Networker

[Networker] Backup saveset speed: Enumerating directories vs using ALL

2008-10-27 10:54:18
Subject: [Networker] Backup saveset speed: Enumerating directories vs using ALL
From: MIchael Leone <Michael.Leone AT PHA.PHILA DOT GOV>
To: NETWORKER AT LISTSERV.TEMPLE DOT EDU
Date: Mon, 27 Oct 2008 10:51:26 -0400
NW 7.4 SP2, Win2003

On our main SAN, we enumerate the folders to be backed up, rather than 
just specifying ALL (or in our case, "H:"). We do this for speed reasons - 
it's a lot faster to do this, rather than specifying a saveset of ALL. I'm 
told that ALL backs up folders in sequence, while enumerating them (in 
conjunction with parallelism) makes them back up in parallel, rather than 
sequence.

Have I got that right?

Well, you can see what's coming ... there was a folder on the drive that 
was not in the saveset list, and hence not backed up.

So my question ... I'd much prefer to just say "H:" as the saveset, and 
get whatever is on the drive, and I won't need to change the saveset list 
whenever a folder is added. 

However, we're talking about a total amount of data in the range of 1 TB. 
This is a AFTD storage node, so we back up to disk, and then clone to a 
SDLT-600 library that is attached to the NW server. We do daily level 1 
backups, and full on Friday (no way do the fulls finish in enough time 
overnight). I think the daily Level 1 backups wouldn't be a problem - 
right now, the longest it takes to back up the folders by enumerating them 
is about 90 minutes (to disk, and then it clones to tape), so not 
enumerating the savesets should still make them finish in the backup 
window (6PM to about 7AM, more or less).

Here's a full backup on Friday:

Start time:   Fri Oct 24 18:15:00 2008
Clone Start:  Sat Oct 25 06:07:15 2008
End time:     Sat Oct 25 15:38:01 2008

So ... if I specify a saveset of "H:", what other settings can I do to 
ensure that I continue to get parallel saveset backups (i.e., that H:\A, 
H:\B, H:\C are all backing up at the same time)? Is there some way I can 
estimate how long? Or some setting (such as client parallelism) that will 
give me most of the same speed I am getting now?

Client parallelism for this client is currently 12; savegroup parallelism 
is 0 (this is the only client in that group). Server parallelism is 32. 
Number of top level folders is currently 28.

I realize I am displaying what to some is a stunning lack of knowledge, 
but please bear with me. :-)

Any suggestions welcome

-- 
Michael Leone
Network Administrator, ISM
Philadelphia Housing Authority
2500 Jackson St
Philadelphia, PA 19145
Tel:  215-684-4180
Cell: 215-252-0143
<mailto:michael.leone AT pha.phila DOT gov>

To sign off this list, send email to listserv AT listserv.temple DOT edu and 
type "signoff networker" in the body of the email. Please write to 
networker-request AT listserv.temple DOT edu if you have any problems with this 
list. You can access the archives at 
http://listserv.temple.edu/archives/networker.html or
via RSS at http://listserv.temple.edu/cgi-bin/wa?RSS&L=NETWORKER

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>