We had an NT ADSM server, then we moved to an AIX server when it ran out of
steam.  We had a 2 CPU Compaq Proliant 6500, dual 100Mb Ethernet cards,
640MB RAM and lots of disk backing up close to 100 NT server clients daily.
When it was in operation, I saw that it used lots of CPU and not much
memory.  IBM said that the NT server did not scale well past 2 CPUs, so
don't waste any money there.  This was attached to a STK9710 w/10 DLT7000
drives.  We had 3 SCSI cards in the server attaching to the DLTs.  The
bottlenecks will be your network and I/O (disk and tape).  Speed those up if
you can.  We eventually went with an AIX server because the Intel platform
we were using just could not go any faster.  We're seeing at least 2-3X
performance now. (I'm not saying that you should look at AIX now, NT may
suit you perfectly.)

James Louie
Nabisco

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Jordan, Chris (ELS) [mailto:c.jordan AT ELSEVIER.CO DOT UK]
> Sent: Thursday, August 19, 1999 12:37 PM
> To: ADSM-L AT VM.MARIST DOT EDU
> Subject: Re: ADSM Bottleneck
>
>
> We have an NT Intel "building block" server that consists of:
>
> 2 x 400 MHz CPUs
> 512 MB Memory
> 2 x 3 disks (9.1GB) mirrored for Op Sys and database
> 24 disks (9.1GB) for the disk cache.
> Attached to a DLT Tape library - 4 drives and 84 slots.
>
> We haven't fully loaded it yet to need a second building
> block - but it
> seems to be the disk for the database that is going to become
> the bottle
> neck first.
>
> Cheers, Chris
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Forgosh, Seth [mailto:sforgosh AT TIAA-CREF DOT ORG]
> Sent: 19 August 1999 16:37
> To: ADSM-L AT VM.MARIST DOT EDU
> Subject: ADSM Bottleneck
>
>
> We are about to spec out a new ADSM server running NT on the
> Intel platform.
> We are interested in opinions of what are the main
> bottlenecks for ADSM
> performance. For instance, would adding multiple processors increase
> performance (especially ADSM DB) or is memory more important.
> Thanks in
> advance.
> Seth Forgosh
>