hello,
the reason for slow backup or archiving is in my expierience mostly a
mismatch in switchport speed. On the other hand i had very backupperformance
after
there had been a new virusscan engine installed. In this case the W2k
Servers show no influence but the 4.0 NT Servers did. In this case the CPU-Usage
is up to 100%. So may have a look at applications which are in conflict with
your TSM-Clients.
regards
M.Kindermann
Wuerzburg/Germany
> try also:
>
>
> BufPoolSize 81920 --> set to 10% of RAM
> UseLargeBuffers Yes ---> set to NO
> MoveBatchSize 256 ---> set to 1000
>
> for the rest Zlatko said it all, especially about the tapes. maybe you can
> run an instr_client_detail trace to take a look at where the bottleneck
> might be.
> what about client options?
>
> Cordiali saluti
> Gianluca Mariani
> Tivoli TSM Global Response Team, Roma
> Via Sciangai 53, Roma
> phones : +39(0)659664598
> +393351270554 (mobile)
> gianluca_mariani AT it.ibm DOT com
>
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> "The people of Krikkit,are, well, you know, they're just a bunch of real
> sweet guys, you know, who just happen to want to kill everybody. Hell, I
> feel the same way some mornings..."
>
>
>
> Zlatko
> Krastev/ACIT
> <acit@ATTGLOBAL To
> .NET> ADSM-L AT VM.MARIST DOT EDU
> Sent by: "ADSM: cc
> Dist Stor
> Manager" bcc
> <ADSM-L AT VM DOT MARI
> ST.EDU> Subject
> Re: Troubleshooting performance issues
>
> 06/11/2002
> 11.20
>
>
> Please respond
> to "ADSM: Dist
> Stor Manager"
>
>
>
>
>
>
> ---> TCPWindowsize 64512
>
> TSM Reference Manual:
> "TCPWINDOWSIZE
> Specifies, in kilobytes, the amount of receive data that can be buffered
> at one time on a TCP/IP connection.
> ...
> 3. A window size larger than the buffer space on the network adapter might
> degrade throughput due to resending packets that were lost on the adapter.
> "
> Try "tcpwindowsize 256" instead
>
> ---> 3 IDE drives
>
> Is the DB on separate drive? How many volumes ?!?! What is the drive and
> what is the DB cache hit ratio?
> IDE drives perform terrible if you issue more than one operation against
> them - commands are queued in the device driver or controller but the
> drive is executing them one-by-one. If you have master+slave drive on same
> IDE channel - one drive have to wait until the other finishes its
> operation and frees the IDE bus.
> Do yourself a favour - buy one or two SCSI drives. It is a server on the
> end.
>
> ---> 3 drives. OS - DB - LOG
>
> Your network is 100 Mb/s (~= 10 MB/s). The drives in 3583 are LTO, right
> (15MB/s). You wrote 3 drives (and small diskpool or no at all) - so you
> are attempting to backup direct to tape? Thus your network is unable to
> feed the beast quickly enough and LTO has to stop-rewind back-start.
> Usually under such circumstances you not only are wearing out to drive but
> also are getting 1-3 MB/s (or less) tape-write rate.
>
> ---> Network data transfer rate: 570.67 KB/sec
>
> It might be worth to check the network (preferably after paying attention
> to above remarks). The TSM server is 100+Full+NoAuto but what about the
> client nodes, switch(es)?
>
> Zlatko Krastev
> IT Consultant
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Etienne Brodeur <ebrodeur AT SERTI DOT COM>
> Sent by: "ADSM: Dist Stor Manager" <ADSM-L AT VM.MARIST DOT EDU>
> 05.11.2002 16:44
> Please respond to "ADSM: Dist Stor Manager"
>
>
> To: ADSM-L AT VM.MARIST DOT EDU
> cc:
> Subject: Troubleshooting performance issues
>
>
> I have some major performance issues during archive operations. I also
> have bad performance durning backups, but the backup window is large so
> they complete without any problems. I can't seem to put my finger on the
> bottleneck and was wondering if someone had a document to recommend when
> looking for performance issues?
