Search String: Display: Description: Sort:

Results:

References: [ +subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*\[Networker\]\s+Virtual\s+Tape\s+Library\s+\-\s+saveset\s+multiplexing\s+slowsmigration\s*$/: 8 ]

Total 8 documents matching your query.

1. Re: [Networker] Virtual Tape Library - saveset multiplexing slowsmigration (score: 1)
Author: Curtis Preston <cpreston AT GLASSHOUSE DOT COM>
Date: Wed, 24 Jan 2007 20:03:20 -0500
The question is: why are you multiplexing to your VTL? Instead of sending 40 jobs to 10 virtual tape drives, why not just create 40 virtual tape drives and turn off multiplexing? -- W. Curtis Preston
/usr/local/webapp/mharc-adsm.org/html/Networker/2007-01/msg00226.html (14,471 bytes)

2. Re: [Networker] Virtual Tape Library - saveset multiplexing slowsmigration (score: 1)
Author: Steven Weller <sdweller AT SBCGLOBAL DOT NET>
Date: Wed, 24 Jan 2007 20:21:01 -0800
Or it sounds like you may be ready to graduate to using real disk as disk rather than emulating the limitations of tape. This would help you really leverage (stream) those LTO resources. -Steve The q
/usr/local/webapp/mharc-adsm.org/html/Networker/2007-01/msg00227.html (15,480 bytes)

3. Re: [Networker] Virtual Tape Library - saveset multiplexing slowsmigration (score: 1)
Author: "Landwehr, Jerome" <jlandweh AT HARRIS DOT COM>
Date: Thu, 25 Jan 2007 10:05:25 -0500
Indeed - I concur with Curtis - this is what we did to maximize cloning speed from VTL to PTL The only reason multiplexing exists is on a PTL the tapes individually spin much faster than a single bac
/usr/local/webapp/mharc-adsm.org/html/Networker/2007-01/msg00238.html (15,747 bytes)

4. Re: [Networker] Virtual Tape Library - saveset multiplexing slowsmigration (score: 1)
Author: Mark Davis <davism AT UWO DOT CA>
Date: Thu, 25 Jan 2007 10:12:32 -0500
Curtis, We have Networker "Network Edition" which limits us to the number of devices we can configure. Between our 10 LTO drives, of which 4 are configured with Dynamic Drive Sharing, and our 16 virt
/usr/local/webapp/mharc-adsm.org/html/Networker/2007-01/msg00240.html (16,069 bytes)

5. Re: [Networker] Virtual Tape Library - saveset multiplexing slowsmigration (score: 1)
Author: Mark Davis <davism AT UWO DOT CA>
Date: Thu, 25 Jan 2007 10:37:05 -0500
The reason we multiplex is we have to. We are backing up over 400 clients per night in a 12 hour window. Also as I mentioned in a previous post, we are limited in the number of devices we can use wit
/usr/local/webapp/mharc-adsm.org/html/Networker/2007-01/msg00244.html (17,726 bytes)

6. Re: [Networker] Virtual Tape Library - saveset multiplexing slowsmigration (score: 1)
Author: "Landwehr, Jerome" <jlandweh AT HARRIS DOT COM>
Date: Thu, 25 Jan 2007 10:58:08 -0500
To eliminate multiplexing, set the group parallelism (if only one group runs at a time) to the munber of drives, the drive target sessions to one; or else set the server parallelism to the number of
/usr/local/webapp/mharc-adsm.org/html/Networker/2007-01/msg00246.html (19,264 bytes)

7. Re: [Networker] Virtual Tape Library - saveset multiplexing slowsmigration (score: 1)
Author: Curtis Preston <cpreston AT GLASSHOUSE DOT COM>
Date: Thu, 25 Jan 2007 11:32:03 -0500
Thought it might be something like that. Bummer. You're really hampering that great technology by using multiplexing with it. -- W. Curtis Preston Author of O'Reilly's Backup & Recovery and Using SAN
/usr/local/webapp/mharc-adsm.org/html/Networker/2007-01/msg00248.html (16,974 bytes)

8. Re: [Networker] Virtual Tape Library - saveset multiplexing slowsmigration (score: 1)
Author: Mark Davis <davism AT UWO DOT CA>
Date: Thu, 25 Jan 2007 12:35:46 -0500
Attila, That is a very interesting idea. Just add a license without actually adding another physical storage node. I just might be able to get the money for that one! I'll be asking EMC for a quote t
/usr/local/webapp/mharc-adsm.org/html/Networker/2007-01/msg00254.html (14,876 bytes)


This search system is powered by Namazu