Re: Comparing NT Backup speeds
These registry settings are causing backup speed degradation in my environment, and I am curious if anyone could explain why. I have a HP StorageWorks DL380 g5, running Storage Server 2003 x64 with dual 2.3 Quad Core processors, and 5 GB RAM. I have a 2TB SAS connected array connected to a HP P800 controller, and then a HP Ultrium 920 SAS LTO-3 drive connected to a different controller (SAS LSI 3000) Using the original NTBackup registry values for the keys below (32,512,9), I was able to backup a 36GB file in 7 Min 13 seconds. I implemented these performance registry keys below (64,1024,16), ran the backup job again, and it took 11 min 47 seconds. What could be causing these performance changes to impact backup speeds so greatly? Klint Michael B. Smith wrote: *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/ ~
RE: Comparing NT Backup speeds
Im not sure I would jump to any conclusions after just two tests. I would start up Perfmon, add my disk and tape queues, and run it a couple more times to see what happens. 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: Friday, November 07, 2008 1:30 PM To: NT System Admin Issues Subject: Re: Comparing NT Backup speeds These registry settings are causing backup speed degradation in my environment, and I am curious if anyone could explain why. I have a HP StorageWorks DL380 g5, running Storage Server 2003 x64 with dual 2.3 Quad Core processors, and 5 GB RAM. I have a 2TB SAS connected array connected to a HP P800 controller, and then a HP Ultrium 920 SAS LTO-3 drive connected to a different controller (SAS LSI 3000) Using the original NTBackup registry values for the keys below (32,512,9), I was able to backup a 36GB file in 7 Min 13 seconds. I implemented these performance registry keys below (64,1024,16), ran the backup job again, and it took 11 min 47 seconds. What could be causing these performance changes to impact backup speeds so greatly? Klint Michael B. Smith wrote: 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 dont have a dat-72 to compare to. My home GB LAN with a cheap crappy switch copies about 50 MB/min. So Im 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/ ~
Re: Comparing NT Backup speeds
Michael, This is a test server in a test environment, and there is nothing else running on it, nor are there other servers connecting to it. I'm not sure what a third test would show. Klint Michael B. Smith wrote: I'm not sure I would jump to any conclusions after just two tests. I would start up Perfmon, add my disk and tape queues, and run it a couple more times to see what happens. 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:* Friday, November 07, 2008 1:30 PM *To:* NT System Admin Issues *Subject:* Re: Comparing NT Backup speeds These registry settings are causing backup speed degradation in my environment, and I am curious if anyone could explain why. I have a HP StorageWorks DL380 g5, running Storage Server 2003 x64 with dual 2.3 Quad Core processors, and 5 GB RAM. I have a 2TB SAS connected array connected to a HP P800 controller, and then a HP Ultrium 920 SAS LTO-3 drive connected to a different controller (SAS LSI 3000) Using the original NTBackup registry values for the keys below (32,512,9), I was able to backup a 36GB file in 7 Min 13 seconds. I implemented these performance registry keys below (64,1024,16), ran the backup job again, and it took 11 min 47 seconds. What could be causing these performance changes to impact backup speeds so greatly? Klint Michael B. Smith wrote: *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
RE: Comparing NT Backup speeds
You are very precious ! Thanks GuidoElia HELPPC _ Da: Michael B. Smith [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Inviato: mercoledì 8 ottobre 2008 13.09 A: NT System Admin Issues Oggetto: RE: Comparing NT Backup speeds 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-A0A0-8A07E02CF9BFdisplaylang=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
RE: Comparing NT Backup speeds
From: HELP_PC [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: RE: Comparing NT Backup speeds You are very precious ! I have heard M called many things - but PRECIOUS!!! That is definitely a new one for the books. J Webster _ Da: Michael B. Smith [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Oggetto: RE: Comparing NT Backup speeds 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- A0A0-8A07E02CF9BFdisplaylang=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). ~ Finally, powerful endpoint security that ISN'T a resource hog! ~ ~ http://www.sunbeltsoftware.com/Business/VIPRE-Enterprise/ ~
RE: Comparing NT Backup speeds
I dont think youll 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 dont think to ask the next questionwhat 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 wasnt 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- A0A0-8A07E02CF9BFdisplaylang=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 dont have a dat-72 to compare to. My home GB LAN with a cheap crappy switch copies about 50 MB/min. So Im 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
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-A0A0-8A07E02CF9BFdisplaylang=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
RE: Comparing NT Backup speeds
Ive 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 thats not much help, but Im 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 couldnt. 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 dont think youll 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 dont think to ask the next questionwhat 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 wasnt 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 http://www.microsoft.com/downloads/details.aspx?FamilyId=63FA9270-563F-4627 -A0A0-8A07E02CF9BFdisplaylang=en 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