>
> Here is the scenario:
>
> TSM 4.2.2.10 server on W2K (SP2)
> 3 IDE drives. OS - DB - LOG
> 100 Mbs/Full Duplex (not auto)
> LTO 3583 SCSI attached to the server
> Server Options:
> CommTimeOut 60
> IdleTimeOut 30
> BufPoolSize 81920
> LogPoolSize 512
> TxnGroupMax 256
> MoveBatchSize 256
> MoveSizeThresh 500
> UseLargeBuffers Yes
> NOBUFPREfetch No
> AuditStorage Yes
> SELFTUNEBUFpool Yes
> SELFTUNETXNsize Yes
> TCPWindowsize 64512
> TCPNoDelay Yes
>
> There are 10 clients running 4.2.2.x (mostly 4.2.2.0). I have not set any
> performance settings in the DSM.OPTs. The servers have less than 10 GB of
> data each. I have 5 of them archiving to tape at the same time and they
> are all running very slowly:
>
> 05-11-2002 01:29:29 ANE4952I (Session: 5848, Node: HY-ORAPED-2000) Total
>
> number of objects inspected: 102,322
> 05-11-2002 01:29:29 ANE4953I (Session: 5848, Node: HY-ORAPED-2000) Total
>
> number of objects archived: 86,989
> 05-11-2002 01:29:29 ANE4961I (Session: 5848, Node: HY-ORAPED-2000) Total
>
> number of bytes transferred: 6.46 Go
> 05-11-2002 01:29:29 ANE4963I (Session: 5848, Node: HY-ORAPED-2000) Data
>
> transfer time: 11,875.56 sec
> 05-11-2002 01:29:29 ANE4966I (Session: 5848, Node: HY-ORAPED-2000)
> Network
> data transfer rate: 570.67 KB/sec
> 05-11-2002 01:29:29 ANE4967I (Session: 5848, Node: HY-ORAPED-2000)
> Aggregate
> data transfer rate: 511.71 KB/sec
> 05-11-2002 01:29:29 ANE4968I (Session: 5848, Node: HY-ORAPED-2000)
> Objects
> compressed by: 0%
> 05-11-2002 01:29:29 ANE4964I (Session: 5848, Node: HY-ORAPED-2000)
> Elapsed
> processing time: 03:40:43
>
> This was the fast one, I also have this W2K client:
>
> 05-11-2002 07:25:34 ANE4952I (Session: 5906, Node: HY-OSRV-2000) Total
> number
> of objects inspected: 8,424
> 05-11-2002 07:25:34 ANE4953I (Session: 5906, Node: HY-OSRV-2000) Total
> number
> of objects archived: 8,364
> 05-11-2002 07:25:34 ANE4961I (Session: 5906, Node: HY-OSRV-2000) Total
> number
> of bytes transferred: 2.76 Go
> 05-11-2002 07:25:34 ANE4963I (Session: 5906, Node: HY-OSRV-2000) Data
>
> transfer time: 2,871.55 sec
> 05-11-2002 07:25:34 ANE4966I (Session: 5906, Node: HY-OSRV-2000) Network
> data
> transfer rate: 1,008.95 KB/sec
> 05-11-2002 07:25:34 ANE4967I (Session: 5906, Node: HY-OSRV-2000)
> Aggregate
> data transfer rate: 97.15 KB/sec
> 05-11-2002 07:25:34 ANE4968I (Session: 5906, Node: HY-OSRV-2000) Objects
>
> compressed by: 0%
> 05-11-2002 07:25:34 ANE4964I (Session: 5906, Node: HY-OSRV-2000) Elapsed
>
> processing time: 08:17:01
>
> Please help me! I don't know where to look anymore.
>
> Thanks,
>
> Etienne Brodeur
>
--
+++ GMX - Mail, Messaging & more http://www.gmx.net +++
NEU: Mit GMX ins Internet. Rund um die Uhr f|r 1 ct/ Min. surfen!
|
