Who would do that with there offsite incremental copies? Could get tape excessive. Matt
-----Original Message----- From: ADSM: Dist Stor Manager [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Del Hoobler Sent: Thursday, September 09, 2004 2:25 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: Optimizing Exchange backup/recover? Matt, A few things to keep in mind: * Exchange restore will almost always be slower than backup because you are writing to disk and more importantly you are replaying transaction logs. * If you back up to tape and you run COLLOCATION by filespace, it will keep the data for your separate storage group on different tapes for the exact purpose of running parallel restores. Thanks, Del ---------------------------------------------------- "ADSM: Dist Stor Manager" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote on 09/09/2004 02:03:40 PM: > It is going to tape. I would rather it go to disk but some of the > files are huge and my disk pool is usually nearly full when it starts. > I know it is being slowed down by conflicting with disk to tape > migration, to some extent. The network interface is GB Ethernet and > has a lot more capacity availably at that time. > If I am successful at backing up separate groups, will I be able > to restore it just as fast? Ot is this something that I would be able > to do if I work out what tapes are written to and what filespaces are > on them. > Matt
