Backup Central

Galaxy 8.0 SP5.

I’m still seeing diabolical throughput when doing an aux copy from a deduplicated maglib to LTO4 tape. Anything from around 10-25MB/Sec. When backing up directly to tape I’m seeing around 75-80MB/Sec.

My setup is that I have a Windows 2003 R2 x64 MA with an LTO attached via SAS, and the maglib volumes on an iSCSI array (Dell MD3000i).

The array is RAID5. There are several mount paths each of which is on a separate volume on the array. Each volume has a single partition with a 64kb offset via diskpart. Each partition has been formatted with 64kb allocation units.

The aux copy has a policy to combine source streams down to 1 stream (as I only have a single LTO) with a multiplexing factor of 5.

If I use a multi-threaded tool such as Rich Copy I can get good throughput with the usual caveats that lots of small files offer worse throughput vs. fewer larger files.

I’m kind of at my wits end here as to what on earth I’m supposed to do to get good performance with aux copy – I’d really appreciate any suggestions before I start looking at going to the lengths of building up a second MA with 2008 and a different array etc. just to test to see if it’s this particular hardware/build that’s giving poor performance.

I’m open to moving to 9.0 if it will increase performance – had planned on doing so when SP2 came out anyway.

Thanks,
Paul


MIRA Ltd


Watling Street, Nuneaton, Warwickshire, CV10 0TU, England

Registered in England and Wales No. 402570
VAT Registration  GB 100 1464 84


The contents of this e-mail are confidential and are solely for the use of the intended recipient.  If you receive this e-mail in error, please delete it and notify us either by e-mail, telephone or fax.  You should not copy, forward or otherwise disclose the content of the e-mail as this is prohibited.

__._,_.___
Reply to sender ([email]paul.hutchings < at > mira.co.uk?subject=Re%3A%20Diabolical%20Aux%20Copy%20Performance%3F[/email]) | Reply to group ([email]commvault < at > yahoogroups.com?subject=Re%3A%20Diabolical%20Aux%20Copy%20Performance%3F[/email]) | Reply via web post | Start a New Topic
Messages in this topic (1)
Recent Activity:

• New Members 4

Visit Your Group

Commvault Documentation here:
http://documentation.commvault.com/
MARKETPLACE

[url=http://global.ard.yahoo.com/SIG=15o0311ph/M=493064.14543979.14365478.13298430/D=groups/S=1707277520:MKP1/Y=YAHOO/EXP=1301866815/L=32a556bc-5e2a-11e0-b9ab-0be43160edc3/B=5VauWGKImik-/J=1301859615294819/K=jUZxzCT53uWbTdwQ_BeccQ/A=6060255/R=0/SIG=1194m4keh/*http://us.toolbar.yahoo.com/?.cpdl=grpj]Stay on top of your group activity without leaving the page you're on - Get the Yahoo! Toolbar now.[/url] if(window.yzq_d==null)window.yzq_d=new Object(); window.yzq_d['5VauWGKImik-']='&U=13ct30qct%2fN%3d5VauWGKImik-%2fC%3d493064.14543979.14365478.13298430%2fD%3dMKP1%2fB%3d6060255%2fV%3d1'; [img]http://us.bc.yahoo.com/b?P=32a556bc-5e2a-11e0-b9ab-0be43160edc3&T=1chcnal8k%2fX%3d1301859615%2fE%3d1707277520%2fR%3dgroups%2fK%3d5%2fV%3d2.1%2fW%3dH%2fY%3dYAHOO%2fF%3d3389197601%2fH%3dY29udGVudD0iR287V2lkZ2V0cztQb2RjYXN0cztNb2JpbGU7RmxpY2tyO0dyb3VwcztBdWN0aW9ucztTbWFsbF9CdXNpbmVzcztCcmllZmNhc2U7RmluYW5jZTsiIGRpc2FibGVzaHVmZmxpbmc9IjEiIHNlcnZlSWQ9IjMyYTU1NmJjLTVlMmEtMTFlMC1iOWFiLTBiZTQzMTYwZWRjMyIgc2l0ZUlkPSI0NDUyNTUxIiB0U3RtcD0iMTMwMTg1OTYxNTI0NTE1NyIg%2fQ%3d-1%2fS%3d1%2fJ%3d3B5EC442&U=13ct30qct%2fN%3d5VauWGKImik-%2fC%3d493064.14543979.14365478.13298430%2fD%3dMKP1%2fB%3d6060255%2fV%3d1[/img]

[url=http://global.ard.yahoo.com/SIG=15ogjcsns/M=493064.14543977.14365476.10835568/D=groups/S=1707277520:MKP1/Y=YAHOO/EXP=1301866815/L=32a556bc-5e2a-11e0-b9ab-0be43160edc3/B=5lauWGKImik-/J=1301859615294819/K=jUZxzCT53uWbTdwQ_BeccQ/A=6260316/R=0/SIG=11bc8n8gt/*http://custom.yahoo.com/fibromyalgiazone/]Find useful articles and helpful tips on living with Fibromyalgia. Visit the Fibromyalgia Zone today![/url] if(window.yzq_d==null)window.yzq_d=new Object(); window.yzq_d['5lauWGKImik-']='&U=13cuk9nof%2fN%3d5lauWGKImik-%2fC%3d493064.14543977.14365476.10835568%2fD%3dMKP1%2fB%3d6260316%2fV%3d1'; [img]http://us.bc.yahoo.com/b?P=32a556bc-5e2a-11e0-b9ab-0be43160edc3&T=1chfs5ln7%2fX%3d1301859615%2fE%3d1707277520%2fR%3dgroups%2fK%3d5%2fV%3d2.1%2fW%3dH%2fY%3dYAHOO%2fF%3d4236997267%2fH%3dY29udGVudD0iR287V2lkZ2V0cztQb2RjYXN0cztNb2JpbGU7RmxpY2tyO0dyb3VwcztBdWN0aW9ucztTbWFsbF9CdXNpbmVzcztCcmllZmNhc2U7RmluYW5jZTsiIGRpc2FibGVzaHVmZmxpbmc9IjEiIHNlcnZlSWQ9IjMyYTU1NmJjLTVlMmEtMTFlMC1iOWFiLTBiZTQzMTYwZWRjMyIgc2l0ZUlkPSI0NDUyNTUxIiB0U3RtcD0iMTMwMTg1OTYxNTI0NTE1NyIg%2fQ%3d-1%2fS%3d1%2fJ%3d3B5EC442&U=13cuk9nof%2fN%3d5lauWGKImik-%2fC%3d493064.14543977.14365476.10835568%2fD%3dMKP1%2fB%3d6260316%2fV%3d1[/img]


Text-Only ([email]commvault-traditional < at > yahoogroups.com?subject=Change Delivery Format: Traditional[/email]), Daily Digest ([email]commvault-digest < at > yahoogroups.com?subject=Email Delivery: Digest[/email]) &bull; Unsubscribe ([email]commvault-unsubscribe < at > yahoogroups.com?subject=Unsubscribe[/email]) &bull; Terms of Use




.

[img]http://geo.yahoo.com/serv?s=97359714/grpId=7450851/grpspId=1707277520/msgId=4898/stime=1301859614/nc1=4507179/nc2=5898817/nc3=4025321[/img]
__,_._,___

Is there an anti-virus agent/endpoint protection agent deployed on the Media Agent, and if so, do you have the MagLib/CV_MAGNETIC, DDB and CommVault directories excluded for scan?

Luke

On 4 April 2011 05:39, Paul Hutchings <paul.hutchings < at > mira.co.uk ([email]paul.hutchings < at > mira.co.uk[/email])> wrote:
 

Galaxy 8.0 SP5.
 
I’m still seeing diabolical throughput when doing an aux copy from a deduplicated maglib to LTO4 tape.  Anything from around 10-25MB/Sec.  When backing up directly to tape I’m seeing around 75-80MB/Sec.
 
My setup is that I have a Windows 2003 R2 x64 MA with an LTO attached via SAS, and the maglib volumes on an iSCSI array (Dell MD3000i).
 
The array is RAID5.  There are several mount paths each of which is on a separate volume on the array.  Each volume has a single partition with a 64kb offset via diskpart.  Each partition has been formatted with 64kb allocation units.
 
The aux copy has a policy to combine source streams down to 1 stream (as I only have a single LTO) with a multiplexing factor of 5.
 
If I use a multi-threaded tool such as Rich Copy I can get good throughput with the usual caveats that lots of small files offer worse throughput vs. fewer larger files.
 
I’m kind of at my wits end here as to what on earth I’m supposed to do to get good performance with aux copy – I’d really appreciate any suggestions before I start looking at going to the lengths of building up a second MA with 2008 and a different array etc. just to test to see if it’s this particular hardware/build that’s giving poor performance.
 
I’m open to moving to 9.0 if it will increase performance – had planned on doing so when SP2 came out anyway.
 
Thanks,
Paul


MIRA Ltd


Watling Street, Nuneaton, Warwickshire, CV10 0TU, England

Registered in England and Wales No. 402570
VAT Registration  GB 100 1464 84


The contents of this e-mail are confidential and are solely for the use of the intended recipient.  If you receive this e-mail in error, please delete it and notify us either by e-mail, telephone or fax.  You should not copy, forward or otherwise disclose the content of the e-mail as this is prohibited.









