Thank's all for the reply's, it's not a log/db/diskpool contrain issue
because I was making a backup of a single 150GB SQL database, that should
not result in many iop's to the log/db.
I am going to try the filepool thing with some private volumes that I can
migrate during the housekeeping to see i
Hi Stefan,
that's what IBM told us.
--
Mit freundlichen Grüßen
Michael Prix
On 02/11/2013 01:46 PM, Stefan Folkerts wrote:
Thanks Michael, so the use of the filepool storagepool type does not set
the O_SYNC flag (and therefor uses the cache on the raid controller) but a
normal diskpool does (
ST.EDU] On Behalf Of Stefan
Folkerts
Sent: Sunday, February 10, 2013 9:56 AM
To: ADSM-L@VM.MARIST.EDU
Subject: [ADSM-L] Strange TSM diskpool performance issue
Hi all,
I am running into a strange performance issue at a small TSM site.
They have an new intel based TSM server running Windows 2008 R2 runni
Stefan,
It may be that all (or an unintended mixed subset(i.e. 1 log, 2 DB and
3 STGPOOL disks) of the disks are on a single I/O channel resulting in a
bottleneck on the data path. This would be reflected by high IO (combined
DB,LOG and STGPOOL activity) during a backup to disk while comparativ
> Thanks Michael, so the use of the filepool storagepool type does not set
> the O_SYNC flag (and therefor uses the cache on the raid controller) but
a
> normal diskpool does (and therefor doesn't use the cache)?
It's also possible that part of what you are seeing is the Raid5 write
penalty.
The d
Thanks Michael, so the use of the filepool storagepool type does not set
the O_SYNC flag (and therefor uses the cache on the raid controller) but a
normal diskpool does (and therefor doesn't use the cache)?
On Mon, Feb 11, 2013 at 11:45 AM, Michael Prix wrote:
> Hi Stefan,
>
> I assume with dis
Hi Stefan,
I assume with diskpool you mean primary pools devicetype disk.
Create a filepool on the internal disks and measure performance against it.
If this is as expected, the internal RAID-controller honors the
O_SYNC-writes TSM uses for diskpools and in this case the cache of the
RAID-contr
Hi Chavdar,
If it would be the raidcontroller I would expect a CIFS copy to be slow as
well but it is not, a LAN based CIFS copy to the same disk the diskpool is
on is fast, the disk is only slow when using it with TSM.
Regards,
Stefan
On Sun, Feb 10, 2013 at 9:24 PM, Chavdar Cholev wrote:
Hi Stefan,
if it is HP server check to you have cache battery on RAID (if any) I
had simmilar issue, when I do backup form disk to LTO it was ~80-90
MB/s, but when nodes baked up to this disk stg it was ~8-10 MB/s even
I have etherchannel 2x1Gbps ...
Regards
Chavdar
On Sun, Feb 10, 2013 at 4:55 PM
Hi all,
I am running into a strange performance issue at a small TSM site.
They have an new intel based TSM server running Windows 2008 R2 running TSM
5.5 (don't ask) with enough CPU and memory to run the server 4 times over.
It has 2 disks in raid 1 for the TSM log, 4 disks in raid 10 for the TSM
y, August 19, 2002 2:37 AM
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: Re: diskpool performance
>
>
> It depends on how the RAID controller implemented RAID-10 (or
> RAID-1E). If
> your write request is small (and random as in TSM DB) you can
> easily hit
> read-before-write penalty
AIL PROTECTED]>
Sent by:"ADSM: Dist Stor Manager" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
cc:
Subject:Re: diskpool performance
Hey,
what the hell was your raid-10 like?
Raid10 is by no means slower than raid1, if correctly implemented (by the
means o
: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: diskpool performance
The disk storage pools need to be RAID-1+. It's "other people's data"
and you are responsible for it, from the moment it is backed up from
their client systems. As you have discovered, performance is not good
with anything oth
t;Technical Specialist
>Naptheon Inc.
>757-688-8180
>
>
>-Original Message-
>From: Mark Stapleton [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
>Sent: Sunday, July 28, 2002 1:46 AM
>To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>Subject: Re: diskpool performance
>
>
>From: ADSM: Dist Stor Manage
writes because it is
always a full stripe write).
Paul D. Seay, Jr.
Technical Specialist
Naptheon Inc.
757-688-8180
-Original Message-
From: Mark Stapleton [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Sunday, July 28, 2002 1:46 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: diskpool performance
From: ADSM
From: ADSM: Dist Stor Manager [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of
Dirk Kastens
> Seemed to be a faulty raid controller. We always used raid5 for
> TSM volumes and never got any errors or bottlenecks. Of course,
> we use different raids for stgpools and the database.
A question: why are RAIDing
24, 2002 12:01 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: diskpool performance
Please could someone advise me on the following issue we have with tsm. I am
a TSM novice and would appreciate some pointers etc.
Environment : TSM 4.2.0 AIX4.3.3 ML09 Server and Client on same Server
using Sharedmem
2
Lantto [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Wednesday, July 24, 2002 2:03 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: diskpool performance
What are your throughput values? Tape is not necessarily slower than disk,
especially when the data is compressed on the tape drive.
Orville L. Lantto
Datatrend
by: "ADSM: Dist Stor Manager" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
07/24/02 01:31 PM
Please respond to "ADSM: Dist Stor Manager"
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
cc:
Subject:Re: diskpool performance
ON Tape... It take time to unwind, take the tape out, put ano
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: Re: diskpool performance
>
> What are your throughput values? Tape is not necessarily slower than
> disk, especially when the data is compressed on the tape drive.
>
> Orville L. Lantto
> Datatrend Technologies, Inc. (http://www.data
-Original Message-
From: ADSM: Dist Stor Manager [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of
Seay, Paul
Sent: Wednesday, July 24, 2002 10:05 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: diskpool performance
You are probably running at source disk speed in both cases. Just because
it if fibre disk does
nt Wait I/O, I would suggest Disk is not your bottleneck.
Alex Paschal
Storage Administrator
Freightliner, LLC
(503) 745-6850 phone/vmail
-Original Message-
From: Steve Freeman [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Wednesday, July 24, 2002 9:01 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: diskpool perfor
Hi,
I have noticed that it is very bad for performance to have 10+ diskpools
(we had close to 50 volumes) on one raid5 volume, and have multimpe
volumes being accessed at the same time. We greatly increased throughput
by breaking our raid5 down into jbod, having just a few diskpool volumes
on a d
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
07/24/2002 11:00 AM
Please respond to "ADSM: Dist Stor Manager"
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
cc:
Subject:diskpool performance
Please could someone advise me on the following issue we have with tsm.
I am a TSM novice and would appreci
: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Steve Freeman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent by: "ADSM: Dist Stor Manager" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
07/24/02 11:00 AM
Please respond to "ADSM: Dist Stor Manager"
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
cc:
Subject:diskpool performance
Please could someone advise me on the following issue we have with tsm.
I am a TSM novice and would appreciate some pointers etc.
Environment : TSM 4.2.0 AIX4.3.3 ML09 Server and Client on same Server
using Sharedmem
2 Stgpools defined diskpool and tapepool
we have created a diskp
26 matches
Mail list logo
