|
[Veritas-bu] RE: perfomance problem using Sun E450 with SDLT drives
2003-08-08 08:13:36
|
Subject: |
[Veritas-bu] RE: perfomance problem using Sun E450 with SDLT drives |
|
From: |
dfdwyer AT tecoenergy DOT com (Dennis Dwyer) |
|
Date: |
Fri, 08 Aug 2003 08:13:36 -0400 |
This is a MIME message. If you are reading this text, you may want to
consider changing to a mail reader or gateway that understands how to
properly handle MIME multipart messages.
--=_134D12E4.89E8BFBC
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
A couple of questions first.
How many processors in your E450?
Did you just implement SDLT220 drives or have you been running them awhil=
e?
If you didn't just implement them, have they been running satisfactorily =
and then all of a sudden started running badly?
The reason I ask is I was considering adding SDLT drives to my L700 libra=
ry last year (there were 8 DLT8000's in there). The vendor (STK) was adam=
ant about the fact that for SDLT you need to have one processor per tape =
drive in order to take full advantage of its performance. Perhaps someone=
can confirm or deny that fact for me but that's was the party line from =
STK as recently as last October.
So ... If you just implemented the drives and you're running 4 SDLT drive=
s on a base E450 with two 400Mhz CPU's, that could be a problem for you. =
Obviously this reasoning might not apply if they had been running well an=
d all of a sudden the performance problem started (unless you had a signi=
ficant increase in the amount of data you're transferring).
Regards,
Dennis
Dennis F. Dwyer
Manager, Systems Software
Tampa Electric Company
(813) 225-5181 - Voice
(813) 275-3599 - FAX
Visit our corporate website at www.tecoenergy.com
The Colonel Says: "Time is not a test of the truth"
Translation: Just because you've always done it that way, doesn't make it=
right
>>> Vijaykumar Rajendra Rao <vrajendr AT mipos2.intel DOT com> 08/07/2003
>>> 12:52:=
04 PM >>>
hello all
i have a sun E 450 Netbackup 4.5 Fp3 master server connected to a Quantum
P4000 using SDLT220 drives. I have 4 tape devices hooked up to the system.
Iam seeing extremely slow performance while runnig 4 jobs. Iam getting
around 2Mb/sec per drive.. also I have tweaked a lot of NB parameters wit=
h
out much success.
Please help
Thanx
_______________________________________________
Veritas-bu maillist - Veritas-bu AT mailman.eng.auburn DOT edu
http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/mailman/listinfo/veritas-bu
--=_134D12E4.89E8BFBC
Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Content-Description: HTML
<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD>
<META http-equiv=3DContent-Type content=3D"text/html; charset=3Diso-8859-=
1">
<META content=3D"MSHTML 5.50.4926.2500" name=3DGENERATOR></HEAD>
<BODY style=3D"MARGIN-TOP: 2px; FONT: 10pt Tahoma; MARGIN-LEFT: 2px">
<DIV>A couple of questions first.</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>How many processors in your E450?</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>Did you just implement SDLT220 drives or have you been running them=20
awhile?</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>If you didn't just implement them, have they been running satisfacto=
rily=20
and then all of a sudden started running badly?</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>The reason I ask is I was considering adding SDLT drives to my L700 =
library=20
last year (there were 8 DLT8000's in there). The vendor (STK) was ad=
amant=20
about the fact that for SDLT you need to have one processor per tape driv=
e in=20
order to take full advantage of its performance. Perhaps someone can conf=
irm or=20
deny that fact for me but that's was the party line from STK as recently =
as last=20
October.</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>So ... If you just implemented the drives and you're running 4 SDLT =
drives=20
on a base E450 with two 400Mhz CPU's, that could be a problem for you. Ob=
viously=20
this reasoning might not apply if they had been running well and all=
of a=20
sudden the performance problem started (unless you had a significant incr=
ease in=20
the amount of data you're transferring).</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>Regards,</DIV>
<DIV>Dennis</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>Dennis F. Dwyer<BR>Manager, Systems Software<BR>Tampa Electric=20
Company</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>(813) 225-5181 - Voice<BR>(813) 275-3599 - FAX</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>Visit our corporate website at <A=20
href=3D"http://www.tecoenergy.com";>www.tecoenergy.com</A></DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>The Colonel Says: "Time is not a test of the truth"<BR>Translation: =
Just=20
because you've always done it that way, doesn't make it=20
right<BR><BR>>>> Vijaykumar Rajendra Rao=20
<vrajendr AT mipos2.intel DOT com> 08/07/2003 12:52:04 PM=20
>>><BR><BR>hello all<BR><BR>i have a sun E 450 Netbackup 4.5 Fp3=
master=20
server connected to a Quantum<BR>P4000 using SDLT220 drives. I have 4 tap=
e=20
devices hooked up to the system.<BR>Iam seeing extremely slow performance=
while=20
runnig 4 jobs. Iam getting<BR>around 2Mb/sec per drive.. also I have twea=
ked a=20
lot of NB parameters with<BR>out much success.<BR><BR><BR><BR>Please=20
help<BR><BR><BR><BR>Thanx<BR><BR><BR><BR>________________________________=
_______________<BR>Veritas-bu=20
maillist - Veritas-bu AT mailman.eng.auburn DOT edu<BR><A=20
href=3D"http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/mailman/listinfo/veritas-bu";>http:/=
/mailman.eng.auburn.edu/mailman/listinfo/veritas-bu</A><BR><BR></DIV></BO=
DY></HTML>
--=_134D12E4.89E8BFBC--
|
|
|