__._,_.___
Reply to sender ([email]kaneda.san.sec < at > gmail.com?subject=Re%3A%20%5Bcommvault%5D%20Diabolical%20Aux%20Copy%20Performance%3F[/email]) | Reply to group ([email]commvault < at > yahoogroups.com?subject=Re%3A%20%5Bcommvault%5D%20Diabolical%20Aux%20Copy%20Performance%3F[/email]) | Reply via web post | Start a New Topic
Messages in this topic (2)
Recent Activity:

• New Members 4

Visit Your Group

Commvault Documentation here:
http://documentation.commvault.com/
MARKETPLACE

[url=http://global.ard.yahoo.com/SIG=15os9fi4f/M=493064.14543977.14365476.10835568/D=groups/S=1707277520:MKP1/Y=YAHOO/EXP=1301879098/L=cbcf141a-5e46-11e0-9b38-0374514c61d9/B=zOEYaEwNPV8-/J=1301871898155032/K=SOloBUp64NnPkWxVFthgvQ/A=6078812/R=0/SIG=114ae4ln1/*http://dogandcatanswers.yahoo.com/]Get great advice about dogs and cats. Visit the Dog & Cat Answers Center.[/url] if(window.yzq_d==null)window.yzq_d=new Object(); window.yzq_d['zOEYaEwNPV8-']='&U=13cpdft7l%2fN%3dzOEYaEwNPV8-%2fC%3d493064.14543977.14365476.10835568%2fD%3dMKP1%2fB%3d6078812%2fV%3d1'; [img]http://us.bc.yahoo.com/b?P=cbcf141a-5e46-11e0-9b38-0374514c61d9&T=1chseqmqo%2fX%3d1301871898%2fE%3d1707277520%2fR%3dgroups%2fK%3d5%2fV%3d2.1%2fW%3dH%2fY%3dYAHOO%2fF%3d1251377715%2fH%3dY29udGVudD0iR287V2lkZ2V0cztQb2RjYXN0cztNb2JpbGU7RmxpY2tyO0dyb3VwcztBdWN0aW9ucztTbWFsbF9CdXNpbmVzcztCcmllZmNhc2U7RmluYW5jZTsiIGRpc2FibGVzaHVmZmxpbmc9IjEiIHNlcnZlSWQ9ImNiY2YxNDFhLTVlNDYtMTFlMC05YjM4LTAzNzQ1MTRjNjFkOSIgc2l0ZUlkPSI0NDUyNTUxIiB0U3RtcD0iMTMwMTg3MTg5ODExODUzOCIg%2fQ%3d-1%2fS%3d1%2fJ%3d3B5EC442&U=13cpdft7l%2fN%3dzOEYaEwNPV8-%2fC%3d493064.14543977.14365476.10835568%2fD%3dMKP1%2fB%3d6078812%2fV%3d1[/img]

[url=http://global.ard.yahoo.com/SIG=15ovbs08g/M=493064.14543979.14365478.13298430/D=groups/S=1707277520:MKP1/Y=YAHOO/EXP=1301879098/L=cbcf141a-5e46-11e0-9b38-0374514c61d9/B=y.EYaEwNPV8-/J=1301871898155032/K=SOloBUp64NnPkWxVFthgvQ/A=6060255/R=0/SIG=1194m4keh/*http://us.toolbar.yahoo.com/?.cpdl=grpj]Stay on top of your group activity without leaving the page you're on - Get the Yahoo! Toolbar now.[/url] if(window.yzq_d==null)window.yzq_d=new Object(); window.yzq_d['y.EYaEwNPV8-']='&U=13c0ocmdt%2fN%3dy.EYaEwNPV8-%2fC%3d493064.14543979.14365478.13298430%2fD%3dMKP1%2fB%3d6060255%2fV%3d1'; [img]http://us.bc.yahoo.com/b?P=cbcf141a-5e46-11e0-9b38-0374514c61d9&T=1chv1g01v%2fX%3d1301871898%2fE%3d1707277520%2fR%3dgroups%2fK%3d5%2fV%3d2.1%2fW%3dH%2fY%3dYAHOO%2fF%3d3141325843%2fH%3dY29udGVudD0iR287V2lkZ2V0cztQb2RjYXN0cztNb2JpbGU7RmxpY2tyO0dyb3VwcztBdWN0aW9ucztTbWFsbF9CdXNpbmVzcztCcmllZmNhc2U7RmluYW5jZTsiIGRpc2FibGVzaHVmZmxpbmc9IjEiIHNlcnZlSWQ9ImNiY2YxNDFhLTVlNDYtMTFlMC05YjM4LTAzNzQ1MTRjNjFkOSIgc2l0ZUlkPSI0NDUyNTUxIiB0U3RtcD0iMTMwMTg3MTg5ODExODUzOCIg%2fQ%3d-1%2fS%3d1%2fJ%3d3B5EC442&U=13c0ocmdt%2fN%3dy.EYaEwNPV8-%2fC%3d493064.14543979.14365478.13298430%2fD%3dMKP1%2fB%3d6060255%2fV%3d1[/img]


Text-Only ([email]commvault-traditional < at > yahoogroups.com?subject=Change Delivery Format: Traditional[/email]), Daily Digest ([email]commvault-digest < at > yahoogroups.com?subject=Email Delivery: Digest[/email]) &bull; Unsubscribe ([email]commvault-unsubscribe < at > yahoogroups.com?subject=Unsubscribe[/email]) &bull; Terms of Use




.

[img]http://geo.yahoo.com/serv?s=97359714/grpId=7450851/grpspId=1707277520/msgId=4899/stime=1301871897/nc1=5898816/nc2=4836037/nc3=4507179[/img]
__,_._,___

No, nothing of that nature at all. I’m seeing around 70gb/hr throughput vs. 250gb/hr or so on regular backups direct to tape.

I’m struggling to find much in the way of guidelines/best practise about whether lots of mount paths on the mag lib are preferred to fewer mount paths if the underlying array is the same regardless.

Paul


From: Luke [mailto:kaneda.san.sec < at > gmail.com]
Sent: 04 April 2011 00:05
To: commvault < at > yahoogroups.com
Cc: Paul Hutchings
Subject: Re: [commvault] Diabolical Aux Copy Performance?

Is there an anti-virus agent/endpoint protection agent deployed on the Media Agent, and if so, do you have the MagLib/CV_MAGNETIC, DDB and CommVault directories excluded for scan?

Luke
On 4 April 2011 05:39, Paul Hutchings <paul.hutchings < at > mira.co.uk ([email]paul.hutchings < at > mira.co.uk[/email])> wrote:

Galaxy 8.0 SP5.

I’m still seeing diabolical throughput when doing an aux copy from a deduplicated maglib to LTO4 tape. Anything from around 10-25MB/Sec. When backing up directly to tape I’m seeing around 75-80MB/Sec.

My setup is that I have a Windows 2003 R2 x64 MA with an LTO attached via SAS, and the maglib volumes on an iSCSI array (Dell MD3000i).

The array is RAID5. There are several mount paths each of which is on a separate volume on the array. Each volume has a single partition with a 64kb offset via diskpart. Each partition has been formatted with 64kb allocation units.

The aux copy has a policy to combine source streams down to 1 stream (as I only have a single LTO) with a multiplexing factor of 5.

If I use a multi-threaded tool such as Rich Copy I can get good throughput with the usual caveats that lots of small files offer worse throughput vs. fewer larger files.

I’m kind of at my wits end here as to what on earth I’m supposed to do to get good performance with aux copy – I’d really appreciate any suggestions before I start looking at going to the lengths of building up a second MA with 2008 and a different array etc. just to test to see if it’s this particular hardware/build that’s giving poor performance.

I’m open to moving to 9.0 if it will increase performance – had planned on doing so when SP2 came out anyway.

Thanks,
Paul



MIRA Ltd



Watling Street, Nuneaton, Warwickshire, CV10 0TU, England

Registered in England and Wales No. 402570

VAT Registration GB 100 1464 84



The contents of this e-mail are confidential and are solely for the use of the intended recipient. If you receive this e-mail in error, please delete it and notify us either by e-mail, telephone or fax. You should not copy, forward or otherwise disclose the content of the e-mail as this is prohibited.










__._,_.___
Reply to sender ([email]paul.hutchings < at > mira.co.uk?subject=RE%3A%20%5Bcommvault%5D%20Diabolical%20Aux%20Copy%20Performance%3F[/email]) | Reply to group ([email]commvault < at > yahoogroups.com?subject=RE%3A%20%5Bcommvault%5D%20Diabolical%20Aux%20Copy%20Performance%3F[/email]) | Reply via web post | Start a New Topic
Messages in this topic (3)
Recent Activity:

• New Members 5

Visit Your Group

Commvault Documentation here:
http://documentation.commvault.com/
Text-Only ([email]commvault-traditional < at > yahoogroups.com?subject=Change Delivery Format: Traditional[/email]), Daily Digest ([email]commvault-digest < at > yahoogroups.com?subject=Email Delivery: Digest[/email]) &bull; Unsubscribe ([email]commvault-unsubscribe < at > yahoogroups.com?subject=Unsubscribe[/email]) &bull; Terms of Use




.

[img]http://geo.yahoo.com/serv?s=97359714/grpId=7450851/grpspId=1707277520/msgId=4902/stime=1301901599/nc1=1/nc2=2/nc3=3[/img]
__,_._,___

Hi Paul,

I looked back through your previous posts and this one.
The first one seemed to focus on network topology and various advice around this.
The second one, you were looking at a particular setting, and someone suggested raising a call to send the logs.
This one had a good idea about checking antivirus etc.

Just a thought instead of hunting from the outside, go inside.
Why not look at the logfiles and see if you can see where it's spinning longer than usual compared to other iDA/MA combinations in your ecosystem. Even with access to the source code, you might pick up a pattern, or see settings that you haven't thought of. The send log function just picks up the relevant snippets from the various logs, so half the job of piecing it together is done.

HTH
Robyn

--- In commvault < at > yahoogroups.com ([email]commvault%40yahoogroups.com[/email]), "Paul Hutchings" <paul.hutchings < at > ...> wrote:

Galaxy 8.0 SP5.



I'm still seeing diabolical throughput when doing an aux copy from a
deduplicated maglib to LTO4 tape. Anything from around 10-25MB/Sec.
When backing up directly to tape I'm seeing around 75-80MB/Sec.



My setup is that I have a Windows 2003 R2 x64 MA with an LTO attached
via SAS, and the maglib volumes on an iSCSI array (Dell MD3000i).



The array is RAID5. There are several mount paths each of which is on a
separate volume on the array. Each volume has a single partition with a
64kb offset via diskpart. Each partition has been formatted with 64kb
allocation units.



The aux copy has a policy to combine source streams down to 1 stream (as
I only have a single LTO) with a multiplexing factor of 5.



If I use a multi-threaded tool such as Rich Copy I can get good
throughput with the usual caveats that lots of small files offer worse
throughput vs. fewer larger files.



I'm kind of at my wits end here as to what on earth I'm supposed to do
to get good performance with aux copy - I'd really appreciate any
suggestions before I start looking at going to the lengths of building
up a second MA with 2008 and a different array etc. just to test to see
if it's this particular hardware/build that's giving poor performance.



I'm open to moving to 9.0 if it will increase performance - had planned
on doing so when SP2 came out anyway.



Thanks,

Paul


--
MIRA Ltd

Watling Street, Nuneaton, Warwickshire, CV10 0TU, England
Registered in England and Wales No. 402570
VAT Registration GB 100 1464 84

The contents of this e-mail are confidential and are solely for the use of the intended recipient. If you receive this e-mail in error, please delete it and notify us either by e-mail, telephone or fax. You should not copy, forward or otherwise disclose the content of the e-mail as this is prohibited.



