Regarding throughput, our experience has been that one of the most
signifigant rate limiting factors is the processing power of the client and
its ability to put data on the network.  What are your clients?  Alot of
these questions seem to be related to Novel environments where there likely
to be older machines.  Without knowing the clients, it might be a gross
assumption, but slow clients will kill your throughput and there is no way
to go faster.

>There has been much discussion recently about ADSM throughput.  I
>was wondering what definition of throughput was being used and
>how is it being calculated.  The reason I ask is that we are
>getting rather poor end to end throughput, about 12 kbyes/sec.
>The definition I am using is based on the data in the SMF records
>(session duration and kbytes transmitted).  Andy Raibeck has
>pointed out that this measure is problematic because ADSM
>probably spends more time scanning drives for changed data than
>actually backing them up.  Indeed, we are experiencing on the
>average about 70% of each session spent in a wait state.
>Nonetheless, if one wanted to estimate how long it would take to
>back up a certain amount of data, wouldn't the end to end
>throughput be the best basis for making such an estimate?  Others
>on this list have commented on the large proportion of session
>time spent waiting.  We would certainly be very interested in
>getting our 70% waiting time figure down.  Does anyone have any
>data on the impact of changing the client's tcp/ip buffer size on
>the proportion of time spent waiting?  If most of the waiting
>time is due to scanning the disk, I don't see how tuning can help
>much.
>
>------------------------------------------------------------------
>Robert P. Klein                          KL2 AT CU.NIH DOT GOV
>Phone: 301-496-7400                      Fax: 301-496-6905
>Mail:  DCRT/CFB/ETS, 12A/1033, 12 SOUTH DR MSC 5607,
>       BETHESDA, MD 20892-5607
>------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>