The more I learn about NTbackup, the more I realize that BE is a just a GUI 
wrapper for it...

________________________________

From: Michael B. Smith [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
Sent: Wednesday, October 08, 2008 9:46 AM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: RE: Comparing NT Backup speeds



I've tried to avoid BE for several years now, but you used to be able to adjust 
the tape buffer size on an advanced property window. I know that's not much 
help, but I'm sure a little time digging on the BE support site would bring 
that to light...

 

Or someone else may know.

 

After I got into it, I found nothing that BE would do for me that NTbackup 
couldn't. And now, Windows Server Backup (with a couple of command line tools 
to deal with Exchange).

 

Now, the enterprise class packages - Netbackup, CommVault, Legato, etc. - they 
are a different story.

 

Regards,

 

Michael B. Smith, MCITP:SA,EMA/MCSE/Exchange MVP

My blog: http://TheEssentialExchange.com/blogs/michael

Link with me at: http://www.linkedin.com/in/theessentialexchange

 

From: Klint Price - ArizonaITPro [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
Sent: Wednesday, October 08, 2008 10:41 AM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: Re: Comparing NT Backup speeds

 

any optimizations out there for BackupExec?






Michael B. Smith wrote: 

I don't think you'll find any problems with it.

 

The section below is showing its age. It was written before Microsoft moved to 
E12 and DPM and VSS. But it was accurate in the 2004 timeframe.

 


NTBackup


When people ask how Microsoft does their Exchange Server backups, most people 
are surprised to hear that Microsoft uses NTBackup. Often they don't think to 
ask the next question-what else do you use?

 

NTBackup is used for the first level backup. This means that it generates the 
backups directly from Exchange Server and then places the backups onto other 
media. Microsoft backs up to disk for the first level backup. After backing up 
to disk, Microsoft then does a secondary dump to tape or to SAN, according to 
their internal backup rotation. This second and/or third level backup often 
uses other tools besides NTBackup.

 

Until recently, Microsoft IT (the group inside Microsoft for maintaining their 
production servers) had a special version of NTBackup that wasn't available to 
the outside world. That version was made available as a hotfix to Windows 
Server 2003 (Microsoft KB 839272 (System performance is negatively affected 
when Ntbackup.exe writes to a destination .bkf file)) and is included in 
Service Pack 1 for Windows Server 2003. This change to NTBackup increases its 
speed significantly and decreases its performance impact on the server 
significantly.

 

You can find detailed information about the process that Microsoft uses 
internally in the document named Backup Process Used with Clustered Exchange 
Server 2003 Servers at Microsoft at 
http://www.microsoft.com/downloads/details.aspx?FamilyId=63FA9270-563F-4627-A0A0-8A07E02CF9BF&displaylang=en
 (http://tinyurl.com/bcfhh). Despite the document name, the information in the 
document applies completely to non-clustered servers as well as to clustered 
servers (excepting only that clustered servers use clustered disk for the 
backup). This document describes the registry changes covered in the next 
section (which can improve performance) and provides practices for performing 
multiple parallel backups of information stores (as covered in the following 
sections).

 

Regards,

 

Michael B. Smith, MCITP:SA,EMA/MCSE/Exchange MVP

My blog: http://TheEssentialExchange.com/blogs/michael

Link with me at: http://www.linkedin.com/in/theessentialexchange

 

From: HELP_PC [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
Sent: Wednesday, October 08, 2008 2:08 AM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: R: Comparing NT Backup speeds

 

I made the changes and even to disk the speed is doubled !I hope no issue or 
contras because it looks too easy !

 

GuidoElia

HELPPC

 

 

________________________________

Da: Michael B. Smith [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
Inviato: martedì 7 ottobre 2008 22.55
A: NT System Admin Issues
Oggetto: RE: Comparing NT Backup speeds


Registry Changes for Optimizing NTBackup


The first optimization to make for NTBackup performance is to change some 
registry keys that affect buffering. These changes can have a very positive 
impact on performance when writing to tape, and a smaller impact when writing 
to disk. They are as follows (in batch file syntax):

 

reg add "HKCU\Software\Microsoft\Ntbackup\Backup Engine" 
        /v "Logical Disk Buffer Size" /t REG_SZ /d 64 /f

reg add "HKCU\Software\Microsoft\Ntbackup\Backup Engine" 
        /v "Max Buffer Size" /t REG_SZ /d 1024 /f

reg add "HKCU\Software\Microsoft\Ntbackup\Backup Engine" 
        /v "Max Num Tape Buffers" /t REG_SZ /d 16 /f 

 

These registry changes double the default values. Do note that they affect 
HKEY_CURRENT_USER, and not HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE as you might expect. Therefore, 
you should execute NTBackup under the desired user to create the registry key 
before you attempt to set the above registry values.

 

 

Regards,

 

Michael B. Smith, MCITP:SA,EMA/MCSE/Exchange MVP

My blog: http://TheEssentialExchange.com/blogs/michael

Link with me at: http://www.linkedin.com/in/theessentialexchange

 

From: Joseph L. Casale [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
Sent: Tuesday, October 07, 2008 11:59 AM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: RE: Comparing NT Backup speeds

 

Michael,
What are these tweaks you speak of?
jlc

 

From: Michael B. Smith [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
Sent: Tuesday, October 07, 2008 6:26 AM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: RE: Comparing NT Backup speeds

 

Well a local device will usually be faster than a remote device.

 

Ntbackup, with the registry tweaks, gives me about 1 GB per minute locally. But 
I don't have a dat-72 to compare to. My home GB LAN with a cheap crappy switch 
copies about 50 MB/min. So I'm thinking that two hours seems more likely than 9 
hours.

 

Regards,

 

Michael B. Smith, MCITP:SA,EMA/MCSE/Exchange MVP

My blog: http://TheEssentialExchange.com/blogs/michael

Link with me at: http://www.linkedin.com/in/theessentialexchange

 

From: HELP_PC [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
Sent: Tuesday, October 07, 2008 7:28 AM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: R: Comparing NT Backup speeds

 

Yes the DAT device is local.

Not applied registry tweaks

 

GuidoElia

HELPPC

 

 

________________________________

Da: Michael B. Smith [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
Inviato: martedì 7 ottobre 2008 13.05
A: NT System Admin Issues
Oggetto: RE: Comparing NT Backup speeds

Have you applied the "standard" registry tweaks to increase the ntbackup buffer 
size?

 

Is the dat-72 locally attached?

 

Regards,

 

Michael B. Smith, MCITP:SA,EMA/MCSE/Exchange MVP

My blog: http://TheEssentialExchange.com/blogs/michael

Link with me at: http://www.linkedin.com/in/theessentialexchange

 

From: HELP_PC [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
Sent: Tuesday, October 07, 2008 1:59 AM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: Comparing NT Backup speeds

 

 

In a network 10/100/1000 copper a NT backup of the complete server to a Qnap 
device RAID-1 takes about 9 hours with verify (about 50GB) versus DAT-72 with 
separate card that takes half the time .

Should be considered normal ? 

TIA 

 

GuidoElia 
HELPPC 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 


 

 


~ Finally, powerful endpoint security that ISN'T a resource hog! ~
~ <http://www.sunbeltsoftware.com/Business/VIPRE-Enterprise/>  ~

Reply via email to