__._,_.___
Reply to sender ([email]technomad < at > nlc.net.au?subject=Re%3A%20Diabolical%20Aux%20Copy%20Performance%3F[/email]) | Reply to group ([email]commvault < at > yahoogroups.com?subject=Re%3A%20Diabolical%20Aux%20Copy%20Performance%3F[/email]) | Reply via web post | Start a New Topic
Messages in this topic (4)
Recent Activity:

• New Members 5

Visit Your Group

Commvault Documentation here:
http://documentation.commvault.com/
Text-Only ([email]commvault-traditional < at > yahoogroups.com?subject=Change Delivery Format: Traditional[/email]), Daily Digest ([email]commvault-digest < at > yahoogroups.com?subject=Email Delivery: Digest[/email]) &bull; Unsubscribe ([email]commvault-unsubscribe < at > yahoogroups.com?subject=Unsubscribe[/email]) &bull; Terms of Use




.

[img]http://geo.yahoo.com/serv?s=97359714/grpId=7450851/grpspId=1707277520/msgId=4903/stime=1301929253/nc1=4025304/nc2=5898810/nc3=4507179[/img]
__,_._,___

Thanks Robyn – I think from some playing today, the rehydrating the data is the problem.

I did some testing with backing up the same data to a deduped storage and to a non-deduped storage policy, followed by an aux copy – same maglib etc.

The aux copy of the non-dedupted data was approximately 3x faster than the deduped aux copy and much closer to normal speeds.

One of the reasons that I haven’t involved support too much is that we’ve very much been testing on a basic, entry level array, and have had performance issues with that, Commvault aside, so it has been a little awkward knowing quite where to start.

I think the fact that I can do an aux copy at respectable speeds with nothing different other than the source data not being deduplicated does point the finger pretty squarely at the rehydration process.

Paul


From: commvault < at > yahoogroups.com [mailto:commvault < at > yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of teq_nomad
Sent: 04 April 2011 13:48
To: commvault < at > yahoogroups.com
Subject: [commvault] Re: Diabolical Aux Copy Performance?




Hi Paul,

I looked back through your previous posts and this one.
The first one seemed to focus on network topology and various advice around this.
The second one, you were looking at a particular setting, and someone suggested raising a call to send the logs.
This one had a good idea about checking antivirus etc.

Just a thought instead of hunting from the outside, go inside.
Why not look at the logfiles and see if you can see where it's spinning longer than usual compared to other iDA/MA combinations in your ecosystem. Even with access to the source code, you might pick up a pattern, or see settings that you haven't thought of. The send log function just picks up the relevant snippets from the various logs, so half the job of piecing it together is done.

HTH
Robyn

--- In commvault < at > yahoogroups.com ([email]commvault%40yahoogroups.com[/email]), "Paul Hutchings" <paul.hutchings < at > ...> wrote:

Galaxy 8.0 SP5.



I'm still seeing diabolical throughput when doing an aux copy from a
deduplicated maglib to LTO4 tape. Anything from around 10-25MB/Sec.
When backing up directly to tape I'm seeing around 75-80MB/Sec.



My setup is that I have a Windows 2003 R2 x64 MA with an LTO attached
via SAS, and the maglib volumes on an iSCSI array (Dell MD3000i).



The array is RAID5. There are several mount paths each of which is on a
separate volume on the array. Each volume has a single partition with a
64kb offset via diskpart. Each partition has been formatted with 64kb
allocation units.



The aux copy has a policy to combine source streams down to 1 stream (as
I only have a single LTO) with a multiplexing factor of 5.



If I use a multi-threaded tool such as Rich Copy I can get good
throughput with the usual caveats that lots of small files offer worse
throughput vs. fewer larger files.



I'm kind of at my wits end here as to what on earth I'm supposed to do
to get good performance with aux copy - I'd really appreciate any
suggestions before I start looking at going to the lengths of building
up a second MA with 2008 and a different array etc. just to test to see
if it's this particular hardware/build that's giving poor performance.



I'm open to moving to 9.0 if it will increase performance - had planned
on doing so when SP2 came out anyway.



Thanks,

Paul


--
MIRA Ltd

Watling Street, Nuneaton, Warwickshire, CV10 0TU, England
Registered in England and Wales No. 402570
VAT Registration GB 100 1464 84

The contents of this e-mail are confidential and are solely for the use of the intended recipient. If you receive this e-mail in error, please delete it and notify us either by e-mail, telephone or fax. You should not copy, forward or otherwise disclose the content of the e-mail as this is prohibited.







__._,_.___
Reply to sender ([email]paul.hutchings < at > mira.co.uk?subject=RE%3A%20%5Bcommvault%5D%20Re%3A%20Diabolical%20Aux%20Copy%20Performance%3F[/email]) | Reply to group ([email]commvault < at > yahoogroups.com?subject=RE%3A%20%5Bcommvault%5D%20Re%3A%20Diabolical%20Aux%20Copy%20Performance%3F[/email]) | Reply via web post | Start a New Topic
Messages in this topic (5)
Recent Activity:

• New Members 5

Visit Your Group

Commvault Documentation here:
http://documentation.commvault.com/
MARKETPLACE

[url=http://global.ard.yahoo.com/SIG=15o9ndbu1/M=493064.14543977.14365476.10835568/D=groups/S=1707277520:MKP1/Y=YAHOO/EXP=1301936832/L=386db7b2-5ecd-11e0-923f-3bfd2fd824e2/B=8NZsW2KImkc-/J=1301929632948803/K=ht71k7WjfNqFJNT6AD2LrQ/A=6260316/R=0/SIG=11bc8n8gt/*http://custom.yahoo.com/fibromyalgiazone/]Find useful articles and helpful tips on living with Fibromyalgia. Visit the Fibromyalgia Zone today![/url] if(window.yzq_d==null)window.yzq_d=new Object(); window.yzq_d['8NZsW2KImkc-']='&U=13ci0sgjg%2fN%3d8NZsW2KImkc-%2fC%3d493064.14543977.14365476.10835568%2fD%3dMKP1%2fB%3d6260316%2fV%3d1'; [img]http://us.bc.yahoo.com/b?P=386db7b2-5ecd-11e0-923f-3bfd2fd824e2&T=1ch2oj3fh%2fX%3d1301929632%2fE%3d1707277520%2fR%3dgroups%2fK%3d5%2fV%3d2.1%2fW%3dH%2fY%3dYAHOO%2fF%3d1931828339%2fH%3dY29udGVudD0iR287V2lkZ2V0cztQb2RjYXN0cztNb2JpbGU7RmxpY2tyO0dyb3VwcztBdWN0aW9ucztTbWFsbF9CdXNpbmVzcztCcmllZmNhc2U7RmluYW5jZTsiIGRpc2FibGVzaHVmZmxpbmc9IjEiIHNlcnZlSWQ9IjM4NmRiN2IyLTVlY2QtMTFlMC05MjNmLTNiZmQyZmQ4MjRlMiIgc2l0ZUlkPSI0NDUyNTUxIiB0U3RtcD0iMTMwMTkyOTYzMjkxMzg5NyIg%2fQ%3d-1%2fS%3d1%2fJ%3d3D5EC442&U=13ci0sgjg%2fN%3d8NZsW2KImkc-%2fC%3d493064.14543977.14365476.10835568%2fD%3dMKP1%2fB%3d6260316%2fV%3d1[/img]

[url=http://global.ard.yahoo.com/SIG=15ov1o8s4/M=493064.14543979.14365478.13298430/D=groups/S=1707277520:MKP1/Y=YAHOO/EXP=1301936832/L=386db7b2-5ecd-11e0-923f-3bfd2fd824e2/B=7tZsW2KImkc-/J=1301929632948803/K=ht71k7WjfNqFJNT6AD2LrQ/A=6060255/R=0/SIG=1194m4keh/*http://us.toolbar.yahoo.com/?.cpdl=grpj]Stay on top of your group activity without leaving the page you're on - Get the Yahoo! Toolbar now.[/url] if(window.yzq_d==null)window.yzq_d=new Object(); window.yzq_d['7tZsW2KImkc-']='&U=13cf8sni4%2fN%3d7tZsW2KImkc-%2fC%3d493064.14543979.14365478.13298430%2fD%3dMKP1%2fB%3d6060255%2fV%3d1'; [img]http://us.bc.yahoo.com/b?P=386db7b2-5ecd-11e0-923f-3bfd2fd824e2&T=1chjsi3c9%2fX%3d1301929632%2fE%3d1707277520%2fR%3dgroups%2fK%3d5%2fV%3d2.1%2fW%3dH%2fY%3dYAHOO%2fF%3d1369579385%2fH%3dY29udGVudD0iR287V2lkZ2V0cztQb2RjYXN0cztNb2JpbGU7RmxpY2tyO0dyb3VwcztBdWN0aW9ucztTbWFsbF9CdXNpbmVzcztCcmllZmNhc2U7RmluYW5jZTsiIGRpc2FibGVzaHVmZmxpbmc9IjEiIHNlcnZlSWQ9IjM4NmRiN2IyLTVlY2QtMTFlMC05MjNmLTNiZmQyZmQ4MjRlMiIgc2l0ZUlkPSI0NDUyNTUxIiB0U3RtcD0iMTMwMTkyOTYzMjkxMzg5NyIg%2fQ%3d-1%2fS%3d1%2fJ%3d3D5EC442&U=13cf8sni4%2fN%3d7tZsW2KImkc-%2fC%3d493064.14543979.14365478.13298430%2fD%3dMKP1%2fB%3d6060255%2fV%3d1[/img]


Text-Only ([email]commvault-traditional < at > yahoogroups.com?subject=Change Delivery Format: Traditional[/email]), Daily Digest ([email]commvault-digest < at > yahoogroups.com?subject=Email Delivery: Digest[/email]) &bull; Unsubscribe ([email]commvault-unsubscribe < at > yahoogroups.com?subject=Unsubscribe[/email]) &bull; Terms of Use




.

[img]http://geo.yahoo.com/serv?s=97359714/grpId=7450851/grpspId=1707277520/msgId=4904/stime=1301929632/nc1=4025321/nc2=4507179/nc3=5758222[/img]
__,_._,___

You could get some benefit from upgrading to V9 and defining this reg key on the MAs: DataMoverUseLookAheadLinkReader. This reads ahead the aux copy data using a separate thread.

Docco here: http://documentation.commvault.com/commvault/release_9_0_0/books_online_1/english_us/features/registry_keys/registry_keys.htm#DataMoverUseLookAheadLinkReader

and here: http://documentation.commvault.com/commvault/release_9_0_0/books_online_1/english_us/features/single_instance/single_instance.htm#Look-Ahead_Logic

Craig.


