speed up ontape -r

Posted in 2014

Summary

Frank (11.50 FC8) asked how to speed up an ontape -r level 0 restore taking over 3 hours. Art Kagel advised faster storage with archive files on separate spindles and channels from the chunks. Paul Watson advised SDS drives and not gzipping on the same server. Ignacio Bisso suggested increasing TAPEBLK. Doug Lawry suggested pigz instead of gzip.

Auto-generated by Claude from the posts below — may be imperfect; read the full thread.

Topics: Backup & Restore

FRANK — Tue, 02 Dec 2014 01:15:13 — source: IIUG Forums & Mailing Lists

HI, Folks, 11.50 FC8. Our ontape -r( restore a full backup level 0) is taking more than 3 hours to run, any more options to make its running faster ? Thanks Frank --001a1139126c6a26dd05093175c7

↪ replying to FRANK

Art Kagel — Tue, 02 Dec 2014 01:26:08 — source: IIUG Forums & Mailing Lists

Faster storage. Keep the archive files on different SAN/physical spindles and controller channels than server chunks. Art Art S. Kagel, President and Principal Consultant ASK Database Management www.askdbmgt.com Blog: http://informix-myview.blogspot.com/ Disclaimer: Please keep in mind that my own opinions are my own opinions and do not reflect on the IIUG, nor any other organization with which I am associated either explicitly, implicitly, or by inference. Neither do those opinions reflect those of other individuals affiliated with any entity with which I am affiliated nor those of the entities themselves. On Mon, Dec 1, 2014 at 8:15 PM, FRANK <yunyaoqu@gmail.com> wrote: > HI, Folks, > > 11.50 FC8. > > Our ontape -r( restore a full backup level 0) is taking more than 3 hours > to run, any more options to make its running faster ? > > Thanks > Frank > > --001a1139126c6a26dd05093175c7 > > > > ******************************************************************************* > Forum Note: Use "Reply" to post a response in the discussion forum. > > --001a11c33e904815850509319cad

↪ replying to Art Kagel

Paul Watson — Tue, 02 Dec 2014 01:28:36 — source: IIUG Forums & Mailing Lists

Get some SDS drives Don't gzip on the same server Cheers Paul Paul Watson Oninit www.oninit.com +1 913 387 7529 > On Dec 1, 2014, at 19:26, Art Kagel <art.kagel@gmail.com> wrote: > > Faster storage. Keep the archive files on different SAN/physical spindles > and controller channels than server chunks. > > Art > > Art S. Kagel, President and Principal Consultant > ASK Database Management > www.askdbmgt.com > > Blog: http://informix-myview.blogspot.com/ > > Disclaimer: Please keep in mind that my own opinions are my own opinions > and do not reflect on the IIUG, nor any other organization with which I am > associated either explicitly, implicitly, or by inference. Neither do > those opinions reflect those of other individuals affiliated with any > entity with which I am affiliated nor those of the entities themselves. > >> On Mon, Dec 1, 2014 at 8:15 PM, FRANK <yunyaoqu@gmail.com> wrote: >> >> HI, Folks, >> >> 11.50 FC8. >> >> Our ontape -r( restore a full backup level 0) is taking more than 3 hours >> to run, any more options to make its running faster ? >> >> Thanks >> Frank >> >> --001a1139126c6a26dd05093175c7 > ******************************************************************************* >> Forum Note: Use "Reply" to post a response in the discussion forum. > > --001a11c33e904815850509319cad > > > ******************************************************************************* > Forum Note: Use "Reply" to post a response in the discussion forum.

↪ replying to Art Kagel

Ignacio Bisso — Tue, 02 Dec 2014 02:21:23 — source: IIUG Forums & Mailing Lists

Hi Try increasing TAPEBLK, I found really good improvements in restore time regardsIgnacio From: Art Kagel <art.kagel@gmail.com> To: ids@iiug.org Sent: Monday, December 1, 2014 10:26 PM Subject: Re: speed up ontape -r [34246] Faster storage. Keep the archive files on different SAN/physical spindles and controller channels than server chunks. Art Art S. Kagel, President and Principal Consultant ASK Database Management www.askdbmgt.com Blog: http://informix-myview.blogspot.com/ Disclaimer: Please keep in mind that my own opinions are my own opinions and do not reflect on the IIUG, nor any other organization with which I am associated either explicitly, implicitly, or by inference. Neither do those opinions reflect those of other individuals affiliated with any entity with which I am affiliated nor those of the entities themselves. On Mon, Dec 1, 2014 at 8:15 PM, FRANK <yunyaoqu@gmail.com> wrote: > HI, Folks, > > 11.50 FC8. > > Our ontape -r( restore a full backup level 0) is taking more than 3 hours > to run, any more options to make its running faster ? > > Thanks > Frank > > --001a1139126c6a26dd05093175c7 > > > > ******************************************************************************* > Forum Note: Use "Reply" to post a response in the discussion forum. > > --001a11c33e904815850509319cad ******************************************************************************* Forum Note: Use "Reply" to post a response in the discussion forum.

↪ replying to Paul Watson

DOUG LAWRY — Tue, 02 Dec 2014 08:23:15 — source: IIUG Forums & Mailing Lists

Or use pigz instead of gzip if that's the limiting factor and you have lots of cores: http://zlib.net/pigz Regards, Doug Lawry

Glossary

ontape