical drives; or, you might want to create two or more disk
volume files for each of the physical volumes. You may want to define
multiple disk pools, since you may want to segregate some copy pool data,
for whatever reasons... such as collocation on for some, off for others.
If there's no need to migrate disk-to-tape, you'd want to ensure the
copypool jobs are run as soon as practicable after the normal nightly
backups. Also, you might want to consider two copypool copies, one for
onsite and one for offsite.
I don't think you'll need to be concerned with disk pool storage
fragmentation, but you could eliminate it if you suspect fragmentation is
affecting performance; use "move data" to (effectively) remove such dead
spots from one volume (consolidating the unexpired data onto other volumes).
BTW, I don't think raw volumes are supported for disk pools; you'll need to
create file system volumes.
Hope this helps.
Don France
Technical Architect - P.A.C.E.
Bus-Ph: (408) 257-3037
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.pacepros.com
-----Original Message-----
From: Walker, Lesley R [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Tuesday, October 31, 2000 8:26 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Running with only one drive
Due to circumstances that I won't bore you all with, I am going to have to
implement a small TSM server with a DLT auto-changer that has only one tape
drive. This is to a be temporary situation but I want it to be sustainable
"just in case".
The total amount of data to be backed up is easily able to be fitted into
the disk space that I have available, so my plan is to have all primary
storage in one diskpool, and a copypool on tape.
Do I need to worry about the diskpool space becoming fragmented as old data
expires?
What's the best way to set up the diskpool - should I create multiple
filesystem volumes in the space, or use raw disk volumes, or does it make no
real difference?
Would it be better to use a standard random-access diskpool, or should I
create a sequential-on-disk pool?
Performance is not much of a concern due to the small amount of data, I just
want to make sure it can be done.
The specifics are:
3.7.3 on Solaris
9GB (total) to be backed up from multiple clients
(not expected to grow at all)
2 versions
4 x 9GB disks for diskpool
--
Lesley Walker
Distributed Systems Services, EDS New Zealand
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
"Where a calculator on the ENIAC is equipped with
18,000 vacuum tubes and weighs 30 tons,
computers in the future by the year 2000, may have
only 1,000 vacuum tubes and weigh only 1.5 tons"
Popular Mechanics, March 1949