__._,_.___
Reply to sender ([email]yahoo < at > downhillcat.com?subject=Re%3A%20Diabolical%20Aux%20Copy%20Performance%3F[/email]) | Reply to group ([email]commvault < at > yahoogroups.com?subject=Re%3A%20Diabolical%20Aux%20Copy%20Performance%3F[/email]) | Reply via web post | Start a New Topic
Messages in this topic (6)
Recent Activity:

• New Members 5

Visit Your Group

Commvault Documentation here:
http://documentation.commvault.com/
Text-Only ([email]commvault-traditional < at > yahoogroups.com?subject=Change Delivery Format: Traditional[/email]), Daily Digest ([email]commvault-digest < at > yahoogroups.com?subject=Email Delivery: Digest[/email]) &bull; Unsubscribe ([email]commvault-unsubscribe < at > yahoogroups.com?subject=Unsubscribe[/email]) &bull; Terms of Use




.

[img]http://geo.yahoo.com/serv?s=97359714/grpId=7450851/grpspId=1707277520/msgId=4905/stime=1301956199/nc1=1/nc2=2/nc3=3[/img]
__,_._,___

Hi,

Ah, then holding out for v9 SP2 is worth it.

Condolences for the entry-level array performance issues.
I think this tier of arrays need extra risk mitigation, e.g. extra pared down array for testing. Hard when they are bought for a price-point, however, that extra breathing room for troubleshooting seems better.

Robyn

--- In commvault < at > yahoogroups.com ([email]commvault%40yahoogroups.com[/email]), "Paul Hutchings" <paul.hutchings < at > ...> wrote:

Thanks Robyn - I think from some playing today, the rehydrating the data
is the problem.



I did some testing with backing up the same data to a deduped storage
and to a non-deduped storage policy, followed by an aux copy - same
maglib etc.



The aux copy of the non-dedupted data was approximately 3x faster than
the deduped aux copy and much closer to normal speeds.



One of the reasons that I haven't involved support too much is that
we've very much been testing on a basic, entry level array, and have had
performance issues with that, Commvault aside, so it has been a little
awkward knowing quite where to start.



I think the fact that I can do an aux copy at respectable speeds with
nothing different other than the source data not being deduplicated does
point the finger pretty squarely at the rehydration process.



Paul



From: commvault < at > yahoogroups.com ([email]commvault%40yahoogroups.com[/email]) [mailto:commvault < at > yahoogroups.com ([email]commvault%40yahoogroups.com[/email])] On
Behalf Of teq_nomad
Sent: 04 April 2011 13:48
To: commvault < at > yahoogroups.com ([email]commvault%40yahoogroups.com[/email])
Subject: [commvault] Re: Diabolical Aux Copy Performance?





Hi Paul,

I looked back through your previous posts and this one.
The first one seemed to focus on network topology and various advice
around this.
The second one, you were looking at a particular setting, and someone
suggested raising a call to send the logs.
This one had a good idea about checking antivirus etc.

Just a thought instead of hunting from the outside, go inside.
Why not look at the logfiles and see if you can see where it's spinning
longer than usual compared to other iDA/MA combinations in your
ecosystem. Even with access to the source code, you might pick up a
pattern, or see settings that you haven't thought of. The send log
function just picks up the relevant snippets from the various logs, so
half the job of piecing it together is done.

HTH
Robyn

--- In commvault < at > yahoogroups.com ([email]commvault%40yahoogroups.com[/email]) <mailto:commvault%40yahoogroups.com> ,
"Paul Hutchings" <paul.hutchings < at > > wrote:

Galaxy 8.0 SP5.



I'm still seeing diabolical throughput when doing an aux copy from a
deduplicated maglib to LTO4 tape. Anything from around 10-25MB/Sec.
When backing up directly to tape I'm seeing around 75-80MB/Sec.



My setup is that I have a Windows 2003 R2 x64 MA with an LTO attached
via SAS, and the maglib volumes on an iSCSI array (Dell MD3000i).



The array is RAID5. There are several mount paths each of which is on
a
separate volume on the array. Each volume has a single partition with
a
64kb offset via diskpart. Each partition has been formatted with 64kb
allocation units.



The aux copy has a policy to combine source streams down to 1 stream
(as
I only have a single LTO) with a multiplexing factor of 5.



If I use a multi-threaded tool such as Rich Copy I can get good
throughput with the usual caveats that lots of small files offer worse
throughput vs. fewer larger files.



I'm kind of at my wits end here as to what on earth I'm supposed to do
to get good performance with aux copy - I'd really appreciate any
suggestions before I start looking at going to the lengths of building
up a second MA with 2008 and a different array etc. just to test to
see
if it's this particular hardware/build that's giving poor performance.



I'm open to moving to 9.0 if it will increase performance - had
planned
on doing so when SP2 came out anyway.



Thanks,

Paul


--
MIRA Ltd

Watling Street, Nuneaton, Warwickshire, CV10 0TU, England
Registered in England and Wales No. 402570
VAT Registration GB 100 1464 84

The contents of this e-mail are confidential and are solely for the
use of the intended recipient. If you receive this e-mail in error,
please delete it and notify us either by e-mail, telephone or fax. You
should not copy, forward or otherwise disclose the content of the e-mail
as this is prohibited.



__._,_.___
Reply to sender ([email]technomad < at > nlc.net.au?subject=Re%3A%20Diabolical%20Aux%20Copy%20Performance%3F[/email]) | Reply to group ([email]commvault < at > yahoogroups.com?subject=Re%3A%20Diabolical%20Aux%20Copy%20Performance%3F[/email]) | Reply via web post | Start a New Topic
Messages in this topic (7)
Recent Activity:

• New Members 5

Visit Your Group

Commvault Documentation here:
http://documentation.commvault.com/
MARKETPLACE

[url=http://global.ard.yahoo.com/SIG=15ouoa4os/M=493064.14543977.14365476.10835568/D=groups/S=1707277520:MKP1/Y=YAHOO/EXP=1301968322/L=89d4e136-5f16-11e0-958e-4b59c1ce2456/B=_9hpakwNO6I-/J=1301961122788311/K=gKdOJbG1x3N6wIjxGVa75A/A=6078812/R=0/SIG=114ae4ln1/*http://dogandcatanswers.yahoo.com/]Get great advice about dogs and cats. Visit the Dog & Cat Answers Center.[/url] if(window.yzq_d==null)window.yzq_d=new Object(); window.yzq_d['_9hpakwNO6I-']='&U=13c86n77j%2fN%3d_9hpakwNO6I-%2fC%3d493064.14543977.14365476.10835568%2fD%3dMKP1%2fB%3d6078812%2fV%3d1'; [img]http://us.bc.yahoo.com/b?P=89d4e136-5f16-11e0-958e-4b59c1ce2456&T=1cgbf70f1%2fX%3d1301961122%2fE%3d1707277520%2fR%3dgroups%2fK%3d5%2fV%3d2.1%2fW%3dH%2fY%3dYAHOO%2fF%3d536597984%2fH%3dY29udGVudD0iR287V2lkZ2V0cztQb2RjYXN0cztNb2JpbGU7RmxpY2tyO0dyb3VwcztBdWN0aW9ucztTbWFsbF9CdXNpbmVzcztCcmllZmNhc2U7RmluYW5jZTsiIGRpc2FibGVzaHVmZmxpbmc9IjEiIHNlcnZlSWQ9Ijg5ZDRlMTM2LTVmMTYtMTFlMC05NThlLTRiNTljMWNlMjQ1NiIgc2l0ZUlkPSI0NDUyNTUxIiB0U3RtcD0iMTMwMTk2MTEyMjc0NjY5NyIg%2fQ%3d-1%2fS%3d1%2fJ%3d3B5EC442&U=13c86n77j%2fN%3d_9hpakwNO6I-%2fC%3d493064.14543977.14365476.10835568%2fD%3dMKP1%2fB%3d6078812%2fV%3d1[/img]

[url=http://global.ard.yahoo.com/SIG=15olqfdnn/M=493064.14543979.14365478.13298430/D=groups/S=1707277520:MKP1/Y=YAHOO/EXP=1301968322/L=89d4e136-5f16-11e0-958e-4b59c1ce2456/B=_thpakwNO6I-/J=1301961122788311/K=gKdOJbG1x3N6wIjxGVa75A/A=6060255/R=0/SIG=1194m4keh/*http://us.toolbar.yahoo.com/?.cpdl=grpj]Stay on top of your group activity without leaving the page you're on - Get the Yahoo! Toolbar now.[/url] if(window.yzq_d==null)window.yzq_d=new Object(); window.yzq_d['_thpakwNO6I-']='&U=13c8nbm19%2fN%3d_thpakwNO6I-%2fC%3d493064.14543979.14365478.13298430%2fD%3dMKP1%2fB%3d6060255%2fV%3d1'; [img]http://us.bc.yahoo.com/b?P=89d4e136-5f16-11e0-958e-4b59c1ce2456&T=1chq1lgvf%2fX%3d1301961122%2fE%3d1707277520%2fR%3dgroups%2fK%3d5%2fV%3d2.1%2fW%3dH%2fY%3dYAHOO%2fF%3d1233153769%2fH%3dY29udGVudD0iR287V2lkZ2V0cztQb2RjYXN0cztNb2JpbGU7RmxpY2tyO0dyb3VwcztBdWN0aW9ucztTbWFsbF9CdXNpbmVzcztCcmllZmNhc2U7RmluYW5jZTsiIGRpc2FibGVzaHVmZmxpbmc9IjEiIHNlcnZlSWQ9Ijg5ZDRlMTM2LTVmMTYtMTFlMC05NThlLTRiNTljMWNlMjQ1NiIgc2l0ZUlkPSI0NDUyNTUxIiB0U3RtcD0iMTMwMTk2MTEyMjc0NjY5NyIg%2fQ%3d-1%2fS%3d1%2fJ%3d3B5EC442&U=13c8nbm19%2fN%3d_thpakwNO6I-%2fC%3d493064.14543979.14365478.13298430%2fD%3dMKP1%2fB%3d6060255%2fV%3d1[/img]


Text-Only ([email]commvault-traditional < at > yahoogroups.com?subject=Change Delivery Format: Traditional[/email]), Daily Digest ([email]commvault-digest < at > yahoogroups.com?subject=Email Delivery: Digest[/email]) &bull; Unsubscribe ([email]commvault-unsubscribe < at > yahoogroups.com?subject=Unsubscribe[/email]) &bull; Terms of Use




.

[img]http://geo.yahoo.com/serv?s=97359714/grpId=7450851/grpspId=1707277520/msgId=4906/stime=1301961122/nc1=4025373/nc2=5741395/nc3=4507179[/img]
__,_._,___

Hi,

Ah, then holding out for v9 SP2 may help considerably.

Condolences for an entry-level array with performance issues. I'm beginning to believe that entry-level arrays need added risk mitigation, e.g. a second one pared down for testing. Hard when they are bought to meet a price point, however, an extra breathing room for troubleshooting options seems warranted, not just vendor support.

