A Computer hardware and components forum. ComputerBanter.com

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Go Back   Home » ComputerBanter.com forum » General Hardware & Peripherals » Storage (alt)
Site Map Home Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

LTO3 vs DLT-S4? (Magnum 224 vs a SuperLoader3)?



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old June 28th 07, 09:12 PM posted to comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.storage
markm75
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 222
Default LTO3 vs DLT-S4? (Magnum 224 vs a SuperLoader3)?

I've heard recently some stating to stay away from DLT, that it is too
slow and LTO is much better..

In pure specs DLT is 60 MB/sec and LTO3 at 80 MB/sec, give SATAII
drive read speeds I cant see how this could be true. Of course.. the
person stating this was an Exabyte rep wanting me to buy a magnum 224
drive over a DLT-s4 unit..

Anyone have any thoughts..

I'm favoring the Superloader3 from Quantum (DLT-S4).

  #2  
Old July 3rd 07, 11:48 PM posted to comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.storage
just bob
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 51
Default LTO3 vs DLT-S4? (Magnum 224 vs a SuperLoader3)?


"markm75" wrote in message
ups.com...
I've heard recently some stating to stay away from DLT, that it is too
slow and LTO is much better..

In pure specs DLT is 60 MB/sec and LTO3 at 80 MB/sec, give SATAII
drive read speeds I cant see how this could be true. Of course.. the
person stating this was an Exabyte rep wanting me to buy a magnum 224
drive over a DLT-s4 unit..

Anyone have any thoughts..

I'm favoring the Superloader3 from Quantum (DLT-S4).


Hi, We have the Quantum Superloader LTO3 and it is super quick. The only
reason I saw to use DLT is to have backwards compatibility with DLT, which
we did not need.

We use Arcserve Brightstor v11.5 SP2 on a Windows 2003 server on a box which
is a standard HP workstation with three 750GB drives and one 80GB boot
drive. We put the three 750's together as one drive with windows disk
manager and we backup using Brightstor's multiple stream system so it backs
up many servers at once. Once it's all written to disk, the Brightstor
software writes the disk data to tape. Because the data is written to tape
from disk in block level it is extremely fast (the tape does not have to
stop and backup, etc). We send the tape offsite daily and any restores
required are done from the disk backup (if the restore point is only a
couple days old). Fantastic system. But I must admit the Brightstor software
is not for the faint of heart, but we've been using it for nearly 10 years
so we are used to it's quirks.

Good luck!


  #3  
Old July 4th 07, 04:40 AM posted to comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.storage
markm75
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 222
Default LTO3 vs DLT-S4? (Magnum 224 vs a SuperLoader3)?

On Jul 3, 6:48 pm, "just bob" [email protected] wrote:
"markm75" wrote in message

ups.com...

I've heard recently some stating to stay away from DLT, that it is too
slow and LTO is much better..


In pure specs DLT is 60 MB/sec and LTO3 at 80 MB/sec, give SATAII
drive read speeds I cant see how this could be true. Of course.. the
person stating this was an Exabyte rep wanting me to buy a magnum 224
drive over a DLT-s4 unit..


Anyone have any thoughts..


I'm favoring the Superloader3 from Quantum (DLT-S4).


Hi, We have the Quantum Superloader LTO3 and it is super quick. The only
reason I saw to use DLT is to have backwards compatibility with DLT, which
we did not need.

We use Arcserve Brightstor v11.5 SP2 on a Windows 2003 server on a box which
is a standard HP workstation with three 750GB drives and one 80GB boot
drive. We put the three 750's together as one drive with windows disk
manager and we backup using Brightstor's multiple stream system so it backs
up many servers at once. Once it's all written to disk, the Brightstor
software writes the disk data to tape. Because the data is written to tape
from disk in block level it is extremely fast (the tape does not have to
stop and backup, etc). We send the tape offsite daily and any restores
required are done from the disk backup (if the restore point is only a
couple days old). Fantastic system. But I must admit the Brightstor software
is not for the faint of heart, but we've been using it for nearly 10 years
so we are used to it's quirks.

