Mail Archive Search: <+subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*ADSM\s+performance\s+on\s+Windows\s+NT\s*$/>

Results:

References: [ +subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*ADSM\s+performance\s+on\s+Windows\s+NT\s*$/: 9 ]

Total 9 documents matching your query.

1. ADSM performance on Windows NT (score: 1): Author: "Loon, E.J. van - SPLXM" <Eric-van.Loon AT KLM DOT NL>; Date: Thu, 28 Jan 1999 12:58:16 +0100; Hi ADSM-ers! I am looking for a company that is using the following: ADSM for Windows NT version 3 server. 3575 tape drives (and library) I am especially interested in performance and/or benchmark fi; /usr/local/webapp/mharc-adsm.org/html/ADSM-L/1999-01/msg01173.html (11,337 bytes)
2. Re: ADSM performance on Windows NT (score: 1): Author: Donald Daniels <Donald_W._Daniels/FFIC AT FFIC DOT COM>; Date: Thu, 28 Jan 1999 14:03:12 -0800; Eric, We're NT 4, version ADSM Vers 3, with 3575 L12, 2 type c drives. Timely you should ask about performance as we've been studying that. Another interesting fact is that our ADSM Server machine is; /usr/local/webapp/mharc-adsm.org/html/ADSM-L/1999-01/msg01241.html (12,423 bytes)
3. Re: ADSM performance on Windows NT (score: 1): Author: "Gogineni, Sri" <SGogineni AT CAISO DOT COM>; Date: Thu, 28 Jan 1999 15:59:17 -0800; Hi Don, If you do not mind , could you also inform about the ADSM server itself to get a better idea of the performance. i.e As to what server it is and the cpu speed and memory. Thanks Sri; /usr/local/webapp/mharc-adsm.org/html/ADSM-L/1999-01/msg01243.html (11,198 bytes)
4. Re: ADSM performance on Windows NT (score: 1): Author: Donald Daniels [mailto:Donald_W._Daniels/FFIC AT FFIC DOT COM]; Date: Sun, 04 Oct 2015 17:48:52 -0500; Eric, We're NT 4, version ADSM Vers 3, with 3575 L12, 2 type c drives. Timely you should ask about performance as we've been studying that. Another interesting fact is that our ADSM Server machine is; /usr/local/webapp/mharc-adsm.org/html/ADSM-L/1999-01/msg01244.html (12,498 bytes)
5. Re: ADSM performance on Windows NT (score: 1): Author: Donald Daniels <Donald_W._Daniels/FFIC AT FFIC DOT COM>; Date: Thu, 28 Jan 1999 18:28:12 -0800; Sri, the ADSM server machine is Compaq Proliant 2500 200mhz x 2 processors, 512MB memory. Don Daniels -- Forwarded by Donald W. Daniels/FFIC on 01/28/99 05:40 PM -- -- "Gogineni, Sri" <SGogineni AT C; /usr/local/webapp/mharc-adsm.org/html/ADSM-L/1999-01/msg01251.html (11,771 bytes)
6. Re: ADSM performance on Windows NT (score: 1): Author: "Gogineni, Sri" <SGogineni AT CAISO DOT COM>; Date: Thu, 28 Jan 1999 22:17:04 -0800; Thanks Don, Sincere regards Sri; /usr/local/webapp/mharc-adsm.org/html/ADSM-L/1999-01/msg01252.html (10,976 bytes)
7. Re: ADSM performance on Windows NT (score: 1): Author: Donald Daniels [mailto:Donald_W._Daniels/FFIC AT FFIC DOT COM]; Date: Sun, 04 Oct 2015 17:48:52 -0500; Sri, the ADSM server machine is Compaq Proliant 2500 200mhz x 2 processors, 512MB memory. Don Daniels -- Forwarded by Donald W. Daniels/FFIC on 01/28/99 05:40 PM PM -- "Gogineni, Sri" <SGogineni AT C; /usr/local/webapp/mharc-adsm.org/html/ADSM-L/1999-01/msg01253.html (11,839 bytes)
8. Re: ADSM performance on Windows NT (score: 1): Author: Donald Daniels <Donald_W._Daniels/FFIC AT FFIC DOT COM>; Date: Fri, 29 Jan 1999 12:20:23 -0800; Eric, my measurements are based on the actual data stored on the client before compression. So the 7GB/hour is considering actual data before compression. We're about to put up a separate 100MB Ether; /usr/local/webapp/mharc-adsm.org/html/ADSM-L/1999-01/msg01318.html (12,242 bytes)
9. Re: ADSM performance on Windows NT (score: 1): Author: Donald Daniels [mailto:Donald_W._Daniels/FFIC AT FFIC DOT COM]; Date: Sun, 04 Oct 2015 17:48:53 -0500; Eric, We're NT 4, version ADSM Vers 3, with 3575 L12, 2 type c drives. Timely you should ask about performance as we've been studying that. Another interesting fact is that our ADSM Server machine is; /usr/local/webapp/mharc-adsm.org/html/ADSM-L/1999-01/msg01319.html (12,558 bytes)

Current List: 1 - 9
Page: [1]