Re: [Networker] Fw: [Networker] Parallelism of "backup clone" pool devices?

2008-05-29 07:03:25
Subject: Re: [Networker] Fw: [Networker] Parallelism of "backup clone" pool devices?
From: Francis Swasey <Frank.Swasey AT UVM DOT EDU>
Date: Thu, 29 May 2008 06:51:00 -0400
I believe that clones are always single threaded.  Therefore, I think what you 
observed is the expected behavior.


Sent with ChatterEmail+
True push email for the Treo Smartphone

-----Original Message-----
From: MIchael Leone <Michael.Leone AT PHA.PHILA DOT GOV>
Date: Thursday, May 29, 2008 12:11 am
Subject: [Networker] Fw: [Networker] Parallelism of "backup clone" pool devices?

Does anyone have any ideas about this?

>I know I'm missing something simple here ... I have a number of jobs
are clone jobs. So I have a tape library with 4 drives, all of which
defined as devices for a media pool that is a "backup clone" pool.

>I've noticed that it seems that each backup clone job will wait until

>there is a free tape drive, before writing. For example: I have JOB
1, 2,
3, 4, 5 - all are clone jobs, defined to use AFTD disk devices.
that all finish writing to the AFTD devices at approximately the same

>time, JOB 1,2,3,4 will each use one of the 4 tape drives to write to,
JOB 5 will wait until a running job finishes, before writing to the
This is *not* the case with my other library, which has 4 drives, all

>defined as part of a media pool that is *not* a backup pool.
all 5 of those jobs will write to the 4 tape drives at once - i.e.,
one of
those jobs will be servicing 2 group

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 or
via RSS at