ADSM-L

Re: ADSM versus Arcserve and Backup Exec

1998-09-14 10:29:49
Subject: Re: ADSM versus Arcserve and Backup Exec
From: Dan Kronstadt <dkronsta AT YAHOO DOT COM>
Date: Mon, 14 Sep 1998 07:29:49 -0700
Dave - I would be interested in getting some more info about your
restore tests. We are happy with adsm except for one thing - a restore
of a file server with several 100K files takes TOO LONG! I have yet to
hear anyone say they can restore more than a gig or 2 an hour, when
that is made up of files averaging 50K each. We are still testing, and
the bottleneck may be Netware *allocating* that many files - but other
vendors (arcserve, for example) claim faster restore times. Do you
have any info on this kind of a restore? Large files get restored fine.

Thanks.
Dan Kronstadt
Warner Bros.
dan.kronstadt AT warnerbros DOT com




---Dave Larimer <david.larimer.hnj9 AT STATEFARM DOT COM> wrote:
>
>
> An alternative suggestion on the use of ADSM, the issue is that you
do not
> wish to use ADSM over the network because of restore being too slow.
 If
> this is correct, I would give you an alternative suggestion.  Given
that a
> disaster situation is hopefully few and far between, backup all data
via
> ADSM through the network and in the event of an actual disaster,
construct
> a new box at the central site, restore it there and ship it to the
remote
> location.  The cost savings eliminating local software, tape library,
> hardware and labor would be substantial.   In addition, when I
evaluated
> Arcserve, Backup Exec, and ADSM, I found the following:
> Backup time:  (depending on how much data changes from day to day) I
found
> that overall ADSM came in first, followed closely            by
Arcserve
> and then by Backup Exec.
> Restore time: (depending on severity of restore and network
connectivity)
> All three products performed about the same, with            ADSM
having a
> slight edge, due to it's strength as file restore software.  In
ADSM, the
> file is ready as soon as it        is restored.  This may not be the
case
> with the other two products.
> Service Support: This is the part that I experienced the most
variety, with
> ADSM, I found the most support, followed by Arcserve         and then
> Backup Exec a distance third.  Backup Exec's support fell off sharply
> during off hours.
> Cost savings: ADSM clearly came out ahead here in all categories.
>
> I hope that this helps.
>
> Dave Larimer
> David.Larimer.HNJ9 AT StateFarm DOT com
>
>
>
>
>
> From:
O1=INET00/C=US/A=IBMX400/P=STATEFARM/DD.RFC-822=ADSM-L\@VM.MARIST.EDU
> on 09/11/98 04:21:21 PM
> To:   ADSM-L
> cc:
> Subject:  ADSM versus Arcserve and Backup Exec
>
> Help!
>
>      There is a shift going on within our company where many Netware
> servers are being consolidated to larger NT servers.  A large number
of
> these Netware soon to be NT servers are located in remote offices
connected
> to our statewide ATM backbone via T1 lines.  The new NT servers in the
> remote offices will contain approximately 6 - 10 GB of user data.
> In most cases we were not planning on backing up the remote NT
machines to
> a central ADSM server because it would take too long to restore an
entire
> machine in a disaster recovery scenario.  This means, for the remote
> offices, local tape, probably a IBM 3570 library, would be used with
the
> standalone version of ADSM.  We also thought we might backup the 3570
> storage pools to a central server for disaster protection.
>
>      Our current enviroment is ADSM for MVS v3 backing up 100
clients all
> within the Datacenter or close by.  Clients are AIX, SUN, HP,
Windows NT
> (Lotus Notes Servers), and 1 Netware server.   ADSM has been in used
to
> backup our UNIX servers for nearly 3 years.  Arcserve is currently
used to
> backup the Netware servers using a DAT tape drive attached to each
server.
> We standardized, or a least I thought we did, on using ADSM company
wide
> about a year and a half ago.
>
>      Ok that's the background on to the problem.. A person from our
> distributed computing group informed me today that they have pretty
much
> decided to go with Arcserve or Seagate Backup Exec to backup the
remote
> office servers.  This decision was made without my involvement and
> shouldn't have been.. But that's a political issue.. The question I
have
> for you good people is has anyone out there done a side by side
comparison
> of the ADSM single server version versus Arcserve and/or Seagate
Backup
> Exec? Any ammo you can give me that shows ADSM is the better choice
would
> be GREATLY appreciated.  It is their feeling that ADSM is too slow
and not
> widely used in the industry for backing up Windows NT or Netware.
>
>
> Thanks!
> Jeff Connor
> Niagara Mohawk Power Corp.
> Syracuse NY
>

_________________________________________________________
DO YOU YAHOO!?
Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com