Bruno,
You stated that the data is all on an EMC frame, are you using or do you
currently have time finder installed? (BCV utilization)
The reason that I ask is, depending on how the volumes are set up on EMC
(hence 50Gb? physicals cut into hypers or meta volumes) and the amount of
cache on the EMC you could make your situation worse by multi-streaming the
backup off of the same physicals.

Also I'm curious if your bin is set for hardware striping and what the
stripe size is?
It could require a bin change where you go to a smaller stripe size and or
smaller hyper/meta volume in order to allow you to multi-stream and increase
performance.
Anyway just a thought,
Mark Eisenhardt

 (m) 408.373.7247
  (e)  scurry AT yahoo-inc DOT com

 #That is probably the best thing to do.
 #
 #Thanks !
 #Bruno
 #OK Bruno, let's be honest here.  NBU as with all backup software
 #applications have difficulty with large quantities of small files.
This
 #is
 #caused by the overhead required to catalog the files, retain metadata
of
 #their locations on tape, etcetera.  A recommendation would be to look
at
 #breaking the 150Gb into something like three 50GB chunks.  Do this in
the
 #file selection using the * wildcard and streaming the data.  The file
list
 #would look something like this:
 #
 #NEW_STREAM
 #/path/a*
 #/path/b*
 #|
 #/path/g*
 #NEW_STREAM
 #/path/h*
 #|
 #/path/m*
 #
 #down to /path/z*
 #
 #To write to one drive set multiplexing in both the STU and the
schedule
 #and
 #set it to the number of streams.
 #
 #HTH.
 #
 #Thanks,
 #Rockey Reed
 #
 #-----Original Message-----
 #From: Bruno.Bossier AT comparex DOT be [mailto:Bruno.Bossier AT comparex DOT 
be]
 #Sent: Monday, November 04, 2002 9:34 AM
 #To: David A. Chapa
 #Cc: veritas-bu AT mailman.eng.auburn DOT edu
 #Subject: Re: [Veritas-bu] Backing up a large amount of small files
 #
 #
 #
 #All the data is on EMC via a SAN, so RAID-1.