Networker

Re: [Networker] Restore times excessive?

2003-01-07 17:15:46
Subject: Re: [Networker] Restore times excessive?
From: "Peter D. Gray" <pdg AT UOW.EDU DOT AU>
To: NETWORKER AT LISTMAIL.TEMPLE DOT EDU
Date: Wed, 8 Jan 2003 09:12:32 +1100
I think this is normal and nothing to do with networker.
Writes are a lot more expensive than reads. Try it
yourself with simple file read/write benchmarks.

It gets even worse with large numbers of small files.
File creation is very expensive. I allow a factor of
5 for restore over saves. Thats why we are moving to mirroring
for DR rather than tape restore. I extimate it would take a week just
to restore all our data.

Regards,
pdg

> I thought about parallelism. It's not a factor. I'm testing against a single
> 10GB text file while no other operations are running on the NetWorker
> server.
>
> Dave
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Robert Legate [mailto:rlegate AT SHAW DOT CA]
> Sent: Monday, December 16, 2002 11:01 AM
> To: NETWORKER AT LISTMAIL.TEMPLE DOT EDU
> Subject: Re: [Networker] Restore times excessive?
>
>
> Could parallelism be a factor here? Are you staging or writing directly to
> tape? Multiplexing will occur when writing directly to tape and this will
> increase recovery time, since files are written in parallel and not
> sequentially.
>

--
Note: To sign off this list, send a "signoff networker" command via email
to listserv AT listmail.temple DOT edu or visit the list's Web site at
http://listmail.temple.edu/archives/networker.html where you can
also view and post messages to the list.
=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>