Good luck!


Wow.. thanks for the great responses..

Sounds like a pretty sweet setup..

Still curious though.. your drives.. are they SATA II or SCSI etc?

Our "backup server" has SATAII's (around 140 MB/s avg reads).

I've struggled for awhile with Symantec 11D on 2003 (x64).. trying to
do the backup of 4 other servers via the gigabit lan.. Symantec is
horribly slow, many others have stated the same (say 20 hours or more
for 400gb even).

I then went to Acronis and sent the job from the source server to the
backup one.. it worked out much better.. but I'd prefer an all in one
solution..

Ill have to check out the software you mentioned. I'm also going to
test microsofts DPM management too.

I was hoping as you seem to indicate with your software, to send the
harddisk backup files directly to tape (not a backup inside a backup,
so if we ever need to restore from tape, we can do so directly)...

I dont believe there is a way to do this with Symantec BackupExec (?),
but it sounds like the software you are using lets you do this right?

Again thanks for the info/tips and all..

Our SuperLoader3 (dlt) just arrived, now I have to find the V-Rails
they mention (awaiting a price from CDW).

Cheers

  #4  
Old July 4th 07, 06:50 AM posted to comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.storage
just bob
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 51
Default LTO3 vs DLT-S4? (Magnum 224 vs a SuperLoader3)?


"markm75" wrote in message
ups.com...
On Jul 3, 6:48 pm, "just bob" [email protected] wrote:
"markm75" wrote in message

ups.com...

I've heard recently some stating to stay away from DLT, that it is too
slow and LTO is much better..


In pure specs DLT is 60 MB/sec and LTO3 at 80 MB/sec, give SATAII
drive read speeds I cant see how this could be true. Of course.. the
person stating this was an Exabyte rep wanting me to buy a magnum 224
drive over a DLT-s4 unit..


Anyone have any thoughts..


I'm favoring the Superloader3 from Quantum (DLT-S4).


Hi, We have the Quantum Superloader LTO3 and it is super quick. The only
reason I saw to use DLT is to have backwards compatibility with DLT,
which
we did not need.

We use Arcserve Brightstor v11.5 SP2 on a Windows 2003 server on a box
which
is a standard HP workstation with three 750GB drives and one 80GB boot
drive. We put the three 750's together as one drive with windows disk
manager and we backup using Brightstor's multiple stream system so it
backs
up many servers at once. Once it's all written to disk, the Brightstor
software writes the disk data to tape. Because the data is written to
tape
from disk in block level it is extremely fast (the tape does not have to
stop and backup, etc). We send the tape offsite daily and any restores
required are done from the disk backup (if the restore point is only a
couple days old). Fantastic system. But I must admit the Brightstor
software
is not for the faint of heart, but we've been using it for nearly 10
years
so we are used to it's quirks.

Good luck!


Wow.. thanks for the great responses..

Sounds like a pretty sweet setup..

Still curious though.. your drives.. are they SATA II or SCSI etc?

Our "backup server" has SATAII's (around 140 MB/s avg reads).

I've struggled for awhile with Symantec 11D on 2003 (x64).. trying to
do the backup of 4 other servers via the gigabit lan.. Symantec is
horribly slow, many others have stated the same (say 20 hours or more
for 400gb even).

I then went to Acronis and sent the job from the source server to the
backup one.. it worked out much better.. but I'd prefer an all in one
solution..

Ill have to check out the software you mentioned. I'm also going to
test microsofts DPM management too.

I was hoping as you seem to indicate with your software, to send the
harddisk backup files directly to tape (not a backup inside a backup,
so if we ever need to restore from tape, we can do so directly)...

I dont believe there is a way to do this with Symantec BackupExec (?),
but it sounds like the software you are using lets you do this right?

Again thanks for the info/tips and all..

Our SuperLoader3 (dlt) just arrived, now I have to find the V-Rails
they mention (awaiting a price from CDW).

