[gpfsug-discuss] Is TSM/HSM 7.1 compatible with GPFS 3.5.0.12 ?

[Sabuj Pattanayek]

We're using tsm 7.1 with gpfs 3.5.0.11. At some point we do want to enable
the HSM features but haven't had time to properly configure/set them up
yet. I had dmapi enabled on GPFS but was never able to bring it up with
dmapi enabled. Everything wasn't properly configured at the time and we
were missing some pieces (not my post, but same issue) :

https://www.ibm.com/developerworks/community/forums/html/topic?id=77777777-0000-0000-0000-000014622591

I'd say that we are having less than optimal performance with TSM however.
We're only able to pull about 4TB a day. It took us 20 days to backup 80TB
for our initial full. Using rsync/tar piped to tar would probably have
taken less than a week. We tried various methods, e.g. using a fast
intermediate diskpool, going simultaneously to our 6 LTO6 tape drives, etc
but each "cp" (tsm client) process that TSM would use seemed to be very
slow. We tweaked just about every setting to optimize performance but to
really no avail. When going to the disk pool this is what should have
happened :

GPFS => relatively fast random I/O (on par with rsync/tar piped to tar) tsm
disk cache => large sequential I/O's for each disk pool volume => tape

this is what really happened

GPFS => slow random I/O => tsm disk pool cache => slow random I/O => tape

so instead we did :

GPFS => slow random I/O (TSM) => tape

..but was the same speed as going through the tsm disk pool cache. We
closely monitored the network, disk, memory, cpu, on the tsm server and
none of the hardware or capabilities of the server were the bottleneck, it
was all in TSM.

If anyone has seen this sort of behavior and has some pointers/hints at
improving performance I'd be glad to hear it.

Thanks,
Sabuj


On Thu, Mar 20, 2014 at 5:21 PM, Grace Tsai <gtsai at slac.stanford.edu> wrote:

> Hi,
>
> Is TSM/HSM 7.1 compatible with GPFS 3.5.0.12 ?
>
> Thanks.
>
> Grace
> _______________________________________________
> gpfsug-discuss mailing list
> gpfsug-discuss at gpfsug.org
> http://gpfsug.org/mailman/listinfo/gpfsug-discuss
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://gpfsug.org/pipermail/gpfsug-discuss_gpfsug.org/attachments/20140320/83143bf7/attachment-0003.htm>