Based on what you posted, it looks like you are getting around
177/megs/hour. Is that transfer rate acceptable to you?? At one time, we
were publicizing the fact that we were getting over 250/meg/hour. We
aren't anymore (that's why I've been researching the tuneing and percentage
wait things).
----------
> From: Francisco Franco <francisco.franco AT HYDRO.ON DOT CA>
> From: Francisco Franco <francisco.franco AT HYDRO.ON DOT CA>
> To: ADSM-L AT VM.MARIST DOT EDU
> Subject: Re: Boosting performance of the Solaris server?
> Date: Monday, April 28, 1997 12:33 PM
>
> Hi Russell,
>
> Russell Street wrote:
> >
> > Hello...
> >
> > Any ideas how to make ADSM work faster than I am seeing it at the
moment?
> >
> > For example, doing a back up to a disk storage pool across FDDI I only
> > see about 500-600 Kb/sec as reported by ADSM --- even lower with
> > smaller files or more data.
> >
> > e.g., 28 files:
> >
> > Total number of objects inspected: 28
> > Total number of objects backed up: 28
> > Total number of objects updated: 0
> > Total number of objects rebound: 0
> > Total number of objects deleted: 0
> > Total number of objects failed: 0
> > Total number of bytes transferred: 193.5 MB
> > Data transfer time: 350.40 sec
> > Data transfer rate: 565.74 KB/sec
> > Average file size: 7,079.0 KB
> > Elapsed processing time: 00:08:57
> >
> > I am using a Sun Solaris (2.5.1) system as a server and variety of
> > clients (Suns, Win95, Novell). (Oddly enough, the Novell system
> > managed 1200Kbytes/sec...) Neither the server or the clients were
> > doing much else than the ADSM work.
> >
> > For a comparision, using rcp to move the file around it can do at >
> > 1Mb/sec. For writing direct to a DLT drive across the network, I
> > could manage 3.5Mb/sec at one point.
> >
> > Any suggestions are welcome. [1]
> >
> > Russell
> >
> > [1] except for moving to AIX ;)
>
> Well, I am using AIX 3.2.5 and I don't mean to say that AIX is better
> or worse than any other UNIX or O/S, I have used Solaris, Sun O/S,
> HP-UX, OSF/1, etc and I find that somewhere along the line all of them
> can do what you want them to do.
>
> In comparison to you machine, I have four machines and here are the
> results that I got for them this weekend:
>
> M1 M2 M3
> ------- ------- -------
> # inspected: 204,211 299,832 234,553 295,859
> # backed up: 161 332 1,092 236
> # updated: 0 1 0 0
> # rebound: 0 0 0 0
> # deleted: 44 76 612 49
> # failed: 2 0 0 0
> # bytes transferred: 177.9 MB 72.3 MB 133.3 MB 3421.1
> KB
> Data transfer time: 186.53 sec 96.80 sec 180.95 sec
> 4.93 sec
> Data transfer rate: 976.75 KB/sec 765.16 KB/sec 754.83 KB/sec
> 693.55 KB/sec
> Average file size: 1,571.5 KB 383.8 KB 193.3 KB 50.7
> KB
> Compression %: 39% 50% 50% 72%
> Elapsed time: 01:00:24 00:35:02 00:30:03 00:26:46
>
>
> If you want, we can try to compare the different opt, sys, etc files and
> see if any of them help you. I guess that the other thing to do if for
> you
> to try and discover if anything outside of the machine is hampering your
> machine, like overnight batch jobs, other backups, loaded network
> traffic,
> etc.
>
> Francisco
> x9477
> --
> Francisco Franco e-mail: francisco.franco AT hydro.on DOT ca
> Ontario Hydro tel: (416) 592-9477
> 700 University Ave fax: (416)
> Toronto, Ont.
|
