- Community Home
- >
- Servers and Operating Systems
- >
- Operating Systems
- >
- Operating System - HP-UX
- >
- After Lvmerge more backup time
Categories
Company
Local Language
Forums
Discussions
Forums
- Data Protection and Retention
- Entry Storage Systems
- Legacy
- Midrange and Enterprise Storage
- Storage Networking
- HPE Nimble Storage
Discussions
Forums
Discussions
Discussions
Discussions
Forums
Discussions
Discussion Boards
Discussion Boards
Discussion Boards
Discussion Boards
- BladeSystem Infrastructure and Application Solutions
- Appliance Servers
- Alpha Servers
- BackOffice Products
- Internet Products
- HPE 9000 and HPE e3000 Servers
- Networking
- Netservers
- Secure OS Software for Linux
- Server Management (Insight Manager 7)
- Windows Server 2003
- Operating System - Tru64 Unix
- ProLiant Deployment and Provisioning
- Linux-Based Community / Regional
- Microsoft System Center Integration
Discussion Boards
Discussion Boards
Discussion Boards
Discussion Boards
Discussion Boards
Discussion Boards
Discussion Boards
Discussion Boards
Discussion Boards
Discussion Boards
Discussion Boards
Discussion Boards
Discussion Boards
Discussion Boards
Discussion Boards
Discussion Boards
Discussion Boards
Discussion Boards
Discussion Boards
Discussion Boards
Community
Resources
Forums
Blogs
- Subscribe to RSS Feed
- Mark Topic as New
- Mark Topic as Read
- Float this Topic for Current User
- Bookmark
- Subscribe
- Printer Friendly Page
- Mark as New
- Bookmark
- Subscribe
- Mute
- Subscribe to RSS Feed
- Permalink
- Report Inappropriate Content
06-26-2006 05:07 PM
06-26-2006 05:07 PM
After splitting Mirror LV we r taking backup of one of the split LV.But now backup time reqd. for LV is incresed & backup progress is very slow suddenely.other backup is working OK.We are using 2 node cluster.
thnks in advance.
srl
Solved! Go to Solution.
- Mark as New
- Bookmark
- Subscribe
- Mute
- Subscribe to RSS Feed
- Permalink
- Report Inappropriate Content
06-26-2006 08:20 PM
06-26-2006 08:20 PM
Re: After Lvmerge more backup time
I'm suggesting a $1,100 per CPU(your price may vary) add in product that can do this quickly.
OnlineJFS.
OnlineJFS enables the following process.
1) Down the database for 1 minute
2) Create a tempory write queue logical volume
3) Restart the database with all writes going to this special lv you just created on the fly.
The database continues to run and you can take a cold OS backup of the sql database and it really does not matter how long it takes.
4) Online JFS command merges the writes with the original logical volume and then the temporary LV can be removed.
It involves less than a minutes downtime and works very, very nicely.
SEP
Owner of ISN Corporation
http://isnamerica.com
http://hpuxconsulting.com
Sponsor: http://hpux.ws
Twitter: http://twitter.com/hpuxlinux
Founder http://newdatacloud.com
- Mark as New
- Bookmark
- Subscribe
- Mute
- Subscribe to RSS Feed
- Permalink
- Report Inappropriate Content
06-26-2006 10:59 PM
06-26-2006 10:59 PM
Re: After Lvmerge more backup time
thanks steven,
It was noticed that one HDD of array was gone failure & array was in rebuild state in whole night.when disk gone bad how much time array takes to rebuild?
thanks.
- Mark as New
- Bookmark
- Subscribe
- Mute
- Subscribe to RSS Feed
- Permalink
- Report Inappropriate Content
06-27-2006 12:57 AM
06-27-2006 12:57 AM
SolutionThe time it takes for the array to rebuild depends on how large the drive is, how fast the array controllers are and the rebuild priority of the array.
If rebuild priority is set very low, which would have the least impact on array performance, then the rebuild could take many many many hours. If the rebuild priority is set high, which would have the most performance impact, the rebuild time could be significantly less.
- Mark as New
- Bookmark
- Subscribe
- Mute
- Subscribe to RSS Feed
- Permalink
- Report Inappropriate Content
06-27-2006 05:23 PM
06-27-2006 05:23 PM
Re: After Lvmerge more backup time
How to set the rebuild priority low of an array?Also now I have replaced the faulty disk with new one now array is in optimising state but now system performance is not degraded.what is technical reason for this?
thanks.