Mark -

Unfortunately, the answer to your question is "It depends".

What kind of performance do you get in backups?   Restore performance is
generally a little better than restore performance, as there is less
overhead.  And large files restore faster than small files.  Command line
restores will be faster than GUI client restores because of the added
overhead for the GUI.  You also shouldn't try to compare different platforms,
because they will have different overheads.  For example, we had a server
(running Lotus Notes; we were only doing full backups, no agents) that had
OS/2 for the OS; the server was converted to NT Server, and performance
immediately got better, even though the hardware stayed the same.

I'm afraid this isn't much help, but there are some things that can be done
to tune the environment; if you give us some details, perhaps some others can
give suggestions.

Jerry Lawson
jlawson AT thehartford DOT com


______________________________ Reply Separator _________________________________
Subject: NetWare client restore performance
Author:  owner-adsm-l AT VM.MARIST DOT EDU at SMTP
Date:    10/14/99 10:41 AM


Hello all, I am doing some benchmarking of network restores of entire
NetWare volumes from archives. Does anyone have any numbers from what they
have seen as far as number of objects restored/ number of bytes transferred/
and aggregate data transfer rates? I need something to compare what I'm
getting too. Also does anyone know if IBM/TIVOLI has a redbook or a
whitepaper or whatever on performance tuning the Novell client and a NT ADSM
Server?


Thanks in advance,


Mark Remeta
Seligman Data Corporation
100 Park Avenue
New York, NY 10017