>Also, do you have a (fast) DISK based volume in front of the FILE storage >pool? We do this >so we can allow lots of client backups coming in and use >the number of migration processes >to control the data streams to the FILE >storage pool.
Yes, I had DISK pools before, but I have migrated all of them to FILE to be able to use TSM Server de-duplication. In my opinion, everybody can use DISK storage pool as less painful till you do not need de-duplication. Now about performance: - I am using JFS2 file systems on FATA disks (RAID5 and RAID6) and I was not able to see big difference in performance after migrating DISK --> FILE. Actually IBM stated the same in some documents; - I think disk performance is a matter of disk interface (number of adapters, adapter type, number of paths, switches, etc) and total number of disks (RAID type, number of RAID arrays, number of disks in RAID array). Grigori G. Solonovitch Senior Technical Architect Information Technology Ahli United Bank Kuwait http://www.ahliunited.com.kw Phone: (+965) 2231-2274 Mobile: (+965) 99798073 E-Mail: grigori.solonovi...@ahliunited.com Please consider the environment before printing this Email -----Original Message----- From: ADSM: Dist Stor Manager [mailto:ads...@vm.marist.edu] On Behalf Of Stef Coene Sent: Wednesday, September 22, 2010 12:29 PM To: ADSM-L@VM.MARIST.EDU Subject: Re: [ADSM-L] Determining devclass FILE values (a.k.a. New Server - Part Deux) On Friday 17 September 2010, you wrote: > From the few responses I got about 6.1.4.x vs 6.2.1.1 for a new server, > the responses leaned to 6.2.x. > > With that decision made, the next is laying out the structure of storage > pools and such. > > Most discussions/directions from here/IBM say that DEVCLASS FILE is the > way to go vs defining fixed storage volumes/pools for disk (or in this > case SAN) > > So, have you migrated to devclass FILE? > > For folks that are using devclass FILE, what values did you use for MAXCAP > and/or MOUNTLimit? How do you calculate/arrive at these numbers? > Pro/con's for just letting the system determine MAXCAP? Also, do you have a (fast) DISK based volume in front of the FILE storage pool? We do this so we can allow lots of client backups coming in and use the number of migration processes to control the data streams to the FILE storage pool. We also have 2 very very very busy 5.x servers with DISK storage pools. We are trying to migrate them to FILE based storage pools. We started with 100GB volumes but this was a disaster. Total storage is 17TB and 32TB. The server was running reclamation for the FILE based storage pools, backup to a remote FILE based storage pool and backup to a tape based local storage pool at the same time. Not good. When we changed the FILE based storage pool to 5 GB volumes, the result was much better. There was less reclamation needed because it is less likely that a volume has a status Filling. Stef ______________________________________________________________________ This email has been scanned by the MessageLabs Email Security System. For more information please visit http://www.messagelabs.com/email ______________________________________________________________________ Please consider the environment before printing this Email. CONFIDENTIALITY AND WAIVER: The information contained in this electronic mail message and any attachments hereto may be legally privileged and confidential. The information is intended only for the recipient(s) named in this message. If you are not the intended recipient you are notified that any use, disclosure, copying or distribution is prohibited. If you have received this in error please contact the sender and delete this message and any attachments from your computer system. We do not guarantee that this message or any attachment to it is secure or free from errors, computer viruses or other conditions that may damage or interfere with data, hardware or software.
