On Mon, 22 Oct 2001 10:29:41 -5, it was written:
>My take is that a backup set creation is the equivalent of a full
>restore.  If the backup set can be created in 3 hours, then a full
>server restore is possible in 3 hours - if you can get the data to
>the server (network throughput) and the netware server can accept the
>data (netware server write throughput).
>
>Is this sound reasoning? 

No.

>Thoughts?

Use some logic. A restore reads a file off of a tape and sends it
along the SCSI/fiber connection to the TSM server, which in turn pipes
it through the I/O bus (getting it from SCSI to ethernet/token ring),
sends it out a network connection, through an indeterminate number of
pieces of network hardware, gets it to its intended target. The target
box then sends the file through *its* I/O bus to IDE/SCSI, and finally
onto disk.

A backupset take a file that is stored on tape, sends it through a
SCSI connection to a SCSI adapter, goes through the I/O bus to another
SCSI adapter on the same bus, sends it back out through another SCSI
connection to a tape drive, which writes the file.

Do the math on the distance, the number of hops through separate
machines, and the translations. There's *lots* more overhead on a
restore; I didn't even discuss the disk operations necessary to
recreate volumes and directories.

--
Mark Stapleton (stapleton AT berbee DOT com)
Mark Stapleton (stapleton AT berbee DOT com)