Robyn

--- In commvault < at > yahoogroups.com ([email]commvault%40yahoogroups.com[/email]), "Paul Hutchings" <paul.hutchings < at > ...> wrote:

Thanks Robyn - I think from some playing today, the rehydrating the data
is the problem.



I did some testing with backing up the same data to a deduped storage
and to a non-deduped storage policy, followed by an aux copy - same
maglib etc.



The aux copy of the non-dedupted data was approximately 3x faster than
the deduped aux copy and much closer to normal speeds.



One of the reasons that I haven't involved support too much is that
we've very much been testing on a basic, entry level array, and have had
performance issues with that, Commvault aside, so it has been a little
awkward knowing quite where to start.



I think the fact that I can do an aux copy at respectable speeds with
nothing different other than the source data not being deduplicated does
point the finger pretty squarely at the rehydration process.



Paul



From: commvault < at > yahoogroups.com ([email]commvault%40yahoogroups.com[/email]) [mailto:commvault < at > yahoogroups.com ([email]commvault%40yahoogroups.com[/email])] On
Behalf Of teq_nomad
Sent: 04 April 2011 13:48
To: commvault < at > yahoogroups.com ([email]commvault%40yahoogroups.com[/email])
Subject: [commvault] Re: Diabolical Aux Copy Performance?





Hi Paul,

I looked back through your previous posts and this one.
The first one seemed to focus on network topology and various advice
around this.
The second one, you were looking at a particular setting, and someone
suggested raising a call to send the logs.
This one had a good idea about checking antivirus etc.

Just a thought instead of hunting from the outside, go inside.
Why not look at the logfiles and see if you can see where it's spinning
longer than usual compared to other iDA/MA combinations in your
ecosystem. Even with access to the source code, you might pick up a
pattern, or see settings that you haven't thought of. The send log
function just picks up the relevant snippets from the various logs, so
half the job of piecing it together is done.

HTH
Robyn

--- In commvault < at > yahoogroups.com ([email]commvault%40yahoogroups.com[/email]) <mailto:commvault%40yahoogroups.com> ,
"Paul Hutchings" <paul.hutchings < at > > wrote:

Galaxy 8.0 SP5.



I'm still seeing diabolical throughput when doing an aux copy from a
deduplicated maglib to LTO4 tape. Anything from around 10-25MB/Sec.
When backing up directly to tape I'm seeing around 75-80MB/Sec.



My setup is that I have a Windows 2003 R2 x64 MA with an LTO attached
via SAS, and the maglib volumes on an iSCSI array (Dell MD3000i).



The array is RAID5. There are several mount paths each of which is on
a
separate volume on the array. Each volume has a single partition with
a
64kb offset via diskpart. Each partition has been formatted with 64kb
allocation units.



The aux copy has a policy to combine source streams down to 1 stream
(as
I only have a single LTO) with a multiplexing factor of 5.



If I use a multi-threaded tool such as Rich Copy I can get good
throughput with the usual caveats that lots of small files offer worse
throughput vs. fewer larger files.



I'm kind of at my wits end here as to what on earth I'm supposed to do
to get good performance with aux copy - I'd really appreciate any
suggestions before I start looking at going to the lengths of building
up a second MA with 2008 and a different array etc. just to test to
see
if it's this particular hardware/build that's giving poor performance.



I'm open to moving to 9.0 if it will increase performance - had
planned
on doing so when SP2 came out anyway.



Thanks,

Paul


--
MIRA Ltd

Watling Street, Nuneaton, Warwickshire, CV10 0TU, England
Registered in England and Wales No. 402570
VAT Registration GB 100 1464 84

The contents of this e-mail are confidential and are solely for the
use of the intended recipient. If you receive this e-mail in error,
please delete it and notify us either by e-mail, telephone or fax. You
should not copy, forward or otherwise disclose the content of the e-mail
as this is prohibited.



__._,_.___
Reply to sender ([email]technomad < at > nlc.net.au?subject=Re%3A%20Diabolical%20Aux%20Copy%20Performance%3F[/email]) | Reply to group ([email]commvault < at > yahoogroups.com?subject=Re%3A%20Diabolical%20Aux%20Copy%20Performance%3F[/email]) | Reply via web post | Start a New Topic
Messages in this topic (
Recent Activity:

• New Members 5

Visit Your Group

Commvault Documentation here:
http://documentation.commvault.com/
Text-Only ([email]commvault-traditional < at > yahoogroups.com?subject=Change Delivery Format: Traditional[/email]), Daily Digest ([email]commvault-digest < at > yahoogroups.com?subject=Email Delivery: Digest[/email]) &bull; Unsubscribe ([email]commvault-unsubscribe < at > yahoogroups.com?subject=Unsubscribe[/email]) &bull; Terms of Use




.

[img]http://geo.yahoo.com/serv?s=97359714/grpId=7450851/grpspId=1707277520/msgId=4907/stime=1301961130/nc1=1/nc2=2/nc3=3[/img]
__,_._,___

Thanks, that looks like it may have a lot of potential. I do intend to go to 9.0, as it stands I suspect I may be going with SP1B due to the timescales.

I would be interested in peoples views on whether it’s actually worth doing rehydrated aux copies to tape or whether it’s sane to simply aux copy deduped data directly to tape?

My Media Agent is standalone from the primary SAN infrastructure, and with D2D w/dedupe I should be able to keep a good month’s worth, if not more (hard to know until we’re backing up full production volumes) on maglib.

I’m thinking that in a DR situation I’m not likely to be hitting tapes as I’d have to have lost my primary SAN and the MA/maglib, and in the typical “Can I get this file/folder back from six months ago?”, is it really an issue to have to wait a little longer whilst it’s restored from tape and rehydrated? (that’s rhetorical and the answer is “No”).

Appreciate any thoughts.

Paul


From: commvault < at > yahoogroups.com [mailto:commvault < at > yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of mcgillcanberra
Sent: 04 April 2011 23:30
To: commvault < at > yahoogroups.com
Subject: [commvault] Re: Diabolical Aux Copy Performance?




You could get some benefit from upgrading to V9 and defining this reg key on the MAs: DataMoverUseLookAheadLinkReader. This reads ahead the aux copy data using a separate thread.

Docco here: http://documentation.commvault.com/commvault/release_9_0_0/books_online_1/english_us/features/registry_keys/registry_keys.htm#DataMoverUseLookAheadLinkReader

and here: http://documentation.commvault.com/commvault/release_9_0_0/books_online_1/english_us/features/single_instance/single_instance.htm#Look-Ahead_Logic

Craig.





MIRA Ltd


Watling Street, Nuneaton, Warwickshire, CV10 0TU, England

Registered in England and Wales No. 402570
VAT Registration  GB 100 1464 84


The contents of this e-mail are confidential and are solely for the use of the intended recipient.  If you receive this e-mail in error, please delete it and notify us either by e-mail, telephone or fax.  You should not copy, forward or otherwise disclose the content of the e-mail as this is prohibited.



__._,_.___
Reply to sender ([email]paul.hutchings < at > mira.co.uk?subject=RE%3A%20%5Bcommvault%5D%20Re%3A%20Diabolical%20Aux%20Copy%20Performance%3F[/email]) | Reply to group ([email]commvault < at > yahoogroups.com?subject=RE%3A%20%5Bcommvault%5D%20Re%3A%20Diabolical%20Aux%20Copy%20Performance%3F[/email]) | Reply via web post | Start a New Topic
Messages in this topic (9)
Recent Activity:

• New Members 3

Visit Your Group

Commvault Documentation here:
http://documentation.commvault.com/
Text-Only ([email]commvault-traditional < at > yahoogroups.com?subject=Change Delivery Format: Traditional[/email]), Daily Digest ([email]commvault-digest < at > yahoogroups.com?subject=Email Delivery: Digest[/email]) &bull; Unsubscribe ([email]commvault-unsubscribe < at > yahoogroups.com?subject=Unsubscribe[/email]) &bull; Terms of Use




.

[img]http://geo.yahoo.com/serv?s=97359714/grpId=7450851/grpspId=1707277520/msgId=4908/stime=1302000647/nc1=1/nc2=2/nc3=3[/img]
__,_._,___

We had a bit of a chicken and egg situation tbh, because we weren’t doing D2D before we didn’t need a decent array, and to determine whether we wanted to to D2D we needed to use an array, any array, to do testing.

Now we’ve licensed it, we’re not going to use the entry level array, we’ll use a spare Equallogic, but tbh I think the issue with the rehydrating is a Commvault issue/feature/problem rather than the storage, though by using the Equallogic the storage becomes a lot less of a potential bottleneck.

Paul


From: commvault < at > yahoogroups.com [mailto:commvault < at > yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of teq_nomad
Sent: 04 April 2011 21:46
To: commvault < at > yahoogroups.com
Subject: [commvault] Re: Diabolical Aux Copy Performance?




Hi,

Ah, then holding out for v9 SP2 is worth it.

Condolences for the entry-level array performance issues.
I think this tier of arrays need extra risk mitigation, e.g. extra pared down array for testing. Hard when they are bought for a price-point, however, that extra breathing room for troubleshooting seems better.

Robyn

--- In commvault < at > yahoogroups.com ([email]commvault%40yahoogroups.com[/email]), "Paul Hutchings" <paul.hutchings < at > ... ([email]paul.hutchings < at > ...[/email])> wrote:

Thanks Robyn - I think from some playing today, the rehydrating the data
is the problem.



I did some testing with backing up the same data to a deduped storage
and to a non-deduped storage policy, followed by an aux copy - same
maglib etc.



The aux copy of the non-dedupted data was approximately 3x faster than
the deduped aux copy and much closer to normal speeds.



One of the reasons that I haven't involved support too much is that
we've very much been testing on a basic, entry level array, and have had
performance issues with that, Commvault aside, so it has been a little
awkward knowing quite where to start.



I think the fact that I can do an aux copy at respectable speeds with
nothing different other than the source data not being deduplicated does
point the finger pretty squarely at the rehydration process.



Paul



From: commvault < at > yahoogroups.com ([email]commvault%40yahoogroups.com[/email]) [mailto:commvault < at > yahoogroups.com ([email]commvault%40yahoogroups.com[/email])] On
Behalf Of teq_nomad
Sent: 04 April 2011 13:48
To: commvault < at > yahoogroups.com ([email]commvault%40yahoogroups.com[/email])
Subject: [commvault] Re: Diabolical Aux Copy Performance?





Hi Paul,

I looked back through your previous posts and this one.
The first one seemed to focus on network topology and various advice
around this.
The second one, you were looking at a particular setting, and someone
suggested raising a call to send the logs.
This one had a good idea about checking antivirus etc.

