> I'm told by Dantz that Retrospect itself knows of no second processor, and
> is not written in such a way to take advantage of a second processor.

I am currently on a press tour in Europe and happen to be sitting across from the
Dantz CTO, Richard Zulch.

Retrospect is carefully architected to be multi-threaded. Since Windows NT
supports multiple processors symmetrically, threads will be allocated between the
number of processors available.

A two processor system will be faster than a single processor system. A four
processor system will not give you the same increase in performance over a two
processor system.

> Surely Dantz could do some benchmarking for the PC, varying RAM and
> processor speeds and number of processors. Assume Windows NT 4.0 Service
> Pack 4+.

The more RAM you give Retrospect, the faster it will go. The question is: at what
point do you get diminishing returns?

If you have more than a hundred clients and you want your backup window to be as
small as possible, get a fast 2 processor system with >512MB of RAM.

Craig Isaacs
Dantz Development Corporation

To subscribe:    [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To unsubscribe:  [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Archives:        <http://list.working-dogs.com/lists/retro-talk/>
Problems?:       [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Reply via email to