I don't think it is new, but it's not an issue that comes up much.

This is a case where "bigger is not always better". In this case, the
reason for the recommendation is because Windows's disk I/O buffers are
smaller than the buffer we use when LARGECOMMBUFFERS YES is in effect, so
we end up waiting on the disk I/O to fill a buffer before sending it to
the server, causing serious performance degradation.

Regards,

Andy

Andy Raibeck
IBM Software Group
Tivoli Storage Manager Client Development
Internal Notes e-mail: Andrew Raibeck/Tucson/IBM@IBMUS
Internet e-mail: storman AT us.ibm DOT com

The only dumb question is the one that goes unasked.
The command line is your friend.
"Good enough" is the enemy of excellence.




"Remeta, Mark" <MRemeta AT SELIGMANDATA DOT COM>
Sent by: "ADSM: Dist Stor Manager" <ADSM-L AT VM.MARIST DOT EDU>
10/26/2001 09:22
Please respond to "ADSM: Dist Stor Manager"


        To:     ADSM-L AT VM.MARIST DOT EDU
        cc:
        Subject:        Re: Windows XP



Hi Andrew, is the recommendation to not use LARGECOMMBUFFERS under Windows
new? I don't recall hearing this before...

Thanks,
Mark