We often use IBM Storwize systems, V3700 for smaller setups and V5020 for larger configurations. >From 24 up to 60 4-6TB nearline drives all in RAID 6.
2x8 core Lenovo servers with internal SSD's in RAID 5 attached to (super fast) internal raid controllers for database and active log reaching 140K iop/s in IBM Spectrum Protect database benchmarks. We outfit them with 192GB of memory when using replication. These systems do 800MB/s inline deduplication and compression without CPU room to spare in some load testing. I have seen that 10Gb/s line filled up many times and even use LACP configurations with two 10Gb/s adapters to make sure I'm not holding it back. We usually run Linux, SLES to be exact. The first time I saw one of these things do inline dedup at those speeds...the inner nerd got a little emotional. :-) We've really got some amazing tech right here with these containerpools. On Wed, Aug 24, 2016 at 1:08 PM, Rhodes, Richard L. < rrho...@firstenergycorp.com> wrote: > I'm curious, what kind of storage system do ya'll use for your container > pools? > > > > -----Original Message----- > From: ADSM: Dist Stor Manager [mailto:ADSM-L@VM.MARIST.EDU] On Behalf Of > David Ehresman > Sent: Tuesday, August 23, 2016 8:56 AM > To: ADSM-L@VM.MARIST.EDU > Subject: *EXTERNAL* Re: deleing data from a containerpool > > We are getting a 78% savings on a mixed workload (BA, Oracle, VM, > Exchange, SQL) with about 350 nodes moving around 10TB of data a night. > > David > > -----Original Message----- > From: ADSM: Dist Stor Manager [mailto:ADSM-L@VM.MARIST.EDU] On Behalf Of > Stefan Folkerts > Sent: Tuesday, August 23, 2016 8:43 AM > To: ADSM-L@VM.MARIST.EDU > Subject: Re: [ADSM-L] deleing data from a containerpool > > This inline deduplication and compression thing really is amazing; > > excerpt from q stgpool f=d > > Deduplication Savings: 153,840 G (90.83%) > Compression Savings: 8,711 G (56.07%) > Total Space Saved: 162,550 G (95.97%) > > So on top of the 90.83% deduplication saving (that dont' require any > reclaiming) this customer saves another 56.07% of the stored data due to > compression making it a total of 95.97% space saved. > These figures require a lot of duplicate data of course but still, > containerpools FTW! > We call it the "cool pool" btw. :-) > > > > On Mon, Aug 22, 2016 at 4:01 PM, Del Hoobler <hoob...@us.ibm.com> wrote: > > > Minor correction. > > > > Inline compression for container pools was added in March in 7.1.5. > > > > > > IBM Spectrum Protect 7.1.5 - Inline compression: > > - Performed in-line after deduplication to provide additional storage > > savings > > - Negligible impact on resources – uses latest and most efficient > > compression algorithms > > - Can potentially double (or more) your storage savings after > > deduplication > > > > > > Del > > > > ---------------------------------------------------- > > > > > > "ADSM: Dist Stor Manager" <ADSM-L@VM.MARIST.EDU> wrote on 08/22/2016 > > 09:53:08 AM: > > > > > From: "Loon, Eric van (ITOPT3) - KLM" <eric-van.l...@klm.com> > > > To: ADSM-L@VM.MARIST.EDU > > > Date: 08/22/2016 09:53 AM > > > Subject: Re: deleing data from a containerpool > > > Sent by: "ADSM: Dist Stor Manager" <ADSM-L@VM.MARIST.EDU> > > > > > > Indeed, TSM 7.1.0 to 7.1.5 only supported deduplication, additional > > > compression was introduced in 7.1.6. > > > Kind regards, > > > Eric van Loon > > > Air France/KLM Storage Engineering > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > From: ADSM: Dist Stor Manager [mailto:ADSM-L@VM.MARIST.EDU] On > > > Behalf Of David Ehresman > > > Sent: maandag 22 augustus 2016 15:12 > > > To: ADSM-L@VM.MARIST.EDU > > > Subject: Re: deleing data from a containerpool > > > > > > At the most recent levels of TSM, it both dedups and compresses but > > > make sure you are at a level that does both. There was a level that > > > only did dedup but not compression. > > > > > > David > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > From: ADSM: Dist Stor Manager [mailto:ADSM-L@VM.MARIST.EDU] On > > > Behalf Of Rhodes, Richard L. > > > Sent: Monday, August 22, 2016 9:07 AM > > > To: ADSM-L@VM.MARIST.EDU > > > Subject: Re: [ADSM-L] deleing data from a containerpool > > > > > > >But I totally agree, everyone who is using file device > > > > > > >classes or expensive backend deduplication (like Data Domain or > > Protectier) > > > > > > >should seriously consider switching to container pools. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > We currently use DataDomains. > > > > > > With a DD it dedups what it can, then compresses the rest. > > > > > > Does TSM also try and compress what is leftover after dedup? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > > > > From: ADSM: Dist Stor Manager [mailto:ADSM-L@VM.MARIST.EDU] On > > > Behalf Of Loon, Eric van (ITOPT3) - KLM > > > > > > Sent: Tuesday, August 16, 2016 3:39 AM > > > > > > To: ADSM-L@VM.MARIST.EDU > > > > > > Subject: Re: deleing data from a containerpool > > > > > > > > > > > > Hi Stefan! > > > > > > Our database is on SSD in an IBM V3700, but the time needed for a > > > del filespace can be significant though. But I totally agree, > > > everyone who is using file device classes or expensive backend > > > deduplication (like Data Domain or Protectier) should seriously > > > consider switching to container pools. We are working on a design > > > for our next TSM servers and we are able to lower our costs per TB > > > by 75% compared to the old design based on the Data Domain! > > > > > > Kind regards, > > > > > > Eric van Loon > > > > > > Air France/KLM Storage Engineering > > > > > > > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > > > > From: ADSM: Dist Stor Manager [mailto:ADSM-L@VM.MARIST.EDU] On > > > Behalf Of Stefan Folkerts > > > > > > Sent: dinsdag 16 augustus 2016 8:33 > > > > > > To: ADSM-L@VM.MARIST.EDU > > > > > > Subject: Re: deleing data from a containerpool > > > > > > > > > > > > Yes, I too have noticed this and it is something to keep in mind. > > > > > > At the same time, I think almost everybody using this pool will be > > > using SSD's for the database the impact will be overseeable. > > > > > > But the directory containerpool is still the best thing to happen to > > > Spectrum Protect since replication came along if you ask me. great > > > performance increase over fileclass restores, no more stopping > > > reclaims during the day to increase restore performance, no more > > > messing with numopenvolsallowed and reclaim values and number of > > > processes to optimize daily operations and restore speed...oh, and > > > compression that saves an easy 30-50% storage and license cost on > > > top of the deduplication! > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Mon, Aug 15, 2016 at 11:20 AM, Loon, Eric van (ITOPT3) - KLM < > > > eric-van.l...@klm.com> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > Hi all! > > > > > > > After doing some extensive testing with a directory container > > > > > > > storagepool I noticed a significant change compared to the old > > > > > > > traditional storage pools. > > > > > > > In a traditional storage pool TSM stores a file like an object. In > > > > > > > most cases one file is one object as far as I could see. Deleting > this > > > > > > > > > data is very fast: a delete filespace runs rather fast because TSM > > > > > > > only has to delete the objects. So deleting a large database client > > > > > > > with multiple TBs takes a few seconds or maybe a few minutes. > > > > > > > When you are using a container storage pool everything changes. Files > > > > > > > are still stored as objects, but objects are split into chunks. The > > > > > > > average size of a chuck is approx. 100 KB and TSM performs dedup on > > > > > > > this chuck level. So if you now delete a large file, TSM has to > > > > > > > inspect every chunk to see if it is unique or not. When it is unique > > > > > > > it will be deleted, otherwise not. If you delete a file which is for > > > > > > > instance 40 GB in size, TSM has to inspect around 420,000 chucks > > > > > > > before the object can be deleted. I noticed that this takes several > > > > > > > seconds to complete, so one has to take into consideration that the > > > > > > > deletion of large clients requires significant more time to > > > complete than one is used to. > > > > > > > Deleing a client with little more than 1 TB of Oracle data was > running > > > > > > > > > for more than 20 minutes. So a delete filespace for really large > > > > > > > database clients can run for hours! Has anyone else noticed this > > > behavior too? > > > > > > > Kind regards, > > > > > > > Eric van Loon > > > > > > > Air France/KLM Storage Engineering > > > > > > > ******************************************************** > > > > > > > For information, services and offers, please visit our web site: > > > > > > > https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url? > > > > > u=http-3A__www.klm.com&d=AwIGaQ&c=SgMrq23dbjbGX6e0ZsSHgEZX6A4IAf > > 1SO3AJ2bNrHlk&r=dOGCMY197NTNH1k_wcsrWS3_fxedKW4rpKJ8cHCD2L8&m= > > vUuUnchIk8qp8ANX9ecD5HSZje8iCRgiNUPhmahQWTQ&s= > > eE7XROkp9Iv02y6CJDM84muZgTbKNhpt7nAgYPrCs-0&e= > > > . This e-mail and any attachment may contain > > > > > > > confidential and privileged material intended for the addressee only. > > > > > > > If you are not the addressee, you are notified that no part of the > > > > > > > e-mail or any attachment may be disclosed, copied or distributed, and > > > > > > > that any other action related to this e-mail or attachment is > strictly > > > > > > > > > prohibited, and may be unlawful. If you have received this e-mail by > > > > > > > error, please notify the sender immediately by return e-mail, and > > > delete this message. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Koninklijke Luchtvaart Maatschappij NV (KLM), its subsidiaries and/or > > > > > > > its employees shall not be liable for the incorrect or incomplete > > > > > > > transmission of this e-mail or any attachments, nor responsible > > > for any delay in receipt. > > > > > > > Koninklijke Luchtvaart Maatschappij N.V. (also known as KLM Royal > > > > > > > Dutch > > > > > > > Airlines) is registered in Amstelveen, The Netherlands, with > > > > > > > registered number 33014286 > > > > > > > ******************************************************** > > > > > > > > > > > > > ******************************************************** > > > > > > For information, services and offers, please visit our web site: > > > https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url? > > > > > u=http-3A__www.klm.com&d=AwIGaQ&c=SgMrq23dbjbGX6e0ZsSHgEZX6A4IAf > > 1SO3AJ2bNrHlk&r=dOGCMY197NTNH1k_wcsrWS3_fxedKW4rpKJ8cHCD2L8&m= > > vUuUnchIk8qp8ANX9ecD5HSZje8iCRgiNUPhmahQWTQ&s= > > eE7XROkp9Iv02y6CJDM84muZgTbKNhpt7nAgYPrCs-0&e= > > > . This e-mail and any attachment may contain confidential and > > > privileged material intended for the addressee only. If you are not > > > the addressee, you are notified that no part of the e-mail or any > > > attachment may be disclosed, copied or distributed, and that any > > > other action related to this e-mail or attachment is strictly > > > prohibited, and may be unlawful. If you have received this e-mail by > > > error, please notify the sender immediately by return e-mail, and > > > delete this message. > > > > > > > > > > > > Koninklijke Luchtvaart Maatschappij NV (KLM), its subsidiaries and/ > > > or its employees shall not be liable for the incorrect or incomplete > > > transmission of this e-mail or any attachments, nor responsible for > > > any delay in receipt. > > > > > > Koninklijke Luchtvaart Maatschappij N.V. (also known as KLM Royal > > > Dutch Airlines) is registered in Amstelveen, The Netherlands, with > > > registered number 33014286 > > > > > > ******************************************************** > > > > > > > > > > > > ******************************************************** > > > For information, services and offers, please visit our web site: > > > https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__www.klm. > com&d=AwIFaQ&c=SgMrq23dbjbGX6e0ZsSHgEZX6A4IAf1SO3AJ2bNrHlk&r= > dOGCMY197NTNH1k_wcsrWS3_fxedKW4rpKJ8cHCD2L8&m= > 2khjm5kIUk4HAMhbAmSErW4psymX49EvvcPlonm458c&s=KERJhiJfWrogTNbgmZOr6_ > HGAgfaXIQntXRwL231Di4&e= . This e-mail and any attachment may contain > > > confidential and privileged material intended for the addressee > > > only. If you are not the addressee, you are notified that no part of > > > the e-mail or any attachment may be disclosed, copied or > > > distributed, and that any other action related to this e-mail or > > > attachment is strictly prohibited, and may be unlawful. If you have > > > received this e-mail by error, please notify the sender immediately > > > by return e-mail, and delete this message. > > > > > > Koninklijke Luchtvaart Maatschappij NV (KLM), its subsidiaries and/ > > > or its employees shall not be liable for the incorrect or incomplete > > > transmission of this e-mail or any attachments, nor responsible for > > > any delay in receipt. > > > Koninklijke Luchtvaart Maatschappij N.V. (also known as KLM Royal > > > Dutch Airlines) is registered in Amstelveen, The Netherlands, with > > > registered number 33014286 > > > ******************************************************** > > > > > > > > > >
