Thought it might be something like that. Bummer. You're really
hampering that great technology by using multiplexing with it.
---
W. Curtis Preston
Author of O'Reilly's Backup & Recovery and Using SANs and NAS
VP Data Protection
GlassHouse Technologies
-----Original Message-----
From: Mark Davis [mailto:davism AT uwo DOT ca]
Sent: Thursday, January 25, 2007 7:13 AM
To: EMC NetWorker discussion; Curtis Preston
Cc: Mark Davis
Subject: Re: [Networker] Virtual Tape Library - saveset multiplexing
slowsmigration
Curtis,
We have Networker "Network Edition" which limits us to the number of
devices we can configure. Between our 10 LTO drives, of which 4 are
configured with Dynamic Drive Sharing, and our 16 virtual drives, we are
close to maxed out on devices. We would have to move up to Enterprise
Edition to be allowed more devices.
We are also backing up 400+ clients per day, all run between 6:00pm and
6:00am, so our backup system is very busy through the night with
multiple many clients backing up simultaneously.
Thank you for your input.
Mark
Curtis Preston wrote:
> The question is: why are you multiplexing to your VTL? Instead of
> sending 40 jobs to 10 virtual tape drives, why not just create 40
> virtual tape drives and turn off multiplexing?
>
> ---
> W. Curtis Preston
> Author of O'Reilly's Backup & Recovery and Using SANs and NAS
> VP Data Protection
> GlassHouse Technologies
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: networker-bounces AT backupcentral DOT com
> [mailto:networker-bounces AT backupcentral DOT com] On Behalf Of Mark Davis
> Sent: Wednesday, January 24, 2007 1:47 PM
> To: NETWORKER AT LISTSERV.TEMPLE DOT EDU
> Subject: [Networker] Virtual Tape Library - saveset multiplexing
> slowsmigration
>
> Hello,
>
> We have a FalconStor VTL in our backup environment. We use this as a
> disk to
> disk to tape configuration, where the client data is initially backed
up
> to
> virtual tape, then after a few days we migrate/stage the data to "real
> tape"
> (LTO3) to free up disk space.
>
> The problem we are having is the multiplexing of savesets on the
virtual
> tape. When we want to migrate a saveset from virtual tape to real tape
> using
> nsrstage, the throughput can be quite slow if the saveset was from a
> slow
> writing client mixed in with savesets from other much faster writing
> clients
> on the same virtual tape. It appears that the entire virtual tape is
> read to
> pick up the pieces of the saveset from the slow writing client.
>
> Has anyone run into this? Any suggestions as to how we can improve the
> performance when migrating our data off the virtual tapes to our LTO3
> drives?
>
> Thanks,
>
> Mark Davis
> University of Western Ontario
> London, Ontario
> Canada
>
> To sign off this list, send email to listserv AT listserv.temple DOT edu and
> type "signoff networker" in the body of the email. Please write to
> networker-request AT listserv.temple DOT edu if you have any problems with
this
> list. You can access the archives at
> http://listserv.temple.edu/archives/networker.html or
> via RSS at http://listserv.temple.edu/cgi-bin/wa?RSS&L=NETWORKER
>
> To sign off this list, send email to listserv AT listserv.temple DOT edu and
type "signoff networker" in the body of the email. Please write to
networker-request AT listserv.temple DOT edu if you have any problems with this
list. You can access the archives at
http://listserv.temple.edu/archives/networker.html or
> via RSS at http://listserv.temple.edu/cgi-bin/wa?RSS&L=NETWORKER
>
To sign off this list, send email to listserv AT listserv.temple DOT edu and
type "signoff networker" in the body of the email. Please write to
networker-request AT listserv.temple DOT edu if you have any problems with this
list. You can access the archives at
http://listserv.temple.edu/archives/networker.html or
via RSS at http://listserv.temple.edu/cgi-bin/wa?RSS&L=NETWORKER
|
