Guest Posted March 31, 2006 Report Share Posted March 31, 2006 Hello, I am new to Retrospect. I have been using Veritas Backup Exec for the last several years but just recently purchased Retrospect 7.5 multi-server and disaster recovery. I have it installed and am still trying to figure out the way they do their backup sets/rotations... but the main issue is that it is taking me nearly 17 hours to backup a little over 110 Gigs of data. This was taking approx. 5.5 hours with Backup Exec. I have tried what I read in other posts about using the 7.0 client with the 7.5 server and that appears to have helped a little but it is still running since last night.. more than 12.5 hours. What is the fix for this or is this product just not nearly as fast as BE? If that is the case then I assume it is time to ask for a refund. I can't function with these extended backup times... Any and all suggestions would be much appreciated. Thanks, TheKell Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
natew Posted April 3, 2006 Report Share Posted April 3, 2006 Hi Can you tell us about your backup device and the source disk please? Retrospect runs as fast as the hardware will allow - meaning that it doesn't do any throttling or anything like that. There must be a bottleneck somewhere... Nate Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted April 4, 2006 Report Share Posted April 4, 2006 natew, I am running Retrospect on a Dell Poweredge 4600 with dual XEON 2.0GHz processors, 2Gig of RAM, running on Windows 2003 server with SP1 installed. This server is a dedicated backup server. I am using a Dell Powervault 110 LTO1 backup device connected to an Adaptec 39160 Ultra 160 SCSI card. I was running Backup Exec 10.0 on a Compaq Proliant ML350 Pentium III 800Mhz with 1Gig of RAM running on Windows 2003 server with SP1 installed, to the exact same tape drive and controller mentioned above. As you can see from the specs above Retrospect should run MUCH MUCH faster than BE! I contacted support and they told me to switch off the through verification and switch it to MD5 which I did and it improved the backup times by one hour. So now instead of 127Gig taking 13.5 hours it takes 12.5 hours. I was backing up this same data with BE on a SLOWER server in 5.5 hours.... Any and all suggestions would be much appreciated... even " I think you should stay with BE becasue Retrospect is not quite there yet with their backup product" Thanks for your time.... TheKell Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
michaeln Posted April 4, 2006 Report Share Posted April 4, 2006 Hi, A couple more questions: 1. What kind of speeds are being reported in the Operations Log (mb/min)? 2. As NateW requested, what is the source disk or what are you backing up? Local? Clients? Roughly how many files are you backing up total? 3. Is the firmware on your tape drive up to date? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted April 4, 2006 Report Share Posted April 4, 2006 Question 1: It actually ran an hour faster last night... 11.5 hours - 4/4/2006 7:17:49 AM: Verifying Monday Backup Set 4/4/2006 8:44:56 AM: Execution completed successfully Completed: 1133887 files, 127.6 GB Performance: 1509.5 MB/minute Duration: 01:27:07 (00:00:36 idle/loading/preparing) 4/4/2006 8:44:57 AM: 97 execution errors Total duration: 11:31:16 (00:43:18 idle/loading/preparing) Question 2 : Local and other servers... see above for total files Question 3: Just visited Dell's site and checked my version and it is current. And again... I am backing up the SAME amount of data and the SAME data on the SAME tape drive and controller that I was backing it up on using Backup Exec just last week, the ONLY difference is I am running Retrospect on a server that is 3x faster and has twice as much RAM as the one BE was running on.... basically NOTHING has changed except the backup SOFTWARE.... After reading other posts I am getting the feeling that Retrospect just can't compete with BE from a performance standpoint... hopefully this is not the case. TheKell Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.