Tek-Tips is the largest IT community on the Internet today!

Members share and learn making Tek-Tips Forums the best source of peer-reviewed technical information on the Internet!

  • Congratulations Mike Lewis on being selected by the Tek-Tips community for having the most helpful posts in the forums last week. Way to Go!

file type device vs. advanced file type device

Status
Not open for further replies.

jimdaining

Technical User
Feb 14, 2008
2
US
I'm currently running NW 7.4 SP1 but I've had this problem since 7.2. When I do a remote backup from a client to a file type device I get backup speeds up to 30MB/sec. When I recreate that device as advanced file type device the speed never gets above 11MB/sec. These speeds are supported by the saveset backup time. File type backups of same data are twice as fast as AFTD. I also have a storage node with saves to an AFTD and it has the faster speeds. Any ideas???
 
No idea. What platform are we talking about? Is the disk local, or NAS? What about the one that is working? Have you tried BIGASM to see the throughput? If not, you can have a look at the performance tuning guide. That might give you an idea.
 
RIF123,

Windows 2003 on all servers. Both devices are NAS. I haven't looked at the tuning guide yet. Guess that is next. Just not sure how the throughput changes so drastically because of the file type. The other aftd is being used by a storage node. Maybe there is something about using aftd's and backing up remote clients????
 
Hi,

Yes, I think testing BIGASM is a good idea. Then you will see what performance you can get from the backup device. There should really not be any trouble with aftd and remote backups. That is a very common setup, so there should be lots of people knowing if that was a limitation.

But start with determine if it is the remote backup to aftd that is slow or if the aftd is slow even for the local client.
 
Loosing about 2/3 of the speed just depending on the device type scared me. That's why i did some BIGASM tests on a Windows 2003 server (local backups) myself.

My results:
- Both device types will have a similar transfer rate
- There is a difference, but it was never more than 10%
- Speed also seems to depend on the hard disk technology:
- For an IDE disk, the AFTD was be about 10% faster
- For an SATA disk, the AFTD was be about 10% slower

Sorry, all my SCSI and FC disks were used.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Part and Inventory Search

Sponsor

Back
Top