Michael, This is a test server in a test environment, and there is nothing else running on it, nor are there other servers connecting to it.
I'm not sure what a third test would show. Klint Michael B. Smith wrote: > > I'm not sure I would jump to any conclusions after just two tests. > > > > I would start up Perfmon, add my disk and tape queues, and run it a > couple more times to see what happens. > > > > Regards, > > > > Michael B. Smith, MCITP:SA,EMA/MCSE/Exchange MVP > > My blog: http://TheEssentialExchange.com/blogs/michael > > Link with me at: http://www.linkedin.com/in/theessentialexchange > > > > *From:* Klint Price - ArizonaITPro [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > *Sent:* Friday, November 07, 2008 1:30 PM > *To:* NT System Admin Issues > *Subject:* Re: Comparing NT Backup speeds > > > > > These registry settings are causing backup speed degradation in my > environment, and I am curious if anyone could explain why. > > I have a HP StorageWorks DL380 g5, running Storage Server 2003 x64 > with dual 2.3 Quad Core processors, and 5 GB RAM. > > I have a 2TB SAS connected array connected to a HP P800 controller, > and then a HP Ultrium 920 SAS LTO-3 drive connected to a different > controller (SAS LSI 3000) > > Using the original NTBackup registry values for the keys below > (32,512,9), I was able to backup a 36GB file in 7 Min 13 seconds. I > implemented these performance registry keys below (64,1024,16), ran > the backup job again, and it took 11 min 47 seconds. > > What could be causing these "performance" changes to impact backup > speeds so greatly? > > Klint > > Michael B. Smith wrote: > > > *Registry Changes for Optimizing NTBackup* > > The first optimization to make for NTBackup performance is to change > some registry keys that affect buffering. These changes can have a > very positive impact on performance when writing to tape, and a > smaller impact when writing to disk. They are as follows (in batch > file syntax): > > > > reg add "HKCU\Software\Microsoft\Ntbackup\Backup Engine" > /v "Logical Disk Buffer Size" /t REG_SZ /d 64 /f > > reg add "HKCU\Software\Microsoft\Ntbackup\Backup Engine" > /v "Max Buffer Size" /t REG_SZ /d 1024 /f > > reg add "HKCU\Software\Microsoft\Ntbackup\Backup Engine" > /v "Max Num Tape Buffers" /t REG_SZ /d 16 /f > > > > These registry changes double the default values. Do note that they > affect HKEY_CURRENT_USER, and not HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE as you might > expect. Therefore, you should execute NTBackup under the desired user > to create the registry key before you attempt to set the above > registry values. > > > > > > Regards, > > > > Michael B. Smith, MCITP:SA,EMA/MCSE/Exchange MVP > > My blog: http://TheEssentialExchange.com/blogs/michael > > Link with me at: http://www.linkedin.com/in/theessentialexchange > > > > *From:* Joseph L. Casale [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > *Sent:* Tuesday, October 07, 2008 11:59 AM > *To:* NT System Admin Issues > *Subject:* RE: Comparing NT Backup speeds > > > > Michael, > What are these tweaks you speak of? > jlc > > > > *From:* Michael B. Smith [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > *Sent:* Tuesday, October 07, 2008 6:26 AM > *To:* NT System Admin Issues > *Subject:* RE: Comparing NT Backup speeds > > > > Well a local device will usually be faster than a remote device. > > > > Ntbackup, with the registry tweaks, gives me about 1 GB per minute > locally. But I don't have a dat-72 to compare to. My home GB LAN with > a cheap crappy switch copies about 50 MB/min. So I'm thinking that two > hours seems more likely than 9 hours. > > > > Regards, > > > > Michael B. Smith, MCITP:SA,EMA/MCSE/Exchange MVP > > My blog: http://TheEssentialExchange.com/blogs/michael > > Link with me at: http://www.linkedin.com/in/theessentialexchange > > > > *From:* HELP_PC [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > *Sent:* Tuesday, October 07, 2008 7:28 AM > *To:* NT System Admin Issues > *Subject:* R: Comparing NT Backup speeds > > > > Yes the DAT device is local. > > Not applied registry tweaks > > > > *GuidoElia* > > *HELPPC* > > > > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > > *Da:* Michael B. Smith [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > *Inviato:* martedì 7 ottobre 2008 13.05 > *A:* NT System Admin Issues > *Oggetto:* RE: Comparing NT Backup speeds > > Have you applied the "standard" registry tweaks to increase the > ntbackup buffer size? > > > > Is the dat-72 locally attached? > > > > Regards, > > > > Michael B. Smith, MCITP:SA,EMA/MCSE/Exchange MVP > > My blog: http://TheEssentialExchange.com/blogs/michael > > Link with me at: http://www.linkedin.com/in/theessentialexchange > > > > *From:* HELP_PC [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > *Sent:* Tuesday, October 07, 2008 1:59 AM > *To:* NT System Admin Issues > *Subject:* Comparing NT Backup speeds > > > > > > In a network 10/100/1000 copper a NT backup of the complete server to > a Qnap device RAID-1 takes about 9 hours with verify (about 50GB) > versus DAT-72 with separate card that takes half the time . > > Should be considered normal ? > > TIA > > > > *GuidoElia* > *HELPPC* > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ~ Finally, powerful endpoint security that ISN'T a resource hog! ~ ~ <http://www.sunbeltsoftware.com/Business/VIPRE-Enterprise/> ~
