ADSM-L

Re: transfer speed

1999-02-11 08:18:37
Subject: Re: transfer speed
From: "Dusedau, Stefan" <Stefan.Dusedau AT VIACOM DOT COM>
Date: Thu, 11 Feb 1999 08:18:37 -0500
Doug,

Another thing you might try is to do an FTP from the NT system to the
mainframe and see the stats. This can tell you if the bottleneck is the
connection between the systems.

We have decided on ADSM as our enterprise backup solution. This was made on
more then just performance. Ease of management, availability of support and
ability to use the same product on all our systems were more important
issues.

Thank You,

Stefan Dusedau
infoWorks
A Viacom technology service
(212)258-6739
stefan.dusedau AT viacom DOT com <mailto:stefan.dusedau AT viacom DOT com>


                -----Original Message-----
                From:   Douglas Brown [mailto:dbrown AT TELALINK DOT NET]
                Sent:   Wednesday, February 10, 1999 4:54 PM
                To:     ADSM-L AT VM.MARIST DOT EDU
                Subject:        transfer speed

                We purchased ADSM in hopes of getting rid of ArcServe and
4mm tapes. In
                order for us to keep it, we have to prove that ADSM is going
to be at least
                as fast as ArcServe. So far, I haven't been able to pull it
off. I thought I
                would ask the list what kind of transfer rates they (you)
were getting. I
                realize that there are about a million factors that can have
an effect on
                the rate, so I'm really only looking for some good ballpark
figures, but
                even that may not be possible.

                Here's the setup...

                133Mhz Pentium, NT server with 100+ MB RAM and a 10Mb pipe.
Compression is
                off and all setting are at optimum per the "Performance
Tuning Guide". Data
                passes from the server (client) to a router, then out of the
router into the
                mainframe (S/390) in the next room. Again, a 10Mb pipe all
the way. ADSM is
                v3r1. Should I be getting better than 575-600K/sec?

                Thanks for any help.

                --
                Doug Brown

                21F3 8086 1D2D 5ED0 1794  2ED9 CFC3 8043 928B 6551
<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>