Cheers



Hi,

As best I can tell from our CDW purchase history the Brightstor backup PC
(server) is an HP DX2200 tower, and we added three Seagate Barracuda 7200.10
HD 750GB SATA II drives.

The Brightstor software writes the disk-to-disk data to the tape in the
normal format, that is, as if it was written directly to tape so you can, as
you said, restore directly from tape.

The Brightstor log reports backup throughput of our main file server is
472MB/Min for 200GB. It might be faster if we were not backing up multiple
servers at the same time. The source server example is a Compaq DL380 G3
with 10k SCSI drives on RAID 5 with "teamed" gigabit NICs. The source and
target are connected by an unmanaged Netgear Gigabit switch.

The only speed issue we have with Brightstor is the Exchange 2003 "bricks
level" backup could be faster, but that is a limitaiton really of the speed
of your exchange server as the bricks level backup agent option gets every
item (msg) individually so you can restore individual email objects.

Good luck with your new loader!

Tell your CDW rep you want a trial Brightstor disk from CA. Unlike the
Symantec solution the Brightstor trial has no restrictions, IIRC.



  #5  
Old July 4th 07, 01:59 PM posted to comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.storage
markm75
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 222
Default LTO3 vs DLT-S4? (Magnum 224 vs a SuperLoader3)?

On Jul 4, 1:50 am, "just bob" [email protected] wrote:
"markm75" wrote in message

ups.com...





On Jul 3, 6:48 pm, "just bob" [email protected] wrote:
"markm75" wrote in message


roups.com...


I've heard recently some stating to stay away from DLT, that it is too
slow and LTO is much better..


In pure specs DLT is 60 MB/sec and LTO3 at 80 MB/sec, give SATAII
drive read speeds I cant see how this could be true. Of course.. the
person stating this was an Exabyte rep wanting me to buy a magnum 224
drive over a DLT-s4 unit..


Anyone have any thoughts..


I'm favoring the Superloader3 from Quantum (DLT-S4).


Hi, We have the Quantum Superloader LTO3 and it is super quick. The only
reason I saw to use DLT is to have backwards compatibility with DLT,
which
we did not need.


We use Arcserve Brightstor v11.5 SP2 on a Windows 2003 server on a box
which
is a standard HP workstation with three 750GB drives and one 80GB boot
drive. We put the three 750's together as one drive with windows disk
manager and we backup using Brightstor's multiple stream system so it
backs
up many servers at once. Once it's all written to disk, the Brightstor
software writes the disk data to tape. Because the data is written to
tape
from disk in block level it is extremely fast (the tape does not have to
stop and backup, etc). We send the tape offsite daily and any restores
required are done from the disk backup (if the restore point is only a
couple days old). Fantastic system. But I must admit the Brightstor
software
is not for the faint of heart, but we've been using it for nearly 10
years
so we are used to it's quirks.


Good luck!


Wow.. thanks for the great responses..


Sounds like a pretty sweet setup..


Still curious though.. your drives.. are they SATA II or SCSI etc?


Our "backup server" has SATAII's (around 140 MB/s avg reads).


I've struggled for awhile with Symantec 11D on 2003 (x64).. trying to
do the backup of 4 other servers via the gigabit lan.. Symantec is
horribly slow, many others have stated the same (say 20 hours or more
for 400gb even).


I then went to Acronis and sent the job from the source server to the
backup one.. it worked out much better.. but I'd prefer an all in one
solution..


Ill have to check out the software you mentioned. I'm also going to
test microsofts DPM management too.


I was hoping as you seem to indicate with your software, to send the
harddisk backup files directly to tape (not a backup inside a backup,
so if we ever need to restore from tape, we can do so directly)...


I dont believe there is a way to do this with Symantec BackupExec (?),
but it sounds like the software you are using lets you do this right?


Again thanks for the info/tips and all..


Our SuperLoader3 (dlt) just arrived, now I have to find the V-Rails
they mention (awaiting a price from CDW).


Cheers


Hi,

As best I can tell from our CDW purchase history the Brightstor backup PC
(server) is an HP DX2200 tower, and we added three Seagate Barracuda 7200.10
HD 750GB SATA II drives.

