Hii Kelly,
We have a mixed bag of clients to backup/archive ... different flavours of
UNIX (total of about 25 clients consisting of SGI, HP-UX, DEC/ALPHA/OSF1 ),
and 4 Vaxens ( three 4000-705's, and one 4000-90 ) running openVMS V6.1 .
At present we are not very much inclined
to include the desktops in our client list , but down the road we might.
We have a HP 9000 to host the ADSM server , and we have bunch of pentium
based desktops w/NT's. My personal preference will be UNIX platform
because that's where I feel more comfortable .. although we have folks
who are good at both the platforms. My question was basically related to
OS-based performance issues for ADSM. Of course, you would like to achieve
higher transfer rates ... which largely depends on the system and tape
hardware ... but may also have to do with the underlying OS. Also important
is the ease of using ADSM in the two environments.
Thanks much,
Surender Saini
Hughes Aircraft
*********************************************************
>
> ------ =_NextPart_000_01BC7722.B96C30C0
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
> Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
>
> Depends on what you're going to do with it. I don't know the HP-UX =
> platforms, but generally, the UNIX stuff is faster than the NT stuff, =
> hardware wise. Do you already have HP platforms and therefore HP smart =
> folks? Do you already have NT platforms and NT smart folks? Are you =
> going to backup more NT stuff than UNIX stuff? I think the answers to =
> these questions helps to lean you in a particular direction.
>
> We've done quite a bit of performance testing with ADSM on NT. I'm =
> finally getting comfortable with the performance I'm seeing. At first I =
> was skeptical, but my confusion about how NT does things contributed to =
> my confusion. We've tested dual processor P6 configurations with 128 MB =
> of memory and were unable to swamp the server with the clients we had. =
> We had two OpenVMS VAX 6610 systems and a couple of Digital Alpha UNIX =
> systems as clients. We ran a number of concurrent streams into the =
> server. Looks like the limiting factor in this case was the driver on =
> the VAXen rather than the server. Migration from disk pools to tape is =
> acceptable. I've seen performance in the 2 - 2.5 GB per hour on a =
> normal SCSI bus (10 MB/sec).
>
> Boils down, IMHO, to what platform you are most comfortable with. ADSM =
> is identical in either case.
>
> I would be interested in hearing about your final decision. Can you =
> please post it here along with the criteria you finally used?
>
> Thanks,
>
> Kelly Lipp
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Surender Saini [SMTP:saini AT ARNOLD.RSG.HAC DOT COM]
> Sent: Thursday, June 12, 1997 9:21 AM
> To: ADSM-L AT VM.MARIST DOT EDU
> Subject: ADSM server platform
>
> Hii ADSM Gals&Guys,
>
> We are trying to buy the ADSM software package. If we have a
> choice for the ADSM server platform between Windows NT and HP-UX,
> what will be your pick ... based on your experience.
>
> Thanks for your candid opinion
>
> Surender Saini
>
> Hughes Aircraft, 1230 Carl Vinson Pkwy, Warner Robins, GA 31093
> saini AT arnold.rsg.hac DOT com
>
|
