Zoltan,
I don't know your server level, but if you want to un- and reload your TSM
database at a specific level, you should reset this value to 1 - because it's a
known bug, that your reload will fail, when you unloaded your database with
tapeiobufs greater than 1
Gerhard Wolkerstorfer
[EMAIL PROTECTED] am 05.07.2001 18:14:35
Bitte antworten an [EMAIL PROTECTED]
An: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Kopie: (Blindkopie: Gerhard Wolkerstorfer/DEBIS/EDVG/AT)
Thema: Re: Database backup performance
*1*
I have increased it to 9 to see what happens.
This could help in a *BIG* way, expecially migration and such.
Thanks for pointing it out.
===========================
Zoltan Forray
Virginia Commonwealth University
University Computing Center
e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
voice: 804-828-4807
Petr Prerost
<pprerost@HTD To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
.CZ> cc:
Sent by: Subject: Re: Database backup
performance
"ADSM: Dist
Stor Manager"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]
RIST.EDU>
07/04/2001
03:16 AM
Please
respond to
"ADSM: Dist
Stor Manager"
Hi Zoltan ,
what is your tapeiobufs setting ? Can you see better tape throughput with
migration processing ?
regards
Petr
----- Puvodnm zprava -----
Od: "Zoltan Forray/AC/VCU" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Komu: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Odeslano: 2. cervence 2001 15:47
Predmet: Database backup performance
> I want to thank everyone who responded to my question(s). It seems that
> *EVERYONE* goes faster than us, some by a big margin.
>
> I just finished upgrading the OS/390 server from ADSM 3.1.2.50 to TSM
> 4.1.3. I was hoping the DB backup would be faster. Unfortunately, there
is
> "no joy in Mudville".
>
> The first full DB backup performed after the upgrade took 4h 43m.
>
> I am still looking for suggestions on how to improve these numbers.
>
> Changing the backup to 3590 drives/tapes only shaved about 20 minutes off
> the time. That mostly accounts for rewind and mount times (1-3590 vs
> 9-3490).
>
> I have bumped the BUFPOOLSIZE value to 80M but still cant achieve the
> elusive 98+% "Cache Hit Pct.".
>
> I've thought about trying SELFTUNEBUFPOOLSIZE but am a little concerned
> since we are currently somewhat real-storage constrained and TSM is
> currently at over 120M WSS, already.
>
> Anyone have any experience with this new option ? Any suggestions/tips
to
> improve the DB backup performance ?
>
> f adsm,q db f=d
> ANR5965I Console command: Q DB F=D
>
> Available Space (MB): 17,496
> Assigned Capacity (MB): 17,496
> Maximum Extension (MB): 0
> Maximum Reduction (MB): 3,020
> Page Size (bytes): 4,096
> Total Usable Pages: 4,478,976
> Used Pages: 3,700,667
> Pct Util: 82.6
> Max. Pct Util: 82.6
> Physical Volumes: 8
> Buffer Pool Pages: 20,480
> Total Buffer Requests: 63,986,411
> Cache Hit Pct.: 95.31
> Cache Wait Pct.: 0.00
> Backup in Progress?: No
> Type of Backup In Progress:
> Incrementals Since Last Full: 0
> Changed Since Last Backup (MB): 376.67