Just a thought instead of hunting from the outside, go inside.
Why not look at the logfiles and see if you can see where it's spinning
longer than usual compared to other iDA/MA combinations in your
ecosystem. Even with access to the source code, you might pick up a
pattern, or see settings that you haven't thought of. The send log
function just picks up the relevant snippets from the various logs, so
half the job of piecing it together is done.

HTH
Robyn

--- In commvault < at > yahoogroups.com ([email]commvault%40yahoogroups.com[/email]) <mailto:commvault%40yahoogroups.com ([email]commvault%40yahoogroups.com[/email])> ,
"Paul Hutchings" <paul.hutchings < at > > wrote:

Galaxy 8.0 SP5.



I'm still seeing diabolical throughput when doing an aux copy from a
deduplicated maglib to LTO4 tape. Anything from around 10-25MB/Sec.
When backing up directly to tape I'm seeing around 75-80MB/Sec.



My setup is that I have a Windows 2003 R2 x64 MA with an LTO attached
via SAS, and the maglib volumes on an iSCSI array (Dell MD3000i).



The array is RAID5. There are several mount paths each of which is on
a
separate volume on the array. Each volume has a single partition with
a
64kb offset via diskpart. Each partition has been formatted with 64kb
allocation units.



The aux copy has a policy to combine source streams down to 1 stream
(as
I only have a single LTO) with a multiplexing factor of 5.



If I use a multi-threaded tool such as Rich Copy I can get good
throughput with the usual caveats that lots of small files offer worse
throughput vs. fewer larger files.



I'm kind of at my wits end here as to what on earth I'm supposed to do
to get good performance with aux copy - I'd really appreciate any
suggestions before I start looking at going to the lengths of building
up a second MA with 2008 and a different array etc. just to test to
see
if it's this particular hardware/build that's giving poor performance.



I'm open to moving to 9.0 if it will increase performance - had
planned
on doing so when SP2 came out anyway.



Thanks,

Paul


--
MIRA Ltd

Watling Street, Nuneaton, Warwickshire, CV10 0TU, England
Registered in England and Wales No. 402570
VAT Registration GB 100 1464 84

The contents of this e-mail are confidential and are solely for the
use of the intended recipient. If you receive this e-mail in error,
please delete it and notify us either by e-mail, telephone or fax. You
should not copy, forward or otherwise disclose the content of the e-mail
as this is prohibited.







__._,_.___
Reply to sender ([email]paul.hutchings < at > mira.co.uk?subject=RE%3A%20%5Bcommvault%5D%20Re%3A%20Diabolical%20Aux%20Copy%20Performance%3F[/email]) | Reply to group ([email]commvault < at > yahoogroups.com?subject=RE%3A%20%5Bcommvault%5D%20Re%3A%20Diabolical%20Aux%20Copy%20Performance%3F[/email]) | Reply via web post | Start a New Topic
Messages in this topic (10)
Recent Activity:

• New Members 3

Visit Your Group

Commvault Documentation here:
http://documentation.commvault.com/
Text-Only ([email]commvault-traditional < at > yahoogroups.com?subject=Change Delivery Format: Traditional[/email]), Daily Digest ([email]commvault-digest < at > yahoogroups.com?subject=Email Delivery: Digest[/email]) &bull; Unsubscribe ([email]commvault-unsubscribe < at > yahoogroups.com?subject=Unsubscribe[/email]) &bull; Terms of Use




.

[img]http://geo.yahoo.com/serv?s=97359714/grpId=7450851/grpspId=1707277520/msgId=4909/stime=1302000751/nc1=1/nc2=2/nc3=3[/img]
__,_._,___

I cant wait to hear replies. We rehydrate to tape also and also see much slower speeds than I would expect going to tape. Have been thinking about keeping data deduped from disk to tape since we moved to cla licensing but haveny had time to do it yet. Thanks for raising the question.

Sent from my Verizon Wireless Phone

----- Reply message -----
From: "Paul Hutchings" <paul.hutchings < at > mira.co.uk>
Date: Tue, Apr 5, 2011 3:47 am
Subject: [commvault] Re: Diabolical Aux Copy Performance?
To: <commvault < at > yahoogroups.com>

Thanks, that looks like it may have a lot of potential. I do intend to
go to 9.0, as it stands I suspect I may be going with SP1B due to the
timescales.



I would be interested in peoples views on whether it's actually worth
doing rehydrated aux copies to tape or whether it's sane to simply aux
copy deduped data directly to tape?



My Media Agent is standalone from the primary SAN infrastructure, and
with D2D w/dedupe I should be able to keep a good month's worth, if not
more (hard to know until we're backing up full production volumes) on
maglib.



I'm thinking that in a DR situation I'm not likely to be hitting tapes
as I'd have to have lost my primary SAN and the MA/maglib, and in the
typical "Can I get this file/folder back from six months ago?", is it
really an issue to have to wait a little longer whilst it's restored
from tape and rehydrated? (that's rhetorical and the answer is "No").



Appreciate any thoughts.



Paul



From: commvault < at > yahoogroups.com [mailto:commvault < at > yahoogroups.com] On
Behalf Of mcgillcanberra
Sent: 04 April 2011 23:30
To: commvault < at > yahoogroups.com
Subject: [commvault] Re: Diabolical Aux Copy Performance?





You could get some benefit from upgrading to V9 and defining this reg
key on the MAs: DataMoverUseLookAheadLinkReader. This reads ahead the
aux copy data using a separate thread.

Docco here:
http://documentation.commvault.com/commvault/release_9_0_0/books_online_
1/english_us/features/registry_keys/registry_keys.htm#DataMoverUseLookAh
eadLinkReader

and here:
http://documentation.commvault.com/commvault/release_9_0_0/books_online_
1/english_us/features/single_instance/single_instance.htm#Look-Ahead_Log
ic

Craig.




--
MIRA Ltd

Watling Street, Nuneaton, Warwickshire, CV10 0TU, England
Registered in England and Wales No. 402570
VAT Registration GB 100 1464 84

The contents of this e-mail are confidential and are solely for the use of the intended recipient. If you receive this e-mail in error, please delete it and notify us either by e-mail, telephone or fax. You should not copy, forward or otherwise disclose the content of the e-mail as this is prohibited.



__._,_.___
Reply to sender ([email]erlarson2000 < at > yahoo.com?subject=Re%3A%20%5Bcommvault%5D%20Re%3A%20Diabolical%20Aux%20Copy%20Performance%3F[/email]) | Reply to group ([email]commvault < at > yahoogroups.com?subject=Re%3A%20%5Bcommvault%5D%20Re%3A%20Diabolical%20Aux%20Copy%20Performance%3F[/email]) | Reply via web post | Start a New Topic
Messages in this topic (1)
Recent Activity:

• New Members 3

Visit Your Group

Commvault Documentation here:
http://documentation.commvault.com/
Text-Only ([email]commvault-traditional < at > yahoogroups.com?subject=Change Delivery Format: Traditional[/email]), Daily Digest ([email]commvault-digest < at > yahoogroups.com?subject=Email Delivery: Digest[/email]) &bull; Unsubscribe ([email]commvault-unsubscribe < at > yahoogroups.com?subject=Unsubscribe[/email]) &bull; Terms of Use




.

[img]http://geo.yahoo.com/serv?s=97359714/grpId=7450851/grpspId=1707277520/msgId=4910/stime=1302009105/nc1=1/nc2=2/nc3=3[/img]
__,_._,___

Not sure if it's been mentioned before, but are you defraging your maglib?

On 5 April 2011 23:11, erlarson2000 < at > yahoo.com ([email]erlarson2000 < at > yahoo.com[/email]) <erlarson2000 < at > yahoo.com ([email]erlarson2000 < at > yahoo.com[/email])> wrote:
 
I cant wait to hear replies. We rehydrate to tape also and also see much slower speeds than I would expect going to tape. Have been thinking about keeping data deduped from disk to tape since we moved to cla licensing but haveny had time to do it yet. Thanks for raising the question.

Sent from my Verizon Wireless Phone

----- Reply message -----
From: "Paul Hutchings" <paul.hutchings < at > mira.co.uk ([email]paul.hutchings < at > mira.co.uk[/email])>
Date: Tue, Apr 5, 2011 3:47 am
Subject: [commvault] Re: Diabolical Aux Copy Performance?

To: <commvault < at > yahoogroups.com ([email]commvault < at > yahoogroups.com[/email])>

Thanks, that looks like it may have a lot of potential.  I do intend to
go to 9.0, as it stands I suspect I may be going with SP1B due to the
timescales.



I would be interested in peoples views on whether it's actually worth
doing rehydrated aux copies to tape or whether it's sane to simply aux
copy deduped data directly to tape?



My Media Agent is standalone from the primary SAN infrastructure, and
with D2D w/dedupe I should be able to keep a good month's worth, if not
more (hard to know until we're backing up full production volumes) on
maglib.



I'm thinking that in a DR situation I'm not likely to be hitting tapes
as I'd have to have lost my primary SAN and the MA/maglib, and in the
typical "Can I get this file/folder back from six months ago?", is it
really an issue to have to wait a little longer whilst it's restored
from tape and rehydrated? (that's rhetorical and the answer is "No").



Appreciate any thoughts.




Paul



From: commvault < at > yahoogroups.com ([email]commvault < at > yahoogroups.com[/email]) [mailto:commvault < at > yahoogroups.com ([email]commvault < at > yahoogroups.com[/email])] On

Behalf Of mcgillcanberra
Sent: 04 April 2011 23:30

To: commvault < at > yahoogroups.com ([email]commvault < at > yahoogroups.com[/email])
Subject: [commvault] Re: Diabolical Aux Copy Performance?



 


You could get some benefit from upgrading to V9 and defining this reg
key on the MAs: DataMoverUseLookAheadLinkReader. This reads ahead the
aux copy data using a separate thread.


Docco here:
http://documentation.commvault.com/commvault/release_9_0_0/books_online_
1/english_us/features/registry_keys/registry_keys.htm#DataMoverUseLookAh
eadLinkReader


and here:
http://documentation.commvault.com/commvault/release_9_0_0/books_online_
1/english_us/features/single_instance/single_instance.htm#Look-Ahead_Log
ic

Craig.





--
MIRA Ltd

Watling Street, Nuneaton, Warwickshire, CV10 0TU, England
Registered in England and Wales No. 402570
VAT Registration  GB 100 1464 84

The contents of this e-mail are confidential and are solely for the use of the intended recipient.  If you receive this e-mail in error, please delete it and notify us either by e-mail, telephone or fax.  You should not copy, forward or otherwise disclose the content of the e-mail as this is prohibited.












--
It is pitch black. You are likely to be eaten by a grue.