The Brightstor software writes the disk-to-disk data to the tape in the
normal format, that is, as if it was written directly to tape so you can, as
you said, restore directly from tape.

The Brightstor log reports backup throughput of our main file server is
472MB/Min for 200GB. It might be faster if we were not backing up multiple
servers at the same time. The source server example is a Compaq DL380 G3
with 10k SCSI drives on RAID 5 with "teamed" gigabit NICs. The source and
target are connected by an unmanaged Netgear Gigabit switch.

The only speed issue we have with Brightstor is the Exchange 2003 "bricks
level" backup could be faster, but that is a limitaiton really of the speed
of your exchange server as the bricks level backup agent option gets every
item (msg) individually so you can restore individual email objects.

Good luck with your new loader!

Tell your CDW rep you want a trial Brightstor disk from CA. Unlike the
Symantec solution the Brightstor trial has no restrictions, IIRC.- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -


So the 472 MB/min is your server, across network, to backup
workstation speed? Thats only about 8 MB/sec.. and it actually sounds
very similar to the numbers I was getting with Symantec for that part.

How fast is the disk to tape going (anywhere near 80 MB/sec as they
specs say for LTO3?)


  #6  
Old July 4th 07, 05:49 PM posted to comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.storage
Folkert Rienstra
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,294
Default LTO3 vs DLT-S4? (Magnum 224 vs a SuperLoader3)?

"markm75" wrote in message ups.com
On Jul 3, 6:48 pm, "just bob" [email protected] wrote:
"markm75" wrote in message ups.com...

I've heard recently some stating to stay away from DLT, that it is too
slow and LTO is much better..


In pure specs DLT is 60 MB/sec and LTO3 at 80 MB/sec, give SATAII
drive read speeds I cant see how this could be true. Of course.. the
person stating this was an Exabyte rep wanting me to buy a magnum 224
drive over a DLT-s4 unit..


Anyone have any thoughts..


I'm favoring the Superloader3 from Quantum (DLT-S4).


Hi, We have the Quantum Superloader LTO3 and it is super quick. The only
reason I saw to use DLT is to have backwards compatibility with DLT, which
we did not need.

We use Arcserve Brightstor v11.5 SP2 on a Windows 2003 server on a box which
is a standard HP workstation with three 750GB drives and one 80GB boot
drive. We put the three 750's together as one drive with windows disk
manager and we backup using Brightstor's multiple stream system so it backs
up many servers at once. Once it's all written to disk, the Brightstor
software writes the disk data to tape. Because the data is written to tape
from disk in block level it is extremely fast (the tape does not have to
stop and backup, etc). We send the tape offsite daily and any restores
required are done from the disk backup (if the restore point is only a
couple days old). Fantastic system. But I must admit the Brightstor software
is not for the faint of heart, but we've been using it for nearly 10 years
so we are used to it's quirks.

Good luck!


Wow.. thanks for the great responses..

Sounds like a pretty sweet setup..

Still curious though.. your drives.. are they SATA II or SCSI etc?


750GB SCSI drives of course, can't you tell?


Our "backup server" has SATAII's (around 140 MB/s avg reads).

I've struggled for awhile with Symantec 11D on 2003 (x64).. trying to
do the backup of 4 other servers via the gigabit lan.. Symantec is
horribly slow, many others have stated the same (say 20 hours or more
for 400gb even).

I then went to Acronis and sent the job from the source server to the
backup one.. it worked out much better.. but I'd prefer an all in one
solution..

Ill have to check out the software you mentioned. I'm also going to
test microsofts DPM management too.

I was hoping as you seem to indicate with your software, to send the
harddisk backup files directly to tape (not a backup inside a backup,
so if we ever need to restore from tape, we can do so directly)...

I dont believe there is a way to do this with Symantec BackupExec (?),
but it sounds like the software you are using lets you do this right?

Again thanks for the info/tips and all..


Our SuperLoader3 (dlt) just arrived,


Right, so it was already on order when you asked the question, hence a troll question.

now I have to find the V-Rails they mention (awaiting a price from CDW).

