Networker

Re: [Networker] Parallelism???

2005-06-24 09:06:53
Subject: Re: [Networker] Parallelism???
From: Riaan Louwrens <riaanl AT SOURCECONSULTING.CO DOT ZA>
To: NETWORKER AT LISTSERV.TEMPLE DOT EDU
Date: Fri, 24 Jun 2005 15:05:23 +0200
As a matter of interest, 

I have found that "generally" around the 4 or 5 // per drive is a good average 
between decent backup performance and a acceptable restore speed (in most of 
our environments).

Depending on the number of clients being backed up at any given time - I 
normally try and keep the client // relatively low (2). IF there is a issue 
with specific clients having horrid throughput's I try and isolate them 
separately.

The server // is then dependant on the number of drives you have (i.e. you set 
the server // to that. Remember that if you only have 1 drive and a server // 
of 16 - you will be backing up 16 sessions to tape as server over rides tape 
//).

Obviously in the larger environments you need some decent CPU / more drives / 
more memory.

I have seen before that having wrong drivers / network cards have chewed up CPU 
on systems.

Regards,
Riaan

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

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