Thanks for the suggestion but there are no tapes involved. This is a test environment still and we are only going to dasd on the mainframe server.
-----Original Message----- From: Beardsley, David [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Wednesday, October 03, 2001 2:57 PM To: '[EMAIL PROTECTED]' Subject: RE: NT client restore C drive The most probable cause for this is tape fragmentation. Do you collocate your onsite volumes.? We have seen variance like this also when reclamation is not successful. David Beardsley Kimberly-Clark Corp. (920) 721-6127 [EMAIL PROTECTED] -----Original Message----- From: Ripley, Bev [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Wednesday, October 03, 2001 1:38 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: NT client restore C drive On a bare bones restore of a Windows NT client's C drive, we are getting very poor throughput times. For example, it is taking an hour and a half to restore 200 MB. Restoring the D drive is much better - 4 minutes for 50 MB. We have release 4.1, a 10/100 Ethernet network, OS/390 TSM server, and we are booting off an alternate partition on the NT client to restore the C drive. Why would we have such a discrepancy in restore times between the 2 drives? And is this average performance? We have much larger servers coming up in our plans and this is not an acceptable timeframe for restores. TIA ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- -- This e-mail is intended for the use of the addressee(s) only and may contain privileged, confidential, or proprietary information that is exempt from disclosure under law. If you have received this message in error, please inform us promptly by reply e-mail, then delete the e-mail and destroy any printed copy. Thank you. ============================================================================ ==