Cheers

  #7  
Old July 5th 07, 02:25 PM posted to comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.storage
markm75
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 222
Default LTO3 vs DLT-S4? (Magnum 224 vs a SuperLoader3)?

On Jul 4, 12:49 pm, "Folkert Rienstra" wrote:

Right, so it was already on order when you asked the question, hence a troll question.




No it wasnt on order when I originally asked the question, besides why
do you care? There is nothing wrong with asking the question, maybe
we are evaluating the product before switching to another..

Can a person not ask a question without interjections from "people"
such as yourself, you've got nothing better to do than harass people?

If you have nothing useful to contribute then dont respond.





  #8  
Old July 5th 07, 03:39 PM posted to comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.storage
markm75
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 222
Default LTO3 vs DLT-S4? (Magnum 224 vs a SuperLoader3)?

On Jul 4, 8:59 am, markm75 wrote:
On Jul 4, 1:50 am, "just bob" [email protected] wrote:





"markm75" wrote in message


oups.com...


On Jul 3, 6:48 pm, "just bob" [email protected] wrote:
"markm75" wrote in message


roups.com...


I've heard recently some stating to stay away from DLT, that it is too
slow and LTO is much better..


In pure specs DLT is 60 MB/sec and LTO3 at 80 MB/sec, give SATAII
drive read speeds I cant see how this could be true. Of course.. the
person stating this was an Exabyte rep wanting me to buy a magnum 224
drive over a DLT-s4 unit..


Anyone have any thoughts..


I'm favoring the Superloader3 from Quantum (DLT-S4).


Hi, We have the Quantum Superloader LTO3 and it is super quick. The only
reason I saw to use DLT is to have backwards compatibility with DLT,
which
we did not need.


We use Arcserve Brightstor v11.5 SP2 on a Windows 2003 server on a box
which
is a standard HP workstation with three 750GB drives and one 80GB boot
drive. We put the three 750's together as one drive with windows disk
manager and we backup using Brightstor's multiple stream system so it
backs
up many servers at once. Once it's all written to disk, the Brightstor
software writes the disk data to tape. Because the data is written to
tape
from disk in block level it is extremely fast (the tape does not have to
stop and backup, etc). We send the tape offsite daily and any restores
required are done from the disk backup (if the restore point is only a
couple days old). Fantastic system. But I must admit the Brightstor
software
is not for the faint of heart, but we've been using it for nearly 10
years
so we are used to it's quirks.


Good luck!


Wow.. thanks for the great responses..


Sounds like a pretty sweet setup..


Still curious though.. your drives.. are they SATA II or SCSI etc?


Our "backup server" has SATAII's (around 140 MB/s avg reads).


I've struggled for awhile with Symantec 11D on 2003 (x64).. trying to
do the backup of 4 other servers via the gigabit lan.. Symantec is
horribly slow, many others have stated the same (say 20 hours or more
for 400gb even).


I then went to Acronis and sent the job from the source server to the
backup one.. it worked out much better.. but I'd prefer an all in one
solution..


Ill have to check out the software you mentioned. I'm also going to
test microsofts DPM management too.


I was hoping as you seem to indicate with your software, to send the
harddisk backup files directly to tape (not a backup inside a backup,
so if we ever need to restore from tape, we can do so directly)...


I dont believe there is a way to do this with Symantec BackupExec (?),
but it sounds like the software you are using lets you do this right?


Again thanks for the info/tips and all..


Our SuperLoader3 (dlt) just arrived, now I have to find the V-Rails
they mention (awaiting a price from CDW).


Cheers


Hi,


As best I can tell from our CDW purchase history the Brightstor backup PC
(server) is an HP DX2200 tower, and we added three Seagate Barracuda 7200.10
HD 750GB SATA II drives.


The Brightstor software writes the disk-to-disk data to the tape in the
normal format, that is, as if it was written directly to tape so you can, as
you said, restore directly from tape.


