Networker

Re: [Networker] Strange performance issues since NetWorker upgrade

2003-08-20 14:01:29
Subject: Re: [Networker] Strange performance issues since NetWorker upgrade
From: Robert Maiello <robert.maiello AT MEDEC DOT COM>
To: NETWORKER AT LISTMAIL.TEMPLE DOT EDU
Date: Wed, 20 Aug 2003 14:01:27 -0400
I don't run Networker on HPUX but just to throw in a wild guess;  barring
any NIC duplex issues..

it is possible that the scsi bus speeds to tape drives and/or disk on the
new server are running at a slower rate than the old server ?

I know a utility like scsiinfo (ftp://ftp.cs.toronto.edu/pub/jdd/scsiinfo/)
will tell you the bus speeds...I think its only for Solaris though.

Again,  just a guess  (and a poor one at that).


Robert Maiello
Thomson Healthcare



On Wed, 20 Aug 2003 16:28:53 +0100, Saunderson,Michael Robert
<SAUNDEMR AT APCI DOT COM> wrote:

>Hello all,
>
>I'm hoping there's a brain or two that can throw some ideas or light on the
following scenario (sorry if it's a bit long winded):
>
>Up until just over a month ago we were running NetWorker 5.1 on HP-UX
10.20. This system ran backups at good speeds, but was highly prone to
falling over and NetWorker itself would often suffer from freezes.
>
>To attempt to solve this (and other support issues), we moved NetWorker
across to newer hardware with the /nsr directory stored on striped disks,
faster processors, more memory, etc. The OS this newer system runs is HP-UX
11.0. Following the move to the new system, we have noticed a significant
reduction in the speed of data streaming down to the tape drives and as a
result many of our larger backups are failing to complete due to lack of
time. We have since upgraded to NetWorker 6.1.3, but this has made no change
to the situation.
>
>The new server has identical numbers of SCSI channels and NICs. There are
no apparent network configuration issues as the neither the cards nor the
switch show any errors. Test FTPs also run at good speeds. The system also
isn't logging any SCSI errors. A local backup of /nsr runs at very good
speed until additional backup streams come in across the network.
>
>Our vendor went through all the usual settings such as Parallelism, Drive
Sessions, etc., but all to no avail.
>
>Does anyone have any further ideas where we could start looking?
>
>Many thanks for any thoughts,
>
>Michael Saunderson.
>
>+
>
>--
>Note: To sign off this list, send a "signoff networker" command via email
>to listserv AT listmail.temple DOT edu or visit the list's Web site at
>http://listmail.temple.edu/archives/networker.html where you can
>also view and post messages to the list.
>=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=

--
Note: To sign off this list, send a "signoff networker" command via email
to listserv AT listmail.temple DOT edu or visit the list's Web site at
http://listmail.temple.edu/archives/networker.html where you can
also view and post messages to the list.
=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=