|
This is a multipart message in MIME format. -- [ Picked text/plain from multipart/alternative ] All excellent ideas. The number of objects stays pretty consistent. We do not find ourselves creating/deleting large numbers of Notes databases. It is not a save changed objects. A bulk of these objects would get changed. I wondered about that pattern with conflicting jobs. I will attempt to log these occurrences better. However, when I first submitted this email I put in a lot of performance data and none of it seemed to indicate such. Yes we have BRMS installed. I wouldn't exactly say we use it. I am not sure that it would fit in with out current backup strategy. And I don't see how adapting to the BRMS strategy would help us. Yes we also have Tivoli. I am not sure if any of these might be the culprit. I would hope that they would appear in the mentioned performance data though. Rob Berendt -- "They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety." Benjamin Franklin Evan Harris <spanner@ihug.co.nz> Sent by: midrange-l-admin@midrange.com 12/10/2002 08:56 PM Please respond to midrange-l To: midrange-l@midrange.com cc: Fax to: Subject: RE: Backup performance issue. Rob Do the numbers of objects saved change significantly ? My experience is that fewer, larger objects will always save and restore relatively faster than the same storage size when there are more objects. I understand this to be caused by the objects etc information that is saved to tape as distinct from just "streaming data". I guess you have knocked out the obvious things like saving changed objects which versus full saves ? Are there any patterns to the changes that marry up with weekly or whatever procedures ? I once had a save that did weird things the Monday after month end. It turned out a couple of guys were running queries and then deleting the output once they had run some summary queries over the rather large summary files they created. Is the start time consistent each night on the first save ? I seem to recall that you use BRMS: is there some BRMS maintenance that might makes a difference for example databases getting cleared down ? Do you use Tivoli as well ? Hope this helps Regards Evan Harris >We do not do any save-while-active. We bring down all Domino servers >prior to the backup. Yes, we get growth. Actually about a gig a day. >However, the growth is consistent, but the backup times do not seem to be >inline with the growth. For example on a Tuesday it might take less time >than on a Monday, even though Tuesday had more information. > >We have a program which adds up the size of all of our IFS root >directories, compares it to the previous day, and lists both the days, and >the growth. > >Rob Berendt >-- >"They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary >safety deserve neither liberty nor safety." >Benjamin Franklin _______________________________________________ This is the Midrange Systems Technical Discussion (MIDRANGE-L) mailing list To post a message email: MIDRANGE-L@midrange.com To subscribe, unsubscribe, or change list options, visit: http://lists.midrange.com/cgi-bin/listinfo/midrange-l or email: MIDRANGE-L-request@midrange.com Before posting, please take a moment to review the archives at http://archive.midrange.com/midrange-l.
As an Amazon Associate we earn from qualifying purchases.
This mailing list archive is Copyright 1997-2024 by midrange.com and David Gibbs as a compilation work. Use of the archive is restricted to research of a business or technical nature. Any other uses are prohibited. Full details are available on our policy page. If you have questions about this, please contact [javascript protected email address].
Operating expenses for this site are earned using the Amazon Associate program and Google Adsense.