My experience so far has been that the restore is limited by the speed and
configuration of the server. We had to restore an NT server (12 GB, P5-233
with 512MB RAM) over 100 Mb ethernet. This ran for over 26 hours, never used
more than 25% of the network, and query session on the ADSM server showed
long periods of send wait. The client data was not compressed -- it
juscouldn't keep up on the disk write side.

FWIW, I see the same thing in the AIX environment; I can shove the data off
the server and over the network far faster than the client can actually
write it.

Tom Kauffman
kauffmant AT nibco DOT com

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Stephan Rittmann [SMTP:srittmann AT FIDUCIA DOT DE]
> Sent: Friday, March 12, 1999 7:59 AM
> To:   ADSM-L AT VM.MARIST DOT EDU
> Subject:      ADSM and big file-servers
>
>
> Hi all,
>
> I want to start a discussion about ADSM and backing up big file servers.
> In our
> environment we have 16 Mbit token-ring networks and we are using ADSM to
> back
> up all of the critical data.
> The biggest file servers that we use at the moment has a 18 GB data
> partition.
> Backing up these servers with incremental backup is no problem. It works
> for a
> long time, everybody is satisfied about the short backup times. But what
> will
> happen  in the case of a disk failure. If the server was very full, you
> have to
> restore up to 18 GB. With our kind of netwotk this would take about 20
> houres
> or more.
> What I want to say is; The disks in the servers  become bigger and bigger,
> the
> backup time is still the same because of the incremental technique from
> ADSM.
> I'm sure that most of the useres from ADSM don't think about the long
> restore
> times in case of a disk failure.
> The difference between the network speed and the size of the data disks
> becomes
> bigger and I see a problem in this fact.
>
> What are you think about these? And how could we solve these problem?
>
> Stephan Rittmann
> FIDUCIA AG, Karlsruhe
> Germany
>