ADSM-L

Re: Slowness of the Migration Process

1997-04-09 08:01:57
Subject: Re: Slowness of the Migration Process
From: "Pittson, Timothy ,HiServ/US" <tpittson AT HIMAIL.HCC DOT COM>
Date: Wed, 9 Apr 1997 08:01:57 -0400
Melinda,
        ADSM does support multiple stgpool migration processes.  I know this
option was also available at some point in version 1 (possibly as a
PTF).  The command to change this is

UPD STGPOOL poolname MIGPROCESS=n   (where n = 1-999 inclusive).

A couple of ADSM server options you can check (again... I think these
were available at some point in Version 1 but am not positive so check
the doc that came with the latest PTF you've applied)...

MOVEBATCHSIZE   (default = 32,  range = 1-256)
MOVESIZETHRESHOLD  (default = 1, range = 1-500)

Increasing these will help...

Good luck !!!

Tim Pittson
tpittson AT himail.hcc DOT com


>----------
>From:  Melinda Varian[SMTP:MAINT%PUCC.BITNET AT VM.MARIST DOT EDU]
>Sent:  Wednesday, April 09, 1997 7:10 AM
>To:    ADSM-L AT VM.MARIST DOT EDU
>Subject:       Slowness of the Migration Process
>
>I suspect I'm not the only one having a rather trying week due to the
>32-bit Windows clients doing full backups in honor of Daylight Savings
>(I have about 1200 of them).
>
>Of my three servers (all on VM, all V1), two are holding together, but
>the largest (1800 clients) is not.  I've expanded the disk storage pool
>on all of them and cranked the maximum number of sessions down, but the
>disk storage pool (6G) on the largest keeps filling up.
>
>The problem is that the migration process can't keep up, running around
>the clock.  Am I right in believing that only one migration process is
>allowed at a time?  Is there any way to up the priority of the migration
>task?  (It appears to be relatively low.)  I've given the server virtual
>machine massive favoring, and the tapes are in an STK silo, so it never
>waits long for tape mounts.  Any suggestions for speeding up the process?
>
>Melinda Varian,
>Princeton University
>
<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>