Huh? I accept it as pretty much de facto that most manufacturers release firmware revisions to correct certain problems. If they researched every possible problem and fixed it before being released, it would never get released. They fix problems many times as customers report a problem (or send it to dev, which comes up with the solution). How is that different from any software or hardware company?
In the case of tape drives, you certainly can't expect Quantum (in my case) to test their drive with each and every vendor, each and every hardware platform, each and every scsi card, each and every backup product, etc. etc. Ben Winzenz Network Engineer Gardner & White (317) 581-1580 ext 418 -----Original Message----- From: Fyodorov, Andrey [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Posted At: Friday, September 19, 2003 10:58 AM Posted To: Exchange (Swynk) Conversation: Not using BLB, But getting really slow backups. Subject: RE: Not using BLB, But getting really slow backups. Do the manufacturers deliberately make their products perform poorly so that later one would have to waste time looking for the latest firmware? -----Original Message----- From: Ben Winzenz [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, September 19, 2003 10:58 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Not using BLB, But getting really slow backups. OK - here is what I have. IIRC, the priority setting and the tape drive firmware were the 2 biggest things. I would do all of these though. Obviously, the drivers are firmware will depend on your tape drive. We have SDLT drives. Modifications made: 1. Placed each Adaptec LP160 SCSI card on a different PCI Bus. One SCSI card is now on PCI Bus 2 and the other SCSI card is on PCI Bus 7 2. Downloaded and installed latest drivers from Adaptec's web site for the 29160LP SCSI card. Driver version is now 6.1.530.201 dated 5/14/2002 3. Updated firmware on Tape Drives from version 4.1 to version 5.5. Obtained the firmware from Quantum's website. 4. Rebooted server and entered SCSI Bios by pressing <Ctrl> A at the appropriate time. Modified the settings of each SCSI card so that write-back cache was enabled on all channels. 5. Changed the priority of each Backup Job in BackupExec from Medium Priority to Highest Priority. As a result of these changes, we have seen an increase in throughput from approx. 130MB/min to over 600MB/min on each job, with both jobs running concurrently. Ben Winzenz Network Engineer Gardner & White (317) 581-1580 ext 418 -----Original Message----- From: Ben Winzenz Posted At: Friday, September 19, 2003 9:55 AM Posted To: Exchange (Swynk) Conversation: Not using BLB, But getting really slow backups. Subject: RE: Not using BLB, But getting really slow backups. Hang on - this is tape drive settings. Give me a few to find the stuff we used, and I'll post. We were getting really slow results as well. We are now well over 500-600mb/min for File, and 700-800mb/min for Exchange. Ben Winzenz Network Engineer Gardner & White (317) 581-1580 ext 418 -----Original Message----- From: Jasa, Ken [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Posted At: Friday, September 19, 2003 9:48 AM Posted To: Exchange (Swynk) Conversation: Not using BLB, But getting really slow backups. Subject: Not using BLB, But getting really slow backups. Hello, Veritas 9 - were using version 8 and getting the same problem. Exchange 5.5, NT4 SP6a We can not seem to get better then 100 MB / minute backing up the Exchange servers. using the Exchange agent. Many nights lately it is much worse. The NICs and ports on the switch have all be set to 100/full. IS Maintenance is from 4am - 7am. Ensured that Trend Server Protect is not doing any scheduled scans and that realtime scans exclude Exchange directories. The databases on the 2 servers are not big: One is 25 GBs with 7 GBs of whitespace The other is 17 GBs and only a 300 MBs of whitespace. Nightly oneline defrags are successful. Veritas tech notes point to a fragmented database - I don't buy that unless Exchange IS maintenance is not functioning on both servers. I also have a few other admins that swear by offline defrags - because they always seemed to help. Any ideas where I should be looking? Thanks Ken Jasa _________________________________________________________________ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Web Interface: http://intm-dl.sparklist.com/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=exchange&text_mode=&; lang=english To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin: [EMAIL PROTECTED] _________________________________________________________________ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Web Interface: http://intm-dl.sparklist.com/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=exchange&text_mode=&; lang=english To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin: [EMAIL PROTECTED] _________________________________________________________________ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Web Interface: http://intm-dl.sparklist.com/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=exchange&text_mode=&; lang=english To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin: [EMAIL PROTECTED] _________________________________________________________________ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Web Interface: http://intm-dl.sparklist.com/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=exchange&text_mode=&; lang=english To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin: [EMAIL PROTECTED] _________________________________________________________________ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Web Interface: http://intm-dl.sparklist.com/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=exchange&text_mode=&lang=english To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
