David,
Yes, in Netware we can restore large files fairly quickly, but when we
hit 10,000 or so 1k files, the system just crawls.  I suspect this is
due to ADSM database inquiries and calls to the ADSM client o/s for file
services.  But that is just a guess.  My gut feel says this code has a
lot of room for improvement.  IBM, what say ye?

Ron Clendenny  <rdclendenny AT cal.ue DOT com>
Callaway Nuclear Power Plant
Fulton, Missouri

> "You can't have everything.  Where would you put it?" - Steven Wright
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: David Ong [SMTP:david AT BABYONG.NSC DOT COM]
> Sent: Tuesday, May 06, 1997 3:05 PM
> To:   ADSM-L AT VM.MARIST DOT EDU
> Subject:      Re: 3590 Read Performance
>
> Ron,
> Thanks for your response. But I don't think my problem has to do with
> co-location. All the required data is on that one 3590 tape. The
> filesystem
> that I was trying to restore is on the same machine as the ADSM
> server.
> Also the data for the file system should be fairly 'sequentially'
> stored on
> the tape because to create the offsite tape, I did a full backup to a
> newly
> created DRPOOL and then backed that up to the offsite pool. The data
> on
> that file system is also very static. The problem appears to be the
> way
> ADSM handles lots of small files vs a few large files. For example, to
> restore a 363mb 'mksysb' file only took less than 10 minutes.
> I remember last year there was some discussion on this subject but I
> don't
> recall ever seeing any resolution to it.
>
> At 07:50 AM 5/6/97 -0500, you wrote:
> >David,
> >We have 3590s in 3490 compatiblity mode.  We restore almost 1GB/hr on
> a
> >co-located tape from MVS on a 9672 to a Netware server via a 100Mb/s
> >fddi card.  If a tape is not co-located it will absolutely kill your
> >performance on restore regardless of any other hardware you may have.
> >It's pay me now or pay me later.
> >
> >Ron Clendenny  <rdclendenny AT cal.ue DOT com>
> >Callaway Nuclear Power Plant
> >Fulton, Missouri
> >
> >"No sir! Away! A papaya war is on" - Palindrome Pete
> >
> >> -----Original Message-----
> >> From: David Ong [SMTP:david AT BABYONG.NSC DOT COM]
> >> Sent: Monday, May 05, 1997 7:47 PM
> >> To:   ADSM-L AT VM.MARIST DOT EDU
> >> Subject:      3590 Read Performance
> >>
> >> Hello ADSMers,
> >>
> >> Last week I had the misfortune of doing our very first DR exercise
> >> which
> >> involved recovering our ADSM server, v2.1.0.9 on AIX 4.1.4 and then
> >> using
> >> ADSM to recover an AIX 4.1.4 node. The ADSM server recovery part
> went
> >> pretty much as planned and rather smoothly. The biggest stumbling
> >> block we
> >> ran into was the amount of time it took to restore data from the
> >> 'offsite'
> >> 3590 tape. For example, to restore a file system with 10,933 files
> and
> >> a
> >> total of 732 MBs, took over 3.5 hours. Question: Is this the kind
> of
> >> performance one should expect from the 3590s? I would appreciate
> >> hearing
> >> from anybody with experience restoring from 3590 tapes.
> >>
> >> Thanks in advance.
> >>
> >> Have a nice day or whatever's left of it.
> >>
> >> David Ong
> >> National Semiconductor Corp.
> >
> >
>
> Have a nice day or whatever's left of it.
>
> David Ong
> National Semiconductor Corp.