ADSM-L

Re: selective vs incremental backup processing times

1999-12-21 03:27:47
Subject: Re: selective vs incremental backup processing times
From: Mike Keating <alex.fagioli AT TECTRADE.CO DOT UK>
Date: Tue, 21 Dec 1999 08:27:47 +0000
What happens when you run an incremental backup
forever?............................

Once again it should be emphasized that there is no need whatsover to run
selective backups.


Alex Fagioli


Data Management Consultant






Barbara Andrews <bandrews AT ERIE1.WNYRIC DOT ORG> on 20/12/99 20:42:03

Please respond to "ADSM: Dist Stor Manager" <ADSM-L AT VM.MARIST DOT EDU>

To:   ADSM-L AT VM.MARIST DOT EDU
cc:    (bcc: Alex Fagioli/Tectrade Computers Limited)

Subject:  selective vs incremental backup processing times




We are running ADSM server Ver. 3 Rel. 1 Level 2.40 on an OS/390 2.7
platform.  The ADSM client is Ver. 3 Rel. 1 Level 0.7 running on a Novell
Netware 4.1.1 Server.  Does anyone have any ideas why it would take much
longer to run an incremental backup verses a selective backup?  As an
example, I specified the following object for the backup:
    vol1:users/ - subdir=yes
Here is the summary after the SELECTIVE backup:

12/17/1999 01:05:49 Total number of objects inspected:   33,116
12/17/1999 01:05:49 Total number of objects backed up:   33,116
12/17/1999 01:05:49 Total number of objects updated:          0
12/17/1999 01:05:49 Total number of objects rebound:          0
12/17/1999 01:05:49 Total number of objects deleted:          0
12/17/1999 01:05:49 Total number of objects failed:           0
12/17/1999 01:05:49 Total number of bytes transferred:     1.59 GB
12/17/1999 01:05:49 Data transfer time:                1,982.16 sec
12/17/1999 01:05:49 Network data transfer rate:          843.95 KB/sec
12/17/1999 01:05:49 Aggregate data transfer rate:        500.70 KB/sec
12/17/1999 01:05:49 Objects compressed by:                    0%
12/17/1999 01:05:49 Elapsed processing time:           00:55:40

Here is the summary after the INCREMENTAL backup the next day:

12/18/1999 08:13:41 Total number of objects inspected:   33,367
12/18/1999 08:13:41 Total number of objects backed up:      227
12/18/1999 08:13:41 Total number of objects updated:          0
12/18/1999 08:13:41 Total number of objects rebound:          0
12/18/1999 08:13:41 Total number of objects deleted:      1,286
12/18/1999 08:13:41 Total number of objects failed:           0
12/18/1999 08:13:41 Total number of bytes transferred:    55.96 MB
12/18/1999 08:13:41 Data transfer time:                  100.83 sec
12/18/1999 08:13:41 Network data transfer rate:          568.40 KB/sec
12/18/1999 08:13:41 Aggregate data transfer rate:          1.35 KB/sec
12/18/1999 08:13:41 Objects compressed by:                    0%
12/18/1999 08:13:41 Elapsed processing time:           11:46:30

We also back up another Novell Netware 4.1.1 server incrementally with no
problems.  It's client code is at a level just prior to the other server's
( 0.6).  It will typically run like the following:

Date and Time       Message
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
12/17/1999 21:00:34 ANE4952I (Session: 267, Node: E011LIB)  Total number of
12/17/1999 21:00:34 ANE4952I (Session: 267, Node: E011LIB)  Total number of
objects inspected:   65,642
12/17/1999 21:00:34 ANE4954I (Session: 267, Node: E011LIB)  Total number of
objects backed up:      142
12/17/1999 21:00:34 ANE4958I (Session: 267, Node: E011LIB)  Total number of
objects updated:          0
12/17/1999 21:00:34 ANE4960I (Session: 267, Node: E011LIB)  Total number of
objects rebound:          0
12/17/1999 21:00:34 ANE4957I (Session: 267, Node: E011LIB)  Total number of
objects deleted:          0
12/17/1999 21:00:34 ANE4959I (Session: 267, Node: E011LIB)  Total number of
objects failed:           3
12/17/1999 21:00:34 ANE4961I (Session: 267, Node: E011LIB)  Total number of
bytes transferred:   145.05 MB
12/17/1999 21:00:34 ANE4963I (Session: 267, Node: E011LIB)  Data transfer
time:                  148.33 sec
12/17/1999 21:00:34 ANE4966I (Session: 267, Node: E011LIB)  Network data
transfer rate:        1,001.35 KB/sec
12/17/1999 21:00:34 ANE4967I (Session: 267, Node: E011LIB)  Aggregate data
transfer rate:        236.46 KB/sec
12/17/1999 21:00:34 ANE4968I (Session: 267, Node: E011LIB)  Objects
compressed by:                    0%
12/17/1999 21:00:34 ANE4964I (Session: 267, Node: E011LIB)  Elapsed
processing time:            00:10:28
12/17/1999 21:00:35 ANR0403I Session 267 ended for node E011LIB (NetWare).
12/17/1999 21:00:37 ANR0406I Session 268 started for node E011LIB (NetWare)
(Tcp/Ip 168.169.11.20(1341)).
12/17/1999 21:00:37 ANR0403I Session 268 ended for node E011LIB (NetWare).

What could be so different about the two servers?

Any insight would be appreciated.  We are only operating ADSM in a test
mode now, but if we don't get this resolved it may never make it to
production.  Confidence levels aren't too high around here.
<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>