I've just installed a new server for a client and all was going well 
until the client stated using his existing data which we had copied to a 
group share ... its a slug.  This is particularly noticable when doing a 
backup, copy is bad but it is even worse during the compare phase.

Originally I thought there was a network or hardware problem, but through 
a process of elimination (inc swapping the server) I conclude its SAMBA 
or possibly the way the user has structured his data.

Having a closer look at the data, it would appear that the user has some 
directories which contain > 1300 small files.

Results from this afternoon were 24.2 Mb/minute copy, 5.6 Mb/minute 
compare to a file based storage set.  The test configuration consisted of 
the server (Qube2) and the backup workstation (Pentium III 550) connected 
to a 100baseT switch ... both machines were 100Mbps Full Duplex.  I don't 
consider these figures to be anything to boast about.

Anyone had similar experiences where the hierarchy of the data has a 
dramatic effect on performance?

I have used this configuration on other sites without such problems ... 
the only significant difference is the clients data.  I guess the best 
solution is to suggest to the client that he structure his data a little 
better than stuff everything in a single folder.

I would be interested to know why the performance of the compare phase is 
so bad.  Restore is equally as bad, but I guess that is to be expected as 
I gather compare is a restore without the actual "write to target".

Cheers,  Malcolm

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

                       Information Alchemy Pty Ltd
                             ACN 089 239 305
                           Canberra, Australia

Malcolm McLeary                                  Mobile:   0412 636 086
Managing Director                                Email:  [EMAIL PROTECTED]

     This message was sent using Claris Emailer 2.0v3 for Macintosh.  

To subscribe:    [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To unsubscribe:  [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Archives:        <>
Problems?:       [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Reply via email to