Are the notes for this presentation available on a web site and/or who was
the presentor?  This would help our purchase desision.

On Sat, 21 Aug 1999, Joshua Bassi wrote:

> Seth,
>
> Last week at the International Storage Systems Symposium I attend a
> session entitled "Optimizing ADSM & Windows NT for Performance and
> Operation" presented by a representative from IBM ADSM Advanced
> Technical Support who specializes in ADSM on NT.  During his
> presentation he talked extensively about ADSM on UP versus SMP NT
> servers.  He indicated that today, the ADSM server on NT can only
> utilize one CPU.  This was big news to me.
>
> That means adding 2 or more CPUs to your NT ADSM server will provide
> minimal ROI.  Yes, NT's system processes, networking, and even running a
> backup of the ADSM server itself would receive a boost from additional
> processor(s), but you wouldn't receive much of a performance boost on
> network backups.
>
> Has anybody else found this to be true?  It was a big shock to me
> personally.
>
>
> Joshua S. Bassi
> Storage Management Team Lead
> AIX / ADSM Certified Specialist
> Dickens Services Group
> (404) 386-9848
> jbassi AT gloryworks DOT com
> www.TeamDSG.com
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: ADSM: Dist Stor Manager [mailto:ADSM-L AT VM.MARIST DOT EDU]On Behalf Of
> Louie, James
> Sent: Thursday, August 19, 1999 10:49 AM
> To: ADSM-L AT VM.MARIST DOT EDU
> Subject: Re: ADSM Bottleneck
>
>
> We had an NT ADSM server, then we moved to an AIX server when it ran out
of
> steam.  We had a 2 CPU Compaq Proliant 6500, dual 100Mb Ethernet cards,
> 640MB RAM and lots of disk backing up close to 100 NT server clients
daily.
> When it was in operation, I saw that it used lots of CPU and not much
> memory.  IBM said that the NT server did not scale well past 2 CPUs, so
> don't waste any money there.  This was attached to a STK9710 w/10 DLT7000
> drives.  We had 3 SCSI cards in the server attaching to the DLTs.  The
> bottlenecks will be your network and I/O (disk and tape).  Speed those up
if
> you can.  We eventually went with an AIX server because the Intel platform
> we were using just could not go any faster.  We're seeing at least 2-3X
> performance now. (I'm not saying that you should look at AIX now, NT may
> suit you perfectly.)
>
> James Louie
> Nabisco
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Jordan, Chris (ELS) [mailto:c.jordan AT ELSEVIER.CO DOT UK]
> > Sent: Thursday, August 19, 1999 12:37 PM
> > To: ADSM-L AT VM.MARIST DOT EDU
> > Subject: Re: ADSM Bottleneck
> >
> >
> > We have an NT Intel "building block" server that consists of:
> >
> > 2 x 400 MHz CPUs
> > 512 MB Memory
> > 2 x 3 disks (9.1GB) mirrored for Op Sys and database
> > 24 disks (9.1GB) for the disk cache.
> > Attached to a DLT Tape library - 4 drives and 84 slots.
> >
> > We haven't fully loaded it yet to need a second building
> > block - but it
> > seems to be the disk for the database that is going to become
> > the bottle
> > neck first.
> >
> > Cheers, Chris
> >
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Forgosh, Seth [mailto:sforgosh AT TIAA-CREF DOT ORG]
> > Sent: 19 August 1999 16:37
> > To: ADSM-L AT VM.MARIST DOT EDU
> > Subject: ADSM Bottleneck
> >
> >
> > We are about to spec out a new ADSM server running NT on the
> > Intel platform.
> > We are interested in opinions of what are the main
> > bottlenecks for ADSM
> > performance. For instance, would adding multiple processors increase
> > performance (especially ADSM DB) or is memory more important.
> > Thanks in
> > advance.
> > Seth Forgosh
> >
>