Fibre Channel (SAN)

Reply
N/A
Posts: 1
Registered: ‎09-01-2008

Netbackup Media Server Bottleneck

I'm trying to figure out what my bottleneck is on a Netbackup Media Server running Solaris 10 on a Sun v240. This is what I'm seeing:

I've got 2 HBAs in the media server. One is zoned in with the robot and 2 LTO4 drives. The other is zoned in with the 3 SecurStor SATAs (48 spindles) and 1 SecureStor Astra (16 spindles). The Storage arrays are connected to a 3850. The 3850 has a single 2Gb/s link to a 12000. The media server is connect to another 3850, and that 3850 is also connected to the same 12000 in the same manner. No matter what I talk to I can only pull about 120MB/s. Examples:

1. pull data off 3 SecureStor SATAs and write to tape while writing backups

to Astra - Astra 120MB/s, data to tape about 1MB/s

2. pull data off Astra and write to tape - Astra about 60MB/s, write to

tape 60MB/s

3. pull data off 3 SecurStors and write to tape - SecureStors about 60MB/s,

write to tape 60MB/s

If I execute the first profile (which should really be pushing my ISL to

240MB/s) and graph four ports - the astra, media server (drive hba) and the ISLs

on both switches - their graphs look exactly the same.

Everything seems to point to my ISL (or the core) But that is only at about

120MB/s (50% utilization). Anyone have any ideas?

thanks

-rcollins

New Contributor
Posts: 2
Registered: ‎09-10-2008

Re: Netbackup Media Server Bottleneck

I don't know how relevant this is to your situation, but the following email snippets between SUN and Symantec techs may give a clue to performance issues on the Sun/Solaris systems:

Q: I was just looking over my notes and I noticed a comment you made during the meeting stating Symantec test showed improved performance using Windows hosts for Media Servers vs Solaris hosts. I have another two clients asking me similar questions and I was wondering if you have any info to back this up. We sell both so I don't really care, just want to get what is best for the customer.

A: That was only demonstrated on Veritas Backup Reporter (VBR) because of the Sybase ASA version 9.0 that we're using. Our Product Management folks noticed this trend while working with some big customers. NBU uses the similar ASA v9 but we didn't do any benchmarking on the performance. Symantec serves heterogeneous platforms for NBU. So, if customer is asking us which platform for NBU, we will not side on the OS type as long as it's supported and on our Software Compatibility list.

What this sounds like to me is that the Sybase ASA v9.0 is not multi-threaded, so can't take advantage of the multi-threaded, multi-core, multi-cpu (only 800MHz) systems from SUN, whereas the 2.6GHz Wintel system can run over 3 times faster. Symantec hasn't benchmarked this, so will not say there is a performance difference.

Good Luck.

Join the Community

Get quick and easy access to valuable resource designed to help you manage your Brocade Network.