The Brightstor log reports backup throughput of our main file server is
472MB/Min for 200GB. It might be faster if we were not backing up multiple
servers at the same time. The source server example is a Compaq DL380 G3
with 10k SCSI drives on RAID 5 with "teamed" gigabit NICs. The source and
target are connected by an unmanaged Netgear Gigabit switch.


The only speed issue we have with Brightstor is the Exchange 2003 "bricks
level" backup could be faster, but that is a limitaiton really of the speed
of your exchange server as the bricks level backup agent option gets every
item (msg) individually so you can restore individual email objects.


Good luck with your new loader!


Tell your CDW rep you want a trial Brightstor disk from CA. Unlike the
Symantec solution the Brightstor trial has no restrictions, IIRC.- Hide quoted text -


- Show quoted text -


So the 472 MB/min is your server, across network, to backup
workstation speed? Thats only about 8 MB/sec.. and it actually sounds
very similar to the numbers I was getting with Symantec for that part.

How fast is the disk to tape going (anywhere near 80 MB/sec as they
specs say for LTO3?)- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -


Forgot to ask:

Curious too if you purchased a rail kit with your unit and if so, if
its ever come in handy. I would imagine that if the unit needs
warranty work, the top cover would need to come off, so without rails
this could be tricky depending on rack configuration. Leading to my
other question... Quantum even stated that sometimes the heads can
fail in 6 months, 1 year etc.. have you ever run into any issues with
the hardware.. or maybe you haven't had it that long.

Cheers

  #9  
Old July 5th 07, 05:22 PM posted to comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.storage
just bob
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 51
Default LTO3 vs DLT-S4? (Magnum 224 vs a SuperLoader3)?


"markm75" wrote in message
oups.com...

So the 472 MB/min is your server, across network, to backup
workstation speed? Thats only about 8 MB/sec.. and it actually sounds
very similar to the numbers I was getting with Symantec for that part.


Yep, that's it.

How fast is the disk to tape going (anywhere near 80 MB/sec as they
specs say for LTO3?)


My report shows our fastest disk to tape transfer was 4,021.60 MB/min and
our average for 317,709.68 MB was 2,823.22 MB/min. Brightstor creates a
disk "session" for each of the seven servers it backs up and most were in
the 3,200 MB/min range but for some reason a couple of them were only 2,000
MN/min so it lowered the average.


  #10  
Old July 5th 07, 05:24 PM posted to comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.storage
just bob
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 51
Default LTO3 vs DLT-S4? (Magnum 224 vs a SuperLoader3)?


"markm75" wrote in message
oups.com...
On Jul 4, 8:59 am, markm75 wrote:
On Jul 4, 1:50 am, "just bob" [email protected] wrote:





"markm75" wrote in message


oups.com...


On Jul 3, 6:48 pm, "just bob" [email protected] wrote:
"markm75" wrote in message


roups.com...


I've heard recently some stating to stay away from DLT, that it is
too
slow and LTO is much better..


In pure specs DLT is 60 MB/sec and LTO3 at 80 MB/sec, give SATAII
drive read speeds I cant see how this could be true. Of course..
the
person stating this was an Exabyte rep wanting me to buy a magnum
224
drive over a DLT-s4 unit..


Anyone have any thoughts..


I'm favoring the Superloader3 from Quantum (DLT-S4).


Hi, We have the Quantum Superloader LTO3 and it is super quick. The
only
reason I saw to use DLT is to have backwards compatibility with DLT,
which
we did not need.


We use Arcserve Brightstor v11.5 SP2 on a Windows 2003 server on a
box
which
is a standard HP workstation with three 750GB drives and one 80GB
boot
drive. We put the three 750's together as one drive with windows
disk
manager and we backup using Brightstor's multiple stream system so
it
backs
up many servers at once. Once it's all written to disk, the
Brightstor
software writes the disk data to tape. Because the data is written
to
tape
from disk in block level it is extremely fast (the tape does not
have to
stop and backup, etc). We send the tape offsite daily and any
restores
required are done from the disk backup (if the restore point is only
a
couple days old). Fantastic system. But I must admit the Brightstor
software
is not for the faint of heart, but we've been using it for nearly 10
years
so we are used to it's quirks.


