as well
Unixgeekus
Rejean Larivee
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
COM> cc:
Sent by: "ADSM: Subject: Re: TSM 5116 server /
storageagent perf
; 1-800-PAGE-MCI#1376812
>
> -Original Message-
> From: Burton, Robert [mailto:robert.burton@;RBC.COM]
> Sent: Friday, November 15, 2002 10:29 AM
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: Re: TSM 5116 server / storageagent performance degradation
>
> no we are still using 3
,
-
Rejean Larivee
IBM TSM/ADSM Level 2 Support
David E Ehresman
cc:
Sent by: "ADSM: Subject: Re: TSM 5116 server /
storageagent perfor
5116 server / storageagent performance degradation
no we are still using 32 bit
-Original Message-
From: David E Ehresman [mailto:deehre01@;LOUISVILLE.EDU]
Sent: Friday, November 15, 2002 10:21 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: TSM 5116 server / storageagent performance degradation
no we are still using 32 bit
-Original Message-
From: David E Ehresman [mailto:deehre01@;LOUISVILLE.EDU]
Sent: Friday, November 15, 2002 10:21 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: TSM 5116 server / storageagent performance degradation
Did you go to 64 bit mode when you went to 5.1.1.6
Did you go to 64 bit mode when you went to 5.1.1.6? We have some
clients that start out backing up at a good rate and then shift into a
mode where they are running very very slow. We now think this might be
a 64 bit mode server problem.
David
>>> [EMAIL PROTECTED] 11/15/02 09:20AM >>>
We were r
We were running tsm 4.2.2.4 on an S7A AIX server. We were putting through
approx 1.7 TB nightly with approx 85%
going to disk storagepool and the remaining going direct to tape. We were
also testing Lan-free with Gresham EDT-Distributape and STK acsls/9840 tape
drives and we were consistently on