Re: Comparing NT Backup speeds
I use NTBackup for smaller sites, but I am asking about a site where I manage the backups for 40 servers, need centralized management, multiple security levels, manage tape rotations, etc. They seem to fall in between NTBackup and Netbackup; hence BE, and my question. Michael B. Smith wrote: 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-A0A0-8A07E02CF9BFdisplaylang=en http://www.microsoft.com/downloads/details.aspx?FamilyId=63FA9270-563F-4627-A0A0-8A07E02CF9BFdisplaylang=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
RE: Comparing NT Backup speeds
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-A0A0-8A07E02CF9BFdisplaylang=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
RE: Comparing NT Backup speeds
It also allows you to schedule your jobs (which Task Scheduler built into windows allows you to do with ntbackup) and manage media sets (which RSM, also built into windows, allows you to do with ntbackup). 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: Sam Cayze [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, October 08, 2008 3:56 PM To: NT System Admin Issues Subject: RE: Comparing NT Backup speeds 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 Ive 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 thats not much help, but Im 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 couldnt. 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 dont think youll 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 dont think to ask the next questionwhat 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 wasnt 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 http://www.microsoft.com/downloads/details.aspx?FamilyId=63FA9270-563F-4627 -A0A0-8A07E02CF9BFdisplaylang=en 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
RE: Comparing NT Backup speeds
Yep, you can, I just tested that last week, which mainly brought me to my conclusion. Phil Brutsche Wote I think you can read NTbackup .bkf files with some versions of BE and vice versa... Now that I know that, I will probably ditch the idea of getting a BE server at my new collocated rack, and just Ntbackup to a external drive. In a DR scenario, I can utilize the backup media with my Backup Exec license if needed. I do like my using my BE console/server for pushing system restores... -Original Message- From: Phil Brutsche [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, October 08, 2008 3:29 PM To: NT System Admin Issues Subject: Re: Comparing NT Backup speeds There's a reason for that. In a lot of ways NTbackup is - truly and honestly - BE Lite. On any 2000 or 2003 or XP (it's not installed by default but is on the CD) machine if I start NTbackup and go into Help - About Backup Utility it even says VERITAS software in the copyrights. I think you can read NTbackup .bkf files with some versions of BE and vice versa... Sam Cayze wrote: The more I learn about NTbackup, the more I realize that BE is a just a GUI wrapper for it... -- Phil Brutsche [EMAIL PROTECTED] ~ Finally, powerful endpoint security that ISN'T a resource hog! ~ ~ http://www.sunbeltsoftware.com/Business/VIPRE-Enterprise/ ~ ~ Finally, powerful endpoint security that ISN'T a resource hog! ~ ~ http://www.sunbeltsoftware.com/Business/VIPRE-Enterprise/ ~
Re: Comparing NT Backup speeds
There's a reason for that. In a lot of ways NTbackup is - truly and honestly - BE Lite. On any 2000 or 2003 or XP (it's not installed by default but is on the CD) machine if I start NTbackup and go into Help - About Backup Utility it even says VERITAS software in the copyrights. I think you can read NTbackup .bkf files with some versions of BE and vice versa... Sam Cayze wrote: The more I learn about NTbackup, the more I realize that BE is a just a GUI wrapper for it... -- Phil Brutsche [EMAIL PROTECTED] ~ Finally, powerful endpoint security that ISN'T a resource hog! ~ ~ http://www.sunbeltsoftware.com/Business/VIPRE-Enterprise/ ~
RE: Comparing NT Backup speeds
It also allows you to schedule your jobs (which Task Scheduler built into windows allows you to do with ntbackup) and manage media sets (which RSM, also built into windows, allows you to do with ntbackup). Well, I just dumped BE for RSM/NTBackup on a windows file server with an autoloader and it works but like the sig of an old member here: Its like watching Yugo's race, you can do it by why would you:) There are few deficiencies... BE certainly had more flexibility with managing media sets/hardware etc and it was certainly more robust then RSM. The more I learn about NTbackup, the more I realize that BE is a just a GUI wrapper for it... Veritas wrote NTBackup for MS, I read this somewhere years ago on MS lit so I assume it was true. ~ Finally, powerful endpoint security that ISN'T a resource hog! ~ ~ http://www.sunbeltsoftware.com/Business/VIPRE-Enterprise/ ~
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 dont have a dat-72 to compare to. My home GB LAN with a cheap crappy switch copies about 50 MB/min. So Im 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/ ~
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/ ~
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/ ~
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 dont have a dat-72 to compare to. My home GB LAN with a cheap crappy switch copies about 50 MB/min. So Im 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/ ~
