I'll throw in a slightly different twist. Maybe it has been in the thread already but I missed it. We have the majority of clients running without compression. We also provide backup services for some smaller satellite sites where we do have client compression on. Same story.... Low bandwidth connections.
In both cases the data all ends up at the same tape drives....which of course have compression active. So is this a bad thing... Can't say, but I'm interested to hear comments back. It seems to make sense to activate the compression on the clients as required. At the same time it makes sense to have the hardware compression active. Curt Magura Lockheed Martin EIS Gaithersburg, Md. 301-240-6305 -----Original Message----- From: Wholey, Joseph (TGA\MLOL) [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Thursday, January 31, 2002 2:05 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: Antwort: Re: low bandwitdth and big files Nick, I have client compression turned on also due to slow network (have no choice). But no one has been able to answer the following questions definitively: 1. Am I potentially doubling the size of certain files in the stg pool by running multiple compression algorithms.? 2. By turning off DEVCLASS compression, is that effectively disabling hardware compression performed by my tape device (IBM 3590 TAPE Device / Cartridge) 3. If client compression and hardware compression are turned on, and hardware compression isn't really buying me anything... won't the attempt at hardware compression prevent streaming? I think it will. I'm looking for YES/NO answers with a valid explanation. Anyone????? Regards, Joe -----Original Message----- From: Nicholas Cassimatis [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Thursday, January 31, 2002 1:32 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: Antwort: Re: low bandwitdth and big files A long while back, I had 36 boxes of the following config: Pentium 100's, 128MB RAM, 16Mbit Token Ring, running OS/2 2.11 with Lan Server 4, Notes 4.1, backing up mail files as flat files. Turned client side compression on, backup window went from 4 hours to 1.25 hours. I cut the data sent over the wire down by 66%, and got a corresponding reduction in the backup time. My machines were effectively offline for the backup window, due to the network being saturated, so the fact they were also CPU bound really didn't matter. It all depends on the config. The worst you could do is to test a little, see what happens. Oh, my library was a 3494 with 2xB11 drives in it. I kept utilizing the same number of tapes, but the capacity at full went from around 28GB to 11GB, as would be expected. Nick Cassimatis Technical Team Lead e-Business Backup/Recovery Services 919-363-8894 T/L 223-8965 [EMAIL PROTECTED] Today is the tomorrow of yesterday.
