Sorry if I left out a few details. All of our primary pools are defined as FILE device classes either on local attached SCSI or network storage. The reason we are installing an LTO drive is that we have had terrible reliability problems with our existing Exabyte/IBM Mammoth2. The Mammoth2 runs great, but we have had bad luck with media over the last few years (write fine, but can't read). Backup STG operations against the Mammoth2 run at 33-42GB/hr, while the same operations to the LTO drive run in the 10-15GB/hr. Also, I do see a lot of ready....writing....ready....writing on the LTO drive, while the Mammoth2 is constant write. This does sound consistent with the LTO backhitch problems I have read about in previous posts.
http://msgs.adsm.org/cgi-bin/get/adsm0104/750.html -----Original Message----- From: Dan Foster [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, June 13, 2003 4:09 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: TSM LTO 3580 Performance Also, is there a diskpool? ie: client->server[diskpool]->server[tapes] If there's no diskpool in between the client and the tape drives, will be a lot of stop/go writes to tape, resulting in about 1 MB/sec vs 10-25 MB/sec. At least, that's true for LTO-1 drives. I've heard that LTO-2 drives better handles this kind of situation. -Dan
