Re: NT restore performance for small files
2015-10-04 17:47:36
> Two more items I like to discuss:
>
> 1) Tuning: What about client compression? Does turning off has
>impact
> on restore performance? Do I have to expect more space to be needed
>
> within ADSM, or does hardware compression equalize the space
>needed?
>
> 2) Conceptional: We think about tuning ADSM as backup tool to be
>able
> to provide adequate disaster restore times. That is ok. Of course
>IBM
> can expect ADSM Users to configure their clients according to
> proposals. But at a given level. For my opinion IBM cannot expect
>that
> ADSM users do half the world in customizing to achieve better
> performance. I have the uncanny feeling that ADSM may not be
>adequate
> to todays needs in comparision to other tools (including those that
>do
> not use the network for backup and therefore are faster).
>
> It is very hard to explain ADSM as THE tool to customers when
>steadily
> getting poor restore times in cases of big restore requests.
>
> Am I alone with this expectations?
>
> Matthias
|
<Prev in Thread] |
Current Thread |
[Next in Thread> |
- Re: NT restore performance for small files, (continued)
- Re: NT restore performance for small files, Kelly J. Lipp
- Re: NT restore performance for small files, Pete Tanenhaus
- Re: NT restore performance for small files, Dwight Cook
- Re: NT restore performance for small files, Francis Maes
- Re: NT restore performance for small files, Hensel, Matthias
- Re: NT restore performance for small files, BFS
- Re: NT restore performance for small files, Uwe Schoenacher
- Re: NT restore performance for small files, Paul Bergh
- NT restore performance for small files, Hensel , Matthias
- Re: NT restore performance for small files, Diana Cline
- Re: NT restore performance for small files,
Hensel , Matthias <=
|
|
|