__._,_.___
Reply to sender ([email]lactose.intolerant.cat < at > gmail.com?subject=Re%3A%20%5Bcommvault%5D%20Re%3A%20Diabolical%20Aux%20Copy%20Performance%3F[/email]) | Reply to group ([email]commvault < at > yahoogroups.com?subject=Re%3A%20%5Bcommvault%5D%20Re%3A%20Diabolical%20Aux%20Copy%20Performance%3F[/email]) | Reply via web post | Start a New Topic
Messages in this topic (2)
Recent Activity:

• New Members 3

Visit Your Group

Commvault Documentation here:
http://documentation.commvault.com/
Text-Only ([email]commvault-traditional < at > yahoogroups.com?subject=Change Delivery Format: Traditional[/email]), Daily Digest ([email]commvault-digest < at > yahoogroups.com?subject=Email Delivery: Digest[/email]) &bull; Unsubscribe ([email]commvault-unsubscribe < at > yahoogroups.com?subject=Unsubscribe[/email]) &bull; Terms of Use




.

[img]http://geo.yahoo.com/serv?s=97359714/grpId=7450851/grpspId=1707277520/msgId=4913/stime=1302020973/nc1=1/nc2=2/nc3=3[/img]
__,_._,___

Hi Erik, Paul,

I haven't played with this, however, rehydrating to tape is the default whereas sending the deduped data to tape is SILO.

Just so happens there a sample online from the Technical Reference Library which nicely spells out the crux of choice your making

"Consider the following when configuring the deduplication store:
- Larger deduplication stores provide better deduplication benefits and higher space savings. However, very large deduplication stores increases data dependency within silo storage, and might affect Silo storage performance.
- Smaller deduplication stores translates to less number of media accessed for data retrieval providing faster restore operations and better manageability of Silo Storage data"

http://services.commvault.com/library/samples/SiloStorageTrainingReference.pdf

So, there's a play-off between dedupe savings and restore times. I would say you need to ask your business how many degrees of disaster they want to cover with which "time to recover". If none of your tapes are deduped, then are you sure you will always have an online copy somewhere that will restore faster, and that your system will never have a gmail-style incident which will corrupt all online copies.

I think I'd be doing some restore tests for starters, so that you could make a recommendation to your mgt.

Anyway, hope you enjoy the SILO reading.

Robyn

--- In commvault < at > yahoogroups.com ([email]commvault%40yahoogroups.com[/email]), "erlarson2000 < at > yahoo.com ([email]erlarson2000%40yahoo.com[/email])" <erlarson2000 < at > ...> wrote:

I cant wait to hear replies. We rehydrate to tape also and also see much slower speeds than I would expect going to tape. Have been thinking about keeping data deduped from disk to tape since we moved to cla licensing but haveny had time to do it yet. Thanks for raising the question.

Sent from my Verizon Wireless Phone

----- Reply message -----
From: "Paul Hutchings" <paul.hutchings < at > ...>
Date: Tue, Apr 5, 2011 3:47 am
Subject: [commvault] Re: Diabolical Aux Copy Performance?
To: <commvault < at > yahoogroups.com ([email]commvault%40yahoogroups.com[/email])>

Thanks, that looks like it may have a lot of potential. I do intend to
go to 9.0, as it stands I suspect I may be going with SP1B due to the
timescales.



I would be interested in peoples views on whether it's actually worth
doing rehydrated aux copies to tape or whether it's sane to simply aux
copy deduped data directly to tape?



My Media Agent is standalone from the primary SAN infrastructure, and
with D2D w/dedupe I should be able to keep a good month's worth, if not
more (hard to know until we're backing up full production volumes) on
maglib.



I'm thinking that in a DR situation I'm not likely to be hitting tapes
as I'd have to have lost my primary SAN and the MA/maglib, and in the
typical "Can I get this file/folder back from six months ago?", is it
really an issue to have to wait a little longer whilst it's restored
from tape and rehydrated? (that's rhetorical and the answer is "No").



Appreciate any thoughts.



Paul



From: commvault < at > yahoogroups.com ([email]commvault%40yahoogroups.com[/email]) [mailto:commvault < at > yahoogroups.com ([email]commvault%40yahoogroups.com[/email])] On
Behalf Of mcgillcanberra
Sent: 04 April 2011 23:30
To: commvault < at > yahoogroups.com ([email]commvault%40yahoogroups.com[/email])
Subject: [commvault] Re: Diabolical Aux Copy Performance?





You could get some benefit from upgrading to V9 and defining this reg
key on the MAs: DataMoverUseLookAheadLinkReader. This reads ahead the
aux copy data using a separate thread.

Docco here:
http://documentation.commvault.com/commvault/release_9_0_0/books_online_
1/english_us/features/registry_keys/registry_keys.htm#DataMoverUseLookAh
eadLinkReader

and here:
http://documentation.commvault.com/commvault/release_9_0_0/books_online_
1/english_us/features/single_instance/single_instance.htm#Look-Ahead_Log
ic

Craig.




--
MIRA Ltd

Watling Street, Nuneaton, Warwickshire, CV10 0TU, England
Registered in England and Wales No. 402570
VAT Registration GB 100 1464 84

The contents of this e-mail are confidential and are solely for the use of the intended recipient. If you receive this e-mail in error, please delete it and notify us either by e-mail, telephone or fax. You should not copy, forward or otherwise disclose the content of the e-mail as this is prohibited.



__._,_.___
Reply to sender ([email]technomad < at > nlc.net.au?subject=Re%3A%20Diabolical%20Aux%20Copy%20Performance%3F[/email]) | Reply to group ([email]commvault < at > yahoogroups.com?subject=Re%3A%20Diabolical%20Aux%20Copy%20Performance%3F[/email]) | Reply via web post | Start a New Topic
Messages in this topic (3)
Recent Activity:

• New Members 3

Visit Your Group

Commvault Documentation here:
http://documentation.commvault.com/
MARKETPLACE

[url=http://global.ard.yahoo.com/SIG=15o54pots/M=493064.14543977.14365476.10835568/D=groups/S=1707277520:MKP1/Y=YAHOO/EXP=1302028187/L=ebf8a286-5fa1-11e0-bfc8-9fa5ef726364/B=zU3uakoGYmI-/J=1302020987465960/K=Jcd7QNG7wAnqqJOxnkCU4w/A=6260316/R=0/SIG=11bc8n8gt/*http://custom.yahoo.com/fibromyalgiazone/]Find useful articles and helpful tips on living with Fibromyalgia. Visit the Fibromyalgia Zone today![/url] if(window.yzq_d==null)window.yzq_d=new Object(); window.yzq_d['zU3uakoGYmI-']='&U=13c7ht76f%2fN%3dzU3uakoGYmI-%2fC%3d493064.14543977.14365476.10835568%2fD%3dMKP1%2fB%3d6260316%2fV%3d1'; [img]http://us.bc.yahoo.com/b?P=ebf8a286-5fa1-11e0-bfc8-9fa5ef726364&T=1cgdsrveo%2fX%3d1302020987%2fE%3d1707277520%2fR%3dgroups%2fK%3d5%2fV%3d2.1%2fW%3dH%2fY%3dYAHOO%2fF%3d391097911%2fH%3dY29udGVudD0iR287V2lkZ2V0cztQb2RjYXN0cztNb2JpbGU7RmxpY2tyO0dyb3VwcztBdWN0aW9ucztTbWFsbF9CdXNpbmVzcztCcmllZmNhc2U7RmluYW5jZTsiIGRpc2FibGVzaHVmZmxpbmc9IjEiIHNlcnZlSWQ9ImViZjhhMjg2LTVmYTEtMTFlMC1iZmM4LTlmYTVlZjcyNjM2NCIgc2l0ZUlkPSI0NDUyNTUxIiB0U3RtcD0iMTMwMjAyMDk4NzQ0MzEyNSIg%2fQ%3d-1%2fS%3d1%2fJ%3d27228962&U=13c7ht76f%2fN%3dzU3uakoGYmI-%2fC%3d493064.14543977.14365476.10835568%2fD%3dMKP1%2fB%3d6260316%2fV%3d1[/img]

[url=http://global.ard.yahoo.com/SIG=15o0ggpv5/M=493064.14543979.14365478.13298430/D=groups/S=1707277520:MKP1/Y=YAHOO/EXP=1302028187/L=ebf8a286-5fa1-11e0-bfc8-9fa5ef726364/B=zE3uakoGYmI-/J=1302020987465960/K=Jcd7QNG7wAnqqJOxnkCU4w/A=6060255/R=0/SIG=1194m4keh/*http://us.toolbar.yahoo.com/?.cpdl=grpj]Stay on top of your group activity without leaving the page you're on - Get the Yahoo! Toolbar now.[/url] if(window.yzq_d==null)window.yzq_d=new Object(); window.yzq_d['zE3uakoGYmI-']='&U=13ch9v025%2fN%3dzE3uakoGYmI-%2fC%3d493064.14543979.14365478.13298430%2fD%3dMKP1%2fB%3d6060255%2fV%3d1'; [img]http://us.bc.yahoo.com/b?P=ebf8a286-5fa1-11e0-bfc8-9fa5ef726364&T=1chr67rep%2fX%3d1302020987%2fE%3d1707277520%2fR%3dgroups%2fK%3d5%2fV%3d2.1%2fW%3dH%2fY%3dYAHOO%2fF%3d4081581388%2fH%3dY29udGVudD0iR287V2lkZ2V0cztQb2RjYXN0cztNb2JpbGU7RmxpY2tyO0dyb3VwcztBdWN0aW9ucztTbWFsbF9CdXNpbmVzcztCcmllZmNhc2U7RmluYW5jZTsiIGRpc2FibGVzaHVmZmxpbmc9IjEiIHNlcnZlSWQ9ImViZjhhMjg2LTVmYTEtMTFlMC1iZmM4LTlmYTVlZjcyNjM2NCIgc2l0ZUlkPSI0NDUyNTUxIiB0U3RtcD0iMTMwMjAyMDk4NzQ0MzEyNSIg%2fQ%3d-1%2fS%3d1%2fJ%3d27228962&U=13ch9v025%2fN%3dzE3uakoGYmI-%2fC%3d493064.14543979.14365478.13298430%2fD%3dMKP1%2fB%3d6060255%2fV%3d1[/img]


Text-Only ([email]commvault-traditional < at > yahoogroups.com?subject=Change Delivery Format: Traditional[/email]), Daily Digest ([email]commvault-digest < at > yahoogroups.com?subject=Email Delivery: Digest[/email]) &bull; Unsubscribe ([email]commvault-unsubscribe < at > yahoogroups.com?subject=Unsubscribe[/email]) &bull; Terms of Use




.

[img]http://geo.yahoo.com/serv?s=97359714/grpId=7450851/grpspId=1707277520/msgId=4914/stime=1302020987/nc1=5522129/nc2=4025304/nc3=4507179[/img]
__,_._,___

I don't think the option I was discussing with the pre-sales guy is SILO though, it has some other abbreviation but I forget what it is now.

In terms of whether using deduped aux is a good idea, my concerns aren't so much around time (as you say that's a matter of policy and testing) but more around data integrity - is there any greater risk of not being able to do a restore from tape if the data is deduped.

I know there shouldn't be, but dedupe is still relatively new technology (proven by the fact that Commvault claim to be the only vendor that lets you put dedupe data on tape).

-----Original Message-----
From: commvault < at > yahoogroups.com ([email]commvault%40yahoogroups.com[/email]) on behalf of teq_nomad
Sent: Tue 05-Apr-11 3:57 PM
To: commvault < at > yahoogroups.com ([email]commvault%40yahoogroups.com[/email])
Subject: [commvault] Re: Diabolical Aux Copy Performance?

Hi Erik, Paul,

I haven't played with this, however, rehydrating to tape is the default whereas sending the deduped data to tape is SILO.

Just so happens there a sample online from the Technical Reference Library which nicely spells out the crux of choice your making

"Consider the following when configuring the deduplication store:
- Larger deduplication stores provide better deduplication benefits and higher space savings. However, very large deduplication stores increases data dependency within silo storage, and might affect Silo storage performance.
- Smaller deduplication stores translates to less number of media accessed for data retrieval providing faster restore operations and better manageability of Silo Storage data"

http://services.commvault.com/library/samples/SiloStorageTrainingReference.pdf

So, there's a play-off between dedupe savings and restore times. I would say you need to ask your business how many degrees of disaster they want to cover with which "time to recover". If none of your tapes are deduped, then are you sure you will always have an online copy somewhere that will restore faster, and that your system will never have a gmail-style incident which will corrupt all online copies.

I think I'd be doing some restore tests for starters, so that you could make a recommendation to your mgt.

Anyway, hope you enjoy the SILO reading.

Robyn

--- In commvault < at > yahoogroups.com ([email]commvault%40yahoogroups.com[/email]), "erlarson2000 < at > yahoo.com ([email]erlarson2000%40yahoo.com[/email])" <erlarson2000 < at > ...> wrote:

I cant wait to hear replies. We rehydrate to tape also and also see much slower speeds than I would expect going to tape. Have been thinking about keeping data deduped from disk to tape since we moved to cla licensing but haveny had time to do it yet. Thanks for raising the question.

Sent from my Verizon Wireless Phone

----- Reply message -----
From: "Paul Hutchings" <paul.hutchings < at > ...>
Date: Tue, Apr 5, 2011 3:47 am
Subject: [commvault] Re: Diabolical Aux Copy Performance?
To: <commvault < at > yahoogroups.com ([email]commvault%40yahoogroups.com[/email])>

Thanks, that looks like it may have a lot of potential. I do intend to
go to 9.0, as it stands I suspect I may be going with SP1B due to the
timescales.



I would be interested in peoples views on whether it's actually worth
doing rehydrated aux copies to tape or whether it's sane to simply aux
copy deduped data directly to tape?



My Media Agent is standalone from the primary SAN infrastructure, and
with D2D w/dedupe I should be able to keep a good month's worth, if not
more (hard to know until we're backing up full production volumes) on
maglib.



I'm thinking that in a DR situation I'm not likely to be hitting tapes
as I'd have to have lost my primary SAN and the MA/maglib, and in the
typical "Can I get this file/folder back from six months ago?", is it
really an issue to have to wait a little longer whilst it's restored
from tape and rehydrated? (that's rhetorical and the answer is "No").



Appreciate any thoughts.



Paul



From: commvault < at > yahoogroups.com ([email]commvault%40yahoogroups.com[/email]) [mailto:commvault < at > yahoogroups.com ([email]commvault%40yahoogroups.com[/email])] On
Behalf Of mcgillcanberra
Sent: 04 April 2011 23:30
To: commvault < at > yahoogroups.com ([email]commvault%40yahoogroups.com[/email])
Subject: [commvault] Re: Diabolical Aux Copy Performance?





You could get some benefit from upgrading to V9 and defining this reg
key on the MAs: DataMoverUseLookAheadLinkReader. This reads ahead the
aux copy data using a separate thread.

Docco here:
http://documentation.commvault.com/commvault/release_9_0_0/books_online_
1/english_us/features/registry_keys/registry_keys.htm#DataMoverUseLookAh
eadLinkReader

and here:
http://documentation.commvault.com/commvault/release_9_0_0/books_online_
1/english_us/features/single_instance/single_instance.htm#Look-Ahead_Log
ic

Craig.




--
MIRA Ltd

Watling Street, Nuneaton, Warwickshire, CV10 0TU, England
Registered in England and Wales No. 402570
VAT Registration GB 100 1464 84

The contents of this e-mail are confidential and are solely for the use of the intended recipient. If you receive this e-mail in error, please delete it and notify us either by e-mail, telephone or fax. You should not copy, forward or otherwise disclose the content of the e-mail as this is prohibited.



__._,_.___
Reply to sender ([email]paul.hutchings < at > mira.co.uk?subject=RE%3A%20%5Bcommvault%5D%20Re%3A%20Diabolical%20Aux%20Copy%20Performance%3F[/email]) | Reply to group ([email]commvault < at > yahoogroups.com?subject=RE%3A%20%5Bcommvault%5D%20Re%3A%20Diabolical%20Aux%20Copy%20Performance%3F[/email]) | Reply via web post | Start a New Topic
Messages in this topic (12)
Recent Activity:

• New Members 3

Visit Your Group

Commvault Documentation here:
http://documentation.commvault.com/
Text-Only ([email]commvault-traditional < at > yahoogroups.com?subject=Change Delivery Format: Traditional[/email]), Daily Digest ([email]commvault-digest < at > yahoogroups.com?subject=Email Delivery: Digest[/email]) &bull; Unsubscribe ([email]commvault-unsubscribe < at > yahoogroups.com?subject=Unsubscribe[/email]) &bull; Terms of Use




.

[img]http://geo.yahoo.com/serv?s=97359714/grpId=7450851/grpspId=1707277520/msgId=4915/stime=1302023747/nc1=1/nc2=2/nc3=3[/img]
__,_._,___

Not consistently

Sent from my Verizon Wireless Phone

----- Reply message -----
From: "LIC" <lactose.intolerant.cat < at > gmail.com>
Date: Tue, Apr 5, 2011 7:02 am
Subject: [commvault] Re: Diabolical Aux Copy Performance?
To: <commvault < at > yahoogroups.com>

Not sure if it's been mentioned before, but are you defraging your maglib?

On 5 April 2011 23:11, erlarson2000 < at > yahoo.com <erlarson2000 < at > yahoo.com>wrote:



I cant wait to hear replies. We rehydrate to tape also and also see much
slower speeds than I would expect going to tape. Have been thinking about
keeping data deduped from disk to tape since we moved to cla licensing but
haveny had time to do it yet. Thanks for raising the question.

Sent from my Verizon Wireless Phone

----- Reply message -----
From: "Paul Hutchings" <paul.hutchings < at > mira.co.uk>
Date: Tue, Apr 5, 2011 3:47 am

Subject: [commvault] Re: Diabolical Aux Copy Performance?
To: <commvault < at > yahoogroups.com>


Thanks, that looks like it may have a lot of potential. I do intend to
go to 9.0, as it stands I suspect I may be going with SP1B due to the
timescales.



I would be interested in peoples views on whether it's actually worth
doing rehydrated aux copies to tape or whether it's sane to simply aux
copy deduped data directly to tape?



My Media Agent is standalone from the primary SAN infrastructure, and
with D2D w/dedupe I should be able to keep a good month's worth, if not
more (hard to know until we're backing up full production volumes) on
maglib.



I'm thinking that in a DR situation I'm not likely to be hitting tapes
as I'd have to have lost my primary SAN and the MA/maglib, and in the
typical "Can I get this file/folder back from six months ago?", is it
really an issue to have to wait a little longer whilst it's restored
from tape and rehydrated? (that's rhetorical and the answer is "No").



Appreciate any thoughts.



Paul



From: commvault < at > yahoogroups.com [mailto:commvault < at > yahoogroups.com] On
Behalf Of mcgillcanberra
Sent: 04 April 2011 23:30
To: commvault < at > yahoogroups.com
Subject: [commvault] Re: Diabolical Aux Copy Performance?





You could get some benefit from upgrading to V9 and defining this reg
key on the MAs: DataMoverUseLookAheadLinkReader. This reads ahead the
aux copy data using a separate thread.

Docco here:

http://documentation.commvault.com/commvault/release_9_0_0/books_online_
1/english_us/features/registry_keys/registry_keys.htm#DataMoverUseLookAh
eadLinkReader

and here:

http://documentation.commvault.com/commvault/release_9_0_0/books_online_
1/english_us/features/single_instance/single_instance.htm#Look-Ahead_Log
ic

Craig.




--
MIRA Ltd

Watling Street, Nuneaton, Warwickshire, CV10 0TU, England
Registered in England and Wales No. 402570
VAT Registration GB 100 1464 84

The contents of this e-mail are confidential and are solely for the use of
the intended recipient. If you receive this e-mail in error, please delete
it and notify us either by e-mail, telephone or fax. You should not copy,
forward or otherwise disclose the content of the e-mail as this is
prohibited.







--
It is pitch black. You are likely to be eaten by a grue.



__._,_.___
Reply to sender ([email]erlarson2000 < at > yahoo.com?subject=Re%3A%20%5Bcommvault%5D%20Re%3A%20Diabolical%20Aux%20Copy%20Performance%3F[/email]) | Reply to group ([email]commvault < at > yahoogroups.com?subject=Re%3A%20%5Bcommvault%5D%20Re%3A%20Diabolical%20Aux%20Copy%20Performance%3F[/email]) | Reply via web post | Start a New Topic
Messages in this topic (4)
Recent Activity:

• New Members 3

Visit Your Group

Commvault Documentation here:
http://documentation.commvault.com/
Text-Only ([email]commvault-traditional < at > yahoogroups.com?subject=Change Delivery Format: Traditional[/email]), Daily Digest ([email]commvault-digest < at > yahoogroups.com?subject=Email Delivery: Digest[/email]) &bull; Unsubscribe ([email]commvault-unsubscribe < at > yahoogroups.com?subject=Unsubscribe[/email]) &bull; Terms of Use




.

[img]http://geo.yahoo.com/serv?s=97359714/grpId=7450851/grpspId=1707277520/msgId=4920/stime=1302029373/nc1=1/nc2=2/nc3=3[/img]
__,_._,___