What he said.

---
W. Curtis Preston
Author of O'Reilly's Backup & Recovery and Using SANs and NAS
VP Data Protection
GlassHouse Technologies


-----Original Message-----
From: networker-bounces AT backupcentral DOT com
[mailto:networker-bounces AT backupcentral DOT com] On Behalf Of Dag Nygren
Sent: Wednesday, January 17, 2007 12:29 PM
To: NETWORKER AT LISTSERV.TEMPLE DOT EDU
Subject: Re: [Networker] Does cloning unmuliplex and make recovery
faster?

> Cloning de-multiplexes the data so the clone should always restore
> faster than the original (assuming you use target sessions higher than
> 1).

You have to remember one thing here though:
The write capability of the client you are recovering to.

This will typically be slightly lower than the read speed
with inode updates and such.

And if you can avoid shoeshining the drive during recover
with the "right" parallelism you will actually get a recover speed
from a multiplexed volume that are faster than from a non-multiplexed
one. The difference will not be large, but indeed noticable.

This implies that if your recovers are faster from a non muxed tape
you were using  a too high parallelism setting during the backup.

Best
Dag

To sign off this list, send email to listserv AT listserv.temple DOT edu and
type "signoff networker" in the body of the email. Please write to
networker-request AT listserv.temple DOT edu if you have any problems with this
list. You can access the archives at
http://listserv.temple.edu/archives/networker.html or
via RSS at http://listserv.temple.edu/cgi-bin/wa?RSS&L=NETWORKER

To sign off this list, send email to listserv AT listserv.temple DOT edu and 
type "signoff networker" in the body of the email. Please write to 
networker-request AT listserv.temple DOT edu if you have any problems with this 
list. You can access the archives at 
http://listserv.temple.edu/archives/networker.html or
via RSS at http://listserv.temple.edu/cgi-bin/wa?RSS&L=NETWORKER