Very Large NetBackup Jobs Failing: maxtsiz, maxssiz & maxdsize tunables

[Alzhy]

Anyone have any suggested values for these kernel parameters udner Netbackup 6.0 to be able to restore very large filesystems with gazillion files on them? Techsupport just "simply" advice us to increase these values as one daemon -- "bprd" is failing to request "memory resources".

If we adjust these kernel params to their maximum allowed values, will we have problems down the road? (SHMMAX is already at around 8GB). The server exclusively hosts NetBackup and has 24GB of memory.

Current kernel settings:

maxdsiz 0X40000000 (1024MB)
maxssiz 0X17000000 (368MB)
maxtsiz 0x24000000 (576)

Also, if we adjust these values to their maximum, will we have issues with the 32-bit process execution memory quadrant?

[Bill Hassell]

The only value that needs changing is maxdsiz. Adjust it up to about 1800 megs. The small value is likely causing the problem as these values are only for 32 bit programs. These are limits so they have no effect on other programs. NOTE: if you have maxdsiz_64 listed in SAM< make sure maxdsiz_64 is larger than maxdsiz.

[Steve Lewis]

Older versions of Netbackup were indeed 32 bit code, so yes you will have to contend with the limits for all shared memory on the system, listen carefully to Mr Hassell and increase your maxdsiz.
We have similar parameters on a small dedicated netbackup system with 2Gb of memory.

We set maxdsiz to 1Gb.
We set maxtsiz to 1Gb (why so big?)
We set maxssiz to a tiny 32Mb.

If Netbackup version 6 is 64 bit code, then you can set maxdsiz_64bit parameter to be much higher along with the netbackup params.

Netbackup does allocate plenty of shared memory in lots of segments (one might say too many segments). 64 bits is a much better configuration of system and code in your case, with lots of files on fast systems.

[Alzhy]

NBU 6.0 executbales are still PA-RISC1.1 which means they are 32-bit apps - right?

So I guess we'll have to adjust these parameters, by maximizing maxdsiz (since the debug logs show there are malloc errors). maxtsize I agree needs to be smaller but I am unsure on maxssiz..