Using the information below does anyone have any ideas on what we might change to get more peformance?
We recently started testing a 2.4 TB MS SQL database for backup and recovery. We were able to get 436 GB/hr for the backup and 299 GB/hr for the restore. This was a LANFree backup with 10 stripes to 10 9840 drives. All of the tracing we have looked at so far from a hardware perspective has lead us to believe there are no bottlenecks on the hardware. For this test I set all the TDP performance options to their max as follows: buffers 8 buffersize 8192 sqlbuffers 0 (this means us as many as required) sqlbuffersize 4096 For my next test I am going to lower some of these settings. I was wondering if anyone else changed these settings for large MS SQL databases and if so what they found? Here are the specifics of our environment: Hardware: Windows 2003 64bit TSM V5.2.3.2 Storage Agent TSM V5.2.3.1 TSM Client TSM V5.2.3.2 Server running on Windows 2000 TDP SQL V5.2.1 4-way HP Itanium server with 32 GB RAM 10 STK 9840B drives (19 MB/sec native 70 MB/sec compression) Emulex 10000 Fibre card (Dual 2 GB port cards) (five 9840 drives per port) for tape Emulex 10000 Fibre card (Dual 2 GB port cards) for disk For the TDP test the server showed 65% CPU utilization on all 4 processors. The disk subsystem was at 30% for the backup and 20% for the restore according to our EMC guys. We ran a single file backup test of a 2 TB file and it backed up to a single 9840 at 100 GB/hr. __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com