What is scary, is that both hosts - Netapp(slow) and E450(fast) are on the same subnet and have the same network settings 100/full-duplex. The other thing is E450 is pretty busy all the time, with lots of traffic and CPU load - and you can backup it fast, and NetApp is practically not loaded - and it's so slow to backup.

-----Original Message----- From: Juan Torres [mailto:torres@susq.com] Sent: Monday, September 18, 2000 4:37 PM To: Rainchik, Aleksandr (MED, Non GE) Cc: toasters@mathworks.com Subject: Re: NetApp/Budtool - poor backup performance

this is just one of our requests : SIZE TIME PERF HOST PARTITION L KB HH:MM:SS KB/sec STATUS ------------------------------------------------------------------------ ------ {filer} {volume} 0 100558438 08:45:50 3187.59 Success

We have dual F720s with trunked 100mb interfaces on a switched network. Our backup host is an E450 with an L11000 locally attched to it with DLT7000s.

Using BudTool we have ndmp requests streamed over the wire. Also, our backup host is multi-homed having one of it's interfaces on the same subnet as the filers.

(your answer was already in your message)

If the backup host you were using (the slow one) is not on the same subnet as the filers and same interface speed, that's where you're bottleneck is (routing and/or bandwidth).

BTW: you're safer going over the wire. we've had some libraries hang the scsi bus of the filer when locally attached.