Good luck!


Wow.. thanks for the great responses..


Sounds like a pretty sweet setup..


Still curious though.. your drives.. are they SATA II or SCSI etc?


Our "backup server" has SATAII's (around 140 MB/s avg reads).


I've struggled for awhile with Symantec 11D on 2003 (x64).. trying to
do the backup of 4 other servers via the gigabit lan.. Symantec is
horribly slow, many others have stated the same (say 20 hours or more
for 400gb even).


I then went to Acronis and sent the job from the source server to the
backup one.. it worked out much better.. but I'd prefer an all in one
solution..


Ill have to check out the software you mentioned. I'm also going to
test microsofts DPM management too.


I was hoping as you seem to indicate with your software, to send the
harddisk backup files directly to tape (not a backup inside a backup,
so if we ever need to restore from tape, we can do so directly)...


I dont believe there is a way to do this with Symantec BackupExec
(?),
but it sounds like the software you are using lets you do this right?


Again thanks for the info/tips and all..


Our SuperLoader3 (dlt) just arrived, now I have to find the V-Rails
they mention (awaiting a price from CDW).


Cheers


Hi,


As best I can tell from our CDW purchase history the Brightstor backup
PC
(server) is an HP DX2200 tower, and we added three Seagate Barracuda
7200.10
HD 750GB SATA II drives.


The Brightstor software writes the disk-to-disk data to the tape in the
normal format, that is, as if it was written directly to tape so you
can, as
you said, restore directly from tape.


The Brightstor log reports backup throughput of our main file server is
472MB/Min for 200GB. It might be faster if we were not backing up
multiple
servers at the same time. The source server example is a Compaq DL380
G3
with 10k SCSI drives on RAID 5 with "teamed" gigabit NICs. The source
and
target are connected by an unmanaged Netgear Gigabit switch.


The only speed issue we have with Brightstor is the Exchange 2003
"bricks
level" backup could be faster, but that is a limitaiton really of the
speed
of your exchange server as the bricks level backup agent option gets
every
item (msg) individually so you can restore individual email objects.


Good luck with your new loader!


Tell your CDW rep you want a trial Brightstor disk from CA. Unlike the
Symantec solution the Brightstor trial has no restrictions, IIRC.- Hide
quoted text -


- Show quoted text -


So the 472 MB/min is your server, across network, to backup
workstation speed? Thats only about 8 MB/sec.. and it actually sounds
very similar to the numbers I was getting with Symantec for that part.

How fast is the disk to tape going (anywhere near 80 MB/sec as they
specs say for LTO3?)- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -


Forgot to ask:

Curious too if you purchased a rail kit with your unit and if so, if
its ever come in handy. I would imagine that if the unit needs
warranty work, the top cover would need to come off, so without rails
this could be tricky depending on rack configuration. Leading to my
other question... Quantum even stated that sometimes the heads can
fail in 6 months, 1 year etc.. have you ever run into any issues with
the hardware.. or maybe you haven't had it that long.


Sorry, I have nothing to add here as currently the Quantum is not loaded in
a rack. We did buy the rails but this client has not installed a rack yet.


 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Quantum SuperLoader3 DLT-S4 vs Exebyte Magnum 224 LTO3 vs Overland Neo 2000 LTO3? markm75 Storage (alt) 0 June 27th 07 09:31 PM
review of lto3 tape cartridges Tim Diekhans Storage & Hardrives 0 May 9th 07 12:15 PM
IBM 3583 library (LTO3) with Windows? Chris Storage & Hardrives 0 July 13th 06 02:44 PM
Speed of LTO3 drive and LTO2 tapes [email protected] Storage & Hardrives 0 June 26th 06 10:00 AM
Inferior connection with Spirit Magnum V.92 modem Netocrat General 18 June 4th 05 03:45 AM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 05:19 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2018, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright Đ2004-2018 ComputerBanter.com.
The comments